| spelling |
oapen-20.500.12657-598812024-03-27T14:14:51Z Diálogos Sur-Sur Devés, Eduardo Pereira da Silva, Fabricio Ngoie Tshibambe, Germain Baltar, Paula South-South Studies; epistemic differences; periphery, Studies of ideas thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JB Society and culture: general::JBC Cultural and media studies::JBCC Cultural studies One of the keys to understanding global inequalities and seeking ways to overcome them is to accept and develop a theoretical assumption: the euphemistically called global “asymmetries” are not only economic or geopolitical. They are equally symbolic. This is where the debates on epistemic dependency (Beigel, 2013) and the coloniality of knowledge (2000) are located, the reflections on “epistemic violence” and “epistemicides” (Spivak, 1988, Santos, Meneses, 2009), on the subject colonial and postcolonial (Césaire, 2004, Fanon, 1966, Hall, 2015) and, in particular, on the role of the "peripheral intellectual" and the production of knowledge in the "Sures" (Devés, 2017). In fact, it is perceived that peripheral knowledge and knowledge have less legitimacy than central knowledge and are frequently not considered "science" or "theory". Their proposals do not circulate or circulate little and tend to disappear over time. 2022-12-08T11:09:02Z 2022-12-08T11:09:02Z 2022 book https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/59881 spa application/pdf Attribution 4.0 International 978-956-6095-71-2.pdf http://ariadnaediciones.cl/ Ariadna Ediciones 10.26448/ae9789566095712.56 10.26448/ae9789566095712.56 f6cb5ffd-d9ed-409f-b6f8-71eb0272e363 265 Santiago, Chile open access
|
| description |
One of the keys to understanding global inequalities and seeking ways to overcome them is to accept and develop a theoretical assumption: the euphemistically called global “asymmetries” are not only economic or geopolitical. They are equally symbolic. This is where the debates on epistemic dependency (Beigel, 2013) and the coloniality of knowledge (2000) are located, the reflections on “epistemic violence” and “epistemicides” (Spivak, 1988, Santos, Meneses, 2009), on the subject colonial and postcolonial (Césaire, 2004, Fanon, 1966, Hall, 2015) and, in particular, on the role of the "peripheral intellectual" and the production of knowledge in the "Sures" (Devés, 2017). In fact, it is perceived that peripheral knowledge and knowledge have less legitimacy than central knowledge and are frequently not considered "science" or "theory". Their proposals do not circulate or circulate little and tend to disappear over time.
|
