No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Can Non‐Europeans Philosophize? Transnational Literacy and Planetary Ethics in a Global Age
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2020
Abstract
Defenders of the Enlightenment highlight the long neglected anticolonial writings of thinkers like Immanuel Kant, which serve as a corrective to the misrepresentation of the Enlightenment's epistemological investment in imperialism. One of the most pervasive repercussions of the claim that the Enlightenment was always already anti‐imperial is that postcolonial critique is rendered redundant, and the project of decolonizing European philosophy becomes unnecessary. Contesting the exoneration of Enlightenment philosophers of racism and sexism, this article debunks the claim that Kantian cosmopolitanism was an antidote to colonialism. Addressing the ambivalent legacies of the European Enlightenment for the postcolonial world, with special focus on the “Syrian refugee crisis,” the article examines the enduring normative violence exerted by Enlightenment principles of cosmopolitanism and outlines the contested terrains that inflect current geopolitics of knowledge‐production. Given that the normative idea of philosophy, as defined during the Enlightenment, continues to delegitimize non‐European perspectives, the integration of previously marginalized knowledges into the philosophical canon is insufficient; rather, in order to desubalternize non‐Western epistemologies, it is imperative to undo the uneven distribution of epistemic agency globally. Drawing on Gayatri Spivak's ideas of transnational literacy and planetary ethics, the article concludes by underscoring the contribution of postcolonial‐feminist critique in imagining postimperial philosophy in a global age.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Hypatia , Volume 32 , Issue 3: Special Issue: Contested Terrains: Women of Color and Third World Women, Feminisms, and Geopolitics , Summer 2017 , pp. 488 - 505
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2017 by Hypatia, Inc.
References
Bernasconi, Robert. 2011. Kant's third thoughts on race. In Reading Kant's geography, ed. Elden, Stuart and Mendieta, Eduardo. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Dabashi, Hamid. 2013. Can non‐Europeans think? Al Jazeera, January 15. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/01/2013114142638797542.html (accessed November 14, 2016).Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1981. Plato's pharmacy. In Dissemination. London: The Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1992. The other heading: Reflections on today's Europe. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 2000. Hostipitality. Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanities 5 (3): 3–18.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 2005. Rogues: Two essays on reason. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Dhawan, Nikita. 2007. Impossible speech. On the politics of silence and violence. Sankt Augustin, Germany: Academia.Google Scholar
Eze, Emmanuel Chukwudi, ed. 1997. Race and the Enlightenment: A reader. Oxford: Wiley‐Blackwell.Google Scholar
Flax, Jane. 1992. Is Enlightenment emancipatory? A feminist reading of “What is Enlightenment”. In Post‐modernism and the re‐reading of modernity, ed. Barker, Francis, Hulme, Peter, and Iversen, Margaret. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Flikschuh, Katrin, and Ypi, Lea, eds. 2014. Kant and colonialism: Historical and critical perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hund, Wulf D. 2011. It must come from Europe. The racisms of Immanuel Kant. In Racisms: Made in Germany, ed. Hund, Wulf D., Koller, Christian, and Zimmermann, Moshe. Berlin: LIT.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1764. Beobachtungen über das Gefühl des Schönen und Erhabenen. In AA vol. 2: 207–56.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1785. Bestimmung des Begriffs einer Menschenrasse. In AA vol. 8: 91–106.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1793. Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis. In AA vol. 8: 275–313.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1900. Gesammelte Schriften. Ausgabe der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (AA). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1913 (unpublished remains). Reflexionen aus dem Nachlaß: Entwürfe zu dem Colleg über Anthropologie aus den 70er und 80er Jahren. In AA vol. 15: 655–899.Google Scholar
Kapoor, Ilan. 2008. The postcolonial politics of development. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline. 2007. Kant's second thoughts on race. Philosophical Quarterly 57 (229): 573–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Lydia. 1995. Translingual practice: Literature, national culture, and translated modernity—China, 1900–1937. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
May Schott, Robin. 1996. The gender of Enlightenment. In What is Enlightenment? Eighteenth‐century answers and twentieth‐century questions, ed. Schmidt, James. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Muthu, Sankar. 2003. Enlightenment against empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pagden, Anthony. 2014. The law of continuity: Conquest and settlement within the limits of Kant's international right. In Kant and colonialism: Historical and critical perspectives, ed. Flikschuh, Katrin and Ypi, Lea. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Said, Edward. 1983. Traveling theory. In The world, the text, and the critic. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1999. Critique of postcolonial reason. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 2003. Death of a discipline. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 2004. Righting wrongs. South Atlantic Quarterly 103 (2/3): 523–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar