Thinking and its place : epistemological considerations on feminist stand point theories and border thinking.

El pensamiento y su lugar : consideraciones epistemológicas en torno al punto de vista feminista y el pensamiento fronterizo.

In modern science, the link between place and knowledge appear to be neglected as an epistemological issue. Contrary to that negligence, feminist and postcolonial studies bring to the table the manifold ways how place influences knowledge production. However, their ideas differ in crucial aspects. Those aspects do not only relate to their corresponding thematic emphasis, but also to how we conceive the link between place and knowledge. This article intends to show those differences in two of the most prominent strands within feminist and postcolonial studies —the feminist standpoint theory and Walter Mignolo’s border thinking. We aim to show the feminist standpoint stresses the mediated nature of any knowledge production, whereas border thinking argues there is a more direct link between place and thinking that ends up confining knowledge to its birthplace.

1. Boatcă, M. (2013). Die östlichen ränder des empire: Kolonialität im Rumänien des 19. Jahrhunderts. En S. Conrad, S. Randeria & R. Römhild (Eds.), Jenseits des eurozentrismus. postkoloniale perspektiven in den geschichts- und kulturwissenschaften (pp. 322-344). Frankfurt & New York: Campus.
2. Browitt, J. (2014). La teoría decolonial: buscando la identidad en el mercado académico. Cuadernos de Literatura, 18(36), 25-46.
3. Canaparo, C. (2009). Geo-epistemology: Latin America and the location of knowlegdge. Bern: Peter Lang.
4. Castro Varela, M. & Dhawan, N. (2015). Postkoloniale theorie. Eine kritische einführung. Bielefeld: Transcript.
5. Castro-Gómez, S. (2007). Decolonizar la universidad. La hybris del punto cero y el diálogo de saberes. En S. Castro-Gómez & R. Grosfoguel (Eds.), El giro decolonial. Reflexiones para una diversidad epistémica más allá del capitalismo global (pp. 79-91). Bogotá: Siglo del Hombre Editores.
6. Code, L. (1981). Is the sex of the knower epistemologically significant?. Metaphilosophy, 12(3-4), 267-276.
7. Collins, P. H. (1986). Learing from the outsider within: the sociological significance of black feminist thought. Social Problems, 33(6), 14-32.
8. Dussel, E. (2008). Meditaciones anti-cartesianas: sobre el origen del anti-discurso filosófico de la modernidad. Tabula rasa, (9), 153-197.
9. Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: fte science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575-599.
10. Harding, S. (1982). Is Gender a Variable in Conceptions of rationality? A survey of issues. Dialectica, 36(2-3), 225-242.
11. Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism. Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press.
12. Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Ithaca & New York: Cornell University Press.
13. Harding, S. (1992). After the neutrality ideal: science, politics, and “strong objectivity”. Social Research, 59(3), 567-587.
14. Harding, S. (2004a). A socially relevant philosophy of science? Resources from standpoint theory’s controversiality. Hypatia, 19(1), 25-47.
15. Harding, S. (2004b). Introduction: standpoint theory as a site of political, philosophic, and scientific debate. En S. Harding (Ed.), The feminist standpoint theory reader. intellectual and political controversies (pp. 1-16). New York & London: Routledge.
16. Harding, S. (2011). Introduction. Beyond postcolonial theory: two undertheorized perspectives on science and technology. En S. Harding (Ed.), the postcolonial science and technology studies reader (pp. 1-31). Durham & London: Duke University Press.
17. Hartsock, N. C. M. (1997). Comment on Hekman’s “truth and method: feminist standpoint theory revisited”: truth or justice? Signs, 22(2), 367-374.
18. Iglesias Turrión, P., Espasandín López, J. & Errejón Galván, Í. (2008). Devolviendo el balón a la cancha. Diálogos con Walter Mignolo. Tabula Rasa, (8), 283-319.
19. Intemann, K. (2010). 25 years of feminist empiricism and standpoint theory: where are we now? Hypatia, 25(4), 778-796.
20. Kim, J. (1994). What is “naturalized epistemology”? En H. Kornblith (Ed.), Naturalizing epistemology (pp. 33-55). Cambridge: MIT Press.
21. Lazarus, N. (2002). fte fetish of “the west” in postcolonial theory. En C. Bartolovich & N. Lazarus (Eds.), Marxism, modernity and postcolonial studies (pp. 43-64). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Longino, H. E. (1993). Review: feminist standpoint theory and the problems of knowledge. Signs, 19(1), 201-212.
23. Mignolo, W. (1993). Colonial or postcolonial discourse: cultural critique or academic colonialism? Latin American Research Review, 28(3), 120-134.
24. Mignolo, W. (2002). fte geopolitics of knowledge and the colonial difference. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 101(1), 57-96.
25. Mignolo, W. (2003). Historias locales/diseños globales. Colonialidad, conocimientos subalternos y pensamiento fronterizo. Madrid: Akal.
26. Mignolo, W. (2005a). The Idea of Latin America. Malden: Blackwell.
27. Mignolo, W. (2005b). Cambiando las éticas y las políticas del conocimiento: la lógica de la colonialidad y la postcolonialidad imperial. Tabula Rasa, (3), 47-72.
28. Mignolo, W. (2009). La idea de América Latina (la derecha, la izquierda y la opción decolonial). Crítica y Emancipación, 1(2), 251-276.
29. Mignolo, W. (2012). Local histories/global designs: coloniality, subaltern knowledges, and border thinking. Princeton & Oxford: Princeton University Press.
30. Mignolo, W. (2014). Desobediencia epistémica: Retórica de la modernidad, lógica de la colonialidad y gramática de la descolonialidad. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Del Signo.
31. Moe, N. (2006). The view from vesuvius. italian culture and the souther question. Berkeley: University of California Press.
32. Nunes, J. A. (2014). El rescate de la epistemología. En B. de S. Santos & M. P. Meneses (Eds.), Epistemologías del sur (pp. 219-244). Madrid: Akal.
33. O’Gorman, E. (1995). La invención de América. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
34. Restrepo, E. & Rojas, A. (2010). Inflexión decolonial: fuentes, conceptos y cuestionamientos. Popayán: Universidad del Cauca.
35. Rose, Hillary (1983). Hand, brain, and heart: a feminist epistemology for the natural sciences. Signs, 9(1), 73-90.
36. Said, E. (2003). Orientalism. London: Penguin Books.
37. Santos, B. de S. (2009). Una epistemología del SUr: La reinvención del conocimiento y la emancipación social. México: Siglo veintiuno & Clacso.
38. Schneider, J. (Comp.). (1998). Italy’s “southern question”. orientalism in one country. Oxford: Berg.
39. Smith, D. E. (1974). Women’s perspective as a radical critique of sociology. Sociological Inquiry, 44(1), 7-13.
40. Smith, D. E. (1987). The everyday world as a problematic. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
41. Soja, E. W. (1990). Postmodern geographies. the reassertation of space in critical social theory. London & New York: Verso.
42. Stanley, L. & Wise, S. (1990). Method, methodology and epistemology in feminist research process. En L. Stanley (Ed.), Feminist praxis. Research, theory and epistemology in feminist sociology (pp. 20-60). London & New York: Routledge.
43. Stoetzler, M. & Yuval-Davis, N. (2002). Standpoint theory, situated knowledge and the situated imagination. Feminist Theory, 3(3), 315-333.
44. Wallerstein, I. (Ed.). (1996). Open the social sciencies. Report of the gulbenkian commission on the restructuring of the social sciencies. Stanford: Standford University Press.
45. Warf, B. & Arias, S. (2008). Introduction: the reinsertion of space in the humanities and social sciences. En B. Warf & S. Arias (Eds.), The spatial turn. Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 1-10). London & New York: Routledge.
46. Wylie, A. (2003). Why standpoint matters. En R. Figueroa & S. Harding (Eds.), Science and Other Cultures (pp. 26-48). New York & London: Routledge.