Being and Being Mixed Race
In: Social theory and practice: an international and interdisciplinary journal of social philosophy, Band 27, Heft 2, S. 285-307
ISSN: 2154-123X
246136 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Social theory and practice: an international and interdisciplinary journal of social philosophy, Band 27, Heft 2, S. 285-307
ISSN: 2154-123X
In: Reid , J & Chandler , D 2018 , ' "Being in Being" : Contesting the Ontopolitics of Indigeneity ' , The European Legacy: Toward New Paradigms , vol. 23 , no. 3 , pp. 251-268 . https://doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2017.1420284
This article critiques the shift towards valorizing indigeneity in western thought and contemporary practice. This shift in approach to indigenous ways of knowing and being, historically derided under conditions of colonialism, is a reflection of the "ontological turn" in anthropology. Rather than seeing indigenous peoples as having an inferior or different understanding of the world to a modernist one, the ontological turn suggests that their importance lies in the fact that they constitute different worlds and "world" in a performatively different way. The radical promise this view holds is that a different world already exists in potentia, the access to which is a question of ontology—of being differently: 'being in being' rather than thinking, acting and world-making as if we were transcendent or "possessive" modern subjects. We argue that the ontopolitical arguments for the superiority of indigenous ways of being should not be seen as radical or emancipatory resistances to modernist or colonial epistemological and ontological legacies but rather as a new form of neoliberal governmentality, cynically manipulating critical, postcolonial and ecological sensibilities for its own ends. Thus, rather than "provincializing" dominant western hegemonic practices, such discourses of indigeneity extend them, instituting new forms of governing through calls for adaptation and resilience.
BASE
In: Safundi: the journal of South African and American Comparative Studies, Band 11, Heft 4, S. 437-446
ISSN: 1543-1304
In: EASA series volume 23
In: Refugee & migration studies
In: Key concepts in philosophy
The concept of well-being -- Hedonism -- Desires -- Capabilities and human nature -- Pluralism -- Aggregating and measuring well-being -- Well-being and normative theory
One of the common themes in feminist research over the past decade has been the claim that reason is "gendered": more specifically, that reason is "male" or "masculine." Although feminists have differed in their interpretations of this claim and the grounds they offer for it, the general conclusion has been that feminist theory should steer clear of investments in reason and rationality, at least as traditionally conceived. For example, we should avoid an epistemology that privileges reason or the standpoint of reason; we should avoid theories of the self that take rationality to be a defining trait; and we should avoid endorsing moral and political ideals that glorify reason and the reasonable "person" (read: Man).
BASE
In: Politics, philosophy & economics: ppe, Band 16, Heft 1, S. 3-24
ISSN: 1741-3060
If D commits a wrong against V, D typically incurs a corrective duty to V. But how should we respond if V has false beliefs about whether she is harmed by D's wrong? There are two types of cases we must consider: (1) those in which V is not harmed but she mistakenly believes that she is (2) those in which V is harmed but she mistakenly believes that she is not. I canvass three views: The Objective View, The Subjective View and The Mixed View. The Objective View holds that V's claim depends on the correct account of harm, rather than her false beliefs, and so D has a duty to offer damages to V in (2) but not in (1) in order to compensate her. The Subjective View holds that, for broadly anti-perfectionist reasons, V's claim depends on her sincere beliefs, even if they are mistaken, and so D has a duty to compensate V in (1) but not in (2). The Mixed View holds that we should defer to her beliefs in (1) but not in (2), so D has a duty to compensate her in both cases. In this article, I argue that we should accept The Mixed View.
In: Inquiry: an interdisciplinary journal of philosophy and the social sciences, Band 51, Heft 6, S. 627-644
ISSN: 1502-3923
In: EIPASCOPE: bulletin, Heft 1, S. 30-31
In: Adoption & fostering: quarterly journal, Band 44, Heft 1, S. 56-74
ISSN: 1740-469X
In: Rethinking Colonial Pasts through Archaeology, S. 423-444
In: TRaNS
Abstract Recent studies of the Chinese in Southeast Asia have tended to deconstruct the hybrid, transnational, diasporic, and de-territorialized attributes of 'Chinese-ness', and theorize the politics thereof. In contrast, earlier scholarship on the politics of Southeast Asia's ethnic Chinese raised many questions over the positions, rights, and roles associated with being 'overseas Chinese'. Hence, many analyses of Chinese politics, from suppressed quietude to militant contestation, tended to ask, 'Why and how was that politics Chinese ?' This article asks, instead, 'Why and how were the Chinese political ?' within the larger rubric of Southeast Asian politics. It argues that posing the first question helped officialdom, academia and media to determine who among the 'overseas Chinese' were friends or foes. Asking the second question, it is argued, involves a boundary-crossing shift that sees the immigrant Chinese engaged in a full spectrum of Southeast Asian politics under the impacts of colonialism and nationalism, and capitalism and anti-capitalism. After exploring the shift in perspective from 'being Chinese' to 'being political', the article suggests that politics beyond China-oriented positions, state-bound stances, or preoccupations of ethnic identity, particularly in Malaysia transformed Southeast Asia to the point of 'creating' a 'largely Chinese' state out of Singapore.
Exploring both debates about misrecognition and explorations of encounters, this paper focuses upon the experiences of ethnic and religious minority young people who are mistaken for being Muslim in Scotland. We explore experiences of encountering misrecognition, including young people's understandings of, and responses to, such encounters. Recognising how racism and religious discrimination operate to marginalise people – and how people manage and respond to this – is crucial in the struggle for social justice. Our focus is upon young people from a diversity of ethnic and religious minority groups who are growing up in urban, suburban and rural Scotland, 382 of whom participated in 45 focus groups and 224 interviews. We found that young Sikhs, Hindus and other South Asian young people as well as Black and Caribbean young people were regularly mistaken for being Muslim. These encounters tended to take place at school, in taxis, at the airport and in public spaces. Our analysis points to a dynamic set of interconnected issues shaping young people's experiences of misrecognition across a range of mediatised, geopoliticised and educational spaces. Geopolitical events and their representation in the media, the homogenisation of the South 'Asian' community and the lack of visibility offered to non-Muslim ethnic and religious minority groups all worked to construct our participants as 'Muslims'. Young people demonstrated agency and creativity in handling and responding to these encounters including: using humour; clarifying their religious affiliation; social withdrawal and ignoring the situation. Redressing misrecognition requires institutional change in order to ensure parity of participation in society.
BASE