Dunsworth, Sterling, and Athreya and Ackermann have done great work at bringing to light the issue of colonial mindsets in modern anthropological research in their respective fields and articles. Athreya and Ackermann specifically mention the concept of "otherization," or the process of marginalizing and devaluing concepts having to due with minority populations. This is a word I had never heard about until their article, Colonialism and Narratives of Human Origins in Asia and Africa, and a word that I think is very helpful in explaining the way that minority, or non-white, populations are treated and more specifically the way that their narratives and experiences are put on the back burner to be ignored and forgotten about.
I also believe that it is incredibly unfortunate that many people in science have retained the colonialist mindset without even knowing it. It is something that can be drilled into people, starting when they are kids and continuing throughout their entire education and career. Scientific theories, hypotheses, and methods for research all have remnants of colonialist thoughts and practices embedded in them. Because of this, no one quite understands that they have become part of the problem. Another problem occurs when we acknowledge the remnants of the not-so-ethical past in our modern techniques and theories: how do we remove this influence from our fields? In my opinion, this task is next to impossible. These techniques and theories are important in advancing our understanding of science and origins. While we are not proud of our past, it has ingrained itself into our daily practices and some of these practices are too important to give up. The simplest answer to our problem is to simply acknowledge that it is wrong, and this is something that Dunsworth mentions in the article It is unethical to teach evolution without confronting racism and sexism. We must teach evolution, and the theories about our origins in order to well educate future researchers and the general population. However, in the process of teaching the theories and methods used in evolutionary research and thinking, we should also teach the ways in which it is influenced by less-than-desirable concepts.
I enjoyed your post. You are correct; the first thing we have to acknowledge is that we are wrong about how we teach history. "Otherizing" other people or cultures can dehumanize a group of people. This is very damaging and can cause an uproar. The best thing we could do is teach others the correct way to approach history, which implications on decolonizing and feminist ideologies. In that way, we can make information non-prejudice and inclusive to all. Even I used to think this way, but honestly, as I became an anthropology student, I started to have a different mindset and started to ask questions. I began to understand why the way I thought before was wrong. In saying that, I mean, anyone can change their mindset, especially those who will teach our future and those who will teach us right now. All we need is influence, and these articles that you have cited are all modern and informative. I learned so much more on questions like why we should research who was first for anything. The answer could give implications of superiority over whoever is second, third, and so on.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting, and somewhat sad, to realize how much an affect colonization had. We learn about some of it, but its affect on science is often overlooked (or sometimes it is even championed as an example of how science is objective).
ReplyDeleteI know that i was never taught anything about these ideas in grad school and even know a lot of folks push back on the ideas in these papers. But you raise a good point: maybe the first step is to be more open about these issues. Espeically nowadays, i find that students are well aware of issues that even 10 years ago were much less likely to be discussed. ONe of the best thing about classes like this is i find myself being pushed in a good way to question what I say and how i teach.