Political ontology

Last updated

Political ontology is an approach within anthropology to understand the process of how practices, entities (human and non-human), and concepts come into being or are enacted. [1] The field takes as its focus 'conflicts involving different assumptions about 'what exists,'" [1] over metaphysical entities, how to understand ecosystems and environment, the nature of animals and plants, and how communities collectively adjudicate what is real. Political ontology emerged as part of the ontological turn, particularly in the works by Mario Blaser, Marisol de la Cadena and Eduardo Viveiros de Castro.

Contents

Definition

Political ontology is not concerned with presenting what is real as the more accurate understanding of "what is there" as a meta-ontological narrative. It is concerned with the possibilities of claiming what is there [1] and showing how what is real is always in a process of contention. [2] In this sense, political ontology is not concerned with what is the ultimate reality, instead is interested in making visible the multiplicity of ontologies. [3] Political ontology is not concerned with independent realities, but it is interested in the process of reality-making and enacting of worlds through practices. [3] [4] [5]

Political ontology recognizes the division between nature and culture as constitutive of modern ontology. From the political ontology point of view, this modern ontology cannot be taken for granted as a universal division. [6] Political ontology does not assume that there is a single world and that the multiplicity of differences are just cultural. Instead, political ontology takes those differences as different ways in which worlds are enacted. These differences between "what is real" are interrelated with power dynamics that reproduce modern ontology as the dominant and Indigenous ontologies as cultural differences. [6] In this sense, political ontology is concerned with the negotiations and conflicts between worlds and how these worlds exist and interact with each other. [6]

Political ontology shows how reality is enacted as equivocal or as a “communicative disjuncture that takes place, not between those who share a common world but rather those whose worlds or ontologies are different”. [6] This communicative disjuncture usually occurs when an ontology or world is presupposed as universal. Because then the differences between “what is there” are based on knowledge or culture and not based on different enactments of worlds. These misunderstandings between modern and non-modern ontologies show how what is constructed as a fact within a worlding is an entanglement of the performativity of objectivity and subjectivity as well as of morality and politics. [7] Mainly political ontology is concerned with the power dynamics that emerge from recognizing the notion of multiple ontologies. [4] [7] [8]

Modern ontology

It is relevant to distinguish how modern ontology constantly recognizes differences as a cultural variation of the same world suppressing the possibility of the enactment of other worlds. [3] [7] The understanding of difference as culture privilege the understanding of a one-world reality that is “not clouded by culture (with lowercase c), and this access is premised precisely on recognizing the ontological difference between what is Culture and what is nature: a distinction that other cultures do not have”. [1] In this sense cultural differences as multiculturalism function as a way to ensure that the performance of other worlds does not contest the modern one-world ontology. [9] [6]

“The importance that protecting the unity of reality “out there” has for the modern ontology becomes evident if one considers that the consequence of accepting the existence of multiple ontologies or worlds would be the end of the “Internal Great Divide” between culture and nature and therefore of the fundamental characteristic that differentiates (and supposedly makes superior) the moderns in relation to the “others” [6]

Radical difference

The power move of political ontology is to take seriously the differences as ways of enacting different worlds and to show the limits of modern ontology. [3] [10] Political ontology aims to recuperate radical difference as a way to escape the all-encompassing modernity. [1] Radical difference is a relational condition that emerges from the enactment of equivocal worlds that exceed modern categories of understanding. [6] This does not mean that the process of enacting worlds implies coherence and purity, to enact a world implies connections to other worlds but these connections do not revoke the radical differences between them.

Pluriverse and multiple ontologies

Political ontology offers a framework to understand the emergence of multiple ontologies through the concept of the pluriverse. [1] [4] According to Blaser, the “pluriverse constituted by intra-acting worldings that share partial connections. Thus, while worldings are co-emergent, they do not share an overarching principle that would make their entanglement a universe. Rather their partial connections often constitute the sites in which it is possible to discern how what is brought into existence by certain worlding might interfere and conflict with what is brought into existence by another''. [1] The key proposition of the pluriverse is that there is not an overarching principle that makes the multiplicities of ontologies into one single universe.

Critics

One of the critics of political ontology is that the enactment of worldings seems to be invariable. The notion of non-modern ontologies as static reinstates the Eurocentric tendency to define non-modern as an image of the modern. Therefore, the changes can only come from the outside of the non-modern that is to say from the modern world. [7] There is also another assumption that is relevant to unstate that is based on the notion that non-modern is better in terms of societies that are egalitarian or non-hierarchical. This is another assumption that reinstates non-moderns as the past of modern societies. [6] In this sense, it is important to think about the enactment of worldings as Blaser quotes from a teacher and mentor Yshiro:

“not all stories (or accounts) are to be told or enacted just anywhere; every situation requires its own story. Telling just any story without attending to what the situation requires is sheer and recklessness. Thus, figuring out where, when, and how to do difference and sameness as the circumstances require is to me the key challenge of doing political ontology”. [9]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anthropology</span> Scientific study of humans, human behavior, and societies

Anthropology is the scientific study of humanity, concerned with human behavior, human biology, cultures, societies, and linguistics, in both the present and past, including past human species. Social anthropology studies patterns of behavior, while cultural anthropology studies cultural meaning, including norms and values. A portmanteau term sociocultural anthropology is commonly used today. Linguistic anthropology studies how language influences social life. Biological or physical anthropology studies the biological development of humans.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cultural anthropology</span> Branch of anthropology focused on the study of cultural variation among humans

Cultural anthropology is a branch of anthropology focused on the study of cultural variation among humans. It is in contrast to social anthropology, which perceives cultural variation as a subset of a posited anthropological constant. The term sociocultural anthropology includes both cultural and social anthropology traditions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ontology</span> Philosophical study of being and existence

In metaphysics, ontology is the philosophical study of being. It investigates what types of entities exist, how they are grouped into categories, and how they are related to one another on the most fundamental level. Ontologists often try to determine what the categories or highest kinds are and how they form a system of categories that encompasses the classification of all entities. Commonly proposed categories include substances, properties, relations, states of affairs, and events. These categories are characterized by fundamental ontological concepts, including particularity and universality, abstractness and concreteness, or possibility and necessity. Of special interest is the concept of ontological dependence, which determines whether the entities of a category exist on the most fundamental level. Disagreements within ontology are often about whether entities belonging to a certain category exist and, if so, how they are related to other entities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Posthumanism</span> Class of philosophies

Posthumanism or post-humanism is an idea in continental philosophy and critical theory responding to the presence of anthropocentrism in 21st-century thought. Posthumanization comprises "those processes by which a society comes to include members other than 'natural' biological human beings who, in one way or another, contribute to the structures, dynamics, or meaning of the society."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">World</span> The totality of existing entities

The world is the totality of entities, the whole of reality, or everything that is. The nature of the world has been conceptualized differently in different fields. Some conceptions see the world as unique while others talk of a "plurality of worlds". Some treat the world as one simple object while others analyze the world as a complex made up of parts. In scientific cosmology, the world or universe is commonly defined as "[t]he totality of all space and time; all that is, has been, and will be". Theories of modality talk of possible worlds as complete and consistent ways how things could have been. Phenomenology, starting from the horizon of co-given objects present in the periphery of every experience, defines the world as the biggest horizon or the "horizon of all horizons". In philosophy of mind, the world is contrasted with the mind as that which is represented by the mind. Theology conceptualizes the world in relation to God, for example, as God's creation, as identical to God or as the two being interdependent. In religions, there is a tendency to downgrade the material or sensory world in favor of a spiritual world to be sought through religious practice. A comprehensive representation of the world and our place in it, as is found in religions, is known as a worldview. Cosmogony is the field that studies the origin or creation of the world while eschatology refers to the science or doctrine of the last things or of the end of the world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ethnography</span> Systematic study of people and cultures

Ethnography is a branch of anthropology and the systematic study of individual cultures. Ethnography explores cultural phenomena from the point of view of the subject of the study. Ethnography is also a type of social research that involves examining the behavior of the participants in a given social situation and understanding the group members' own interpretation of such behavior.

Performativity is the concept that language can function as a form of social action and have the effect of change. The concept has multiple applications in diverse fields such as anthropology, social and cultural geography, economics, gender studies, law, linguistics, performance studies, history, management studies and philosophy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arjun Appadurai</span> Indian-American anthropologist (born 1949)

Arjun Appadurai is an Indian-American anthropologist recognized as a major theorist in globalization studies. In his anthropological work, he discusses the importance of the modernity of nation-states and globalization. He is the former University of Chicago professor of anthropology and South Asian Languages and Civilizations, Humanities Dean of the University of Chicago, director of the city center and globalization at Yale University, and the Education and Human Development Studies professor at NYU Steinhardt School of Culture.

The imaginary is the set of values, institutions, laws, and symbols through which people imagine their social whole. It is common to the members of a particular social group and the corresponding society. The concept of the imaginary has attracted attention in anthropology, sociology, psychoanalysis, philosophy, and media studies.

In critical theory, deterritorialization is the process by which a social relation, called a territory, has its current organization and context altered, mutated or destroyed. The components then constitute a new territory, which is the process of reterritorialization.

Arturo Escobar is a Colombian-American anthropologist and Professor Emeritus of Anthropology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA. His academic research interests include political ecology, anthropology of development, social movements, anti-globalization movements, political ontology, and postdevelopment theory.

Neuroanthropology is the study of the relationship between culture and the brain. This field of study emerged from a 2008 conference of the American Anthropological Association. It is based on the premise that lived experience leaves identifiable patterns in brain structure, which then feed back into cultural expression.The exact mechanisms are so far ill defined and remain speculative.

Karen Michelle Barad is an American feminist theorist and physicist, known particularly for their theory of agential realism.

Systems theory in anthropology is an interdisciplinary, non-representative, non-referential, and non-Cartesian approach that brings together natural and social sciences to understand society in its complexity. The basic idea of a system theory in social science is to solve the classical problem of duality; mind-body, subject-object, form-content, signifier-signified, and structure-agency. System theory suggests that instead of creating closed categories into binaries (subject-object); the system should stay open so as to allow free flow of process and interactions. In this way the binaries are dissolved.

Ethnoscience has been defined as an attempt "to reconstitute what serves as science for others, their practices of looking after themselves and their bodies, their botanical knowledge, but also their forms of classification, of making connections, etc.".

The nature–culture divide is the notion of a dichotomy between humans and the environment. It is a theoretical foundation of contemporary anthropology that considers whether nature and culture function separately from one another, or if they are in a continuous biotic relationship with each other.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to social science:

Engaged theory is a methodological framework for understanding the social complexity of a society, by using social relations as the base category of study, with the social always understood as grounded in the natural, including people as embodied beings. Engaged theory progresses from detailed, empirical analysis of the people, things, and processes of the world to abstract theory about the constitution and social framing of people, things, and processes.

Global cultural flow involves the flow of people, artifacts, and ideas across national boundaries as result of globalization. Global cultural flows can be observed in five interdependent 'Landscapes', or dimensions, that distinguish the fundamental disjunctures between economy, culture, and politics in the global cultural economy.

The ontological turn is an increased interest in ontology within a number of philosophical and academic disciplines during the early 2000s. The ontological turn in anthropology is not concerned with anthropological notions of culture, epistemology, nor world views. Instead, the ontological turn generates interest in being in the world and accepts that different world views are not simply different representations of the same world. More specifically, the ontological turn refers to a change in theoretical orientation according to which differences are understood not in terms of a difference in world views, but a differences in worlds and all of these worlds are of equal validity.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Blaser, Mario (2013). "Ontological Conflicts and the Stories of Peoples in Spite of Europe: Toward a Conversation on Political Ontology". Current Anthropology. 54 (5): 547–568. doi:10.1086/672270. ISSN   0011-3204. S2CID   142640993.
  2. ↑ Cadena, Marisol de la (2015). Earth beings : ecologies of practice across Andean worlds. Durham. ISBN   978-0-8223-5944-9. OCLC   898161720.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  3. 1 2 3 4 Blaser, Mario (2014). "Ontology and indigeneity: on the political ontology of heterogeneous assemblages". Cultural Geographies. 21 (1): 49–58. Bibcode:2014CuGeo..21...49B. doi:10.1177/1474474012462534. ISSN   1474-4740. JSTOR   26168541. S2CID   147651392.
  4. 1 2 3 The anthropology of sustainability : beyond development and progress. Marc Brightman, Jerome Lewis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 2017. ISBN   978-1-137-56636-2. OCLC   1000142894.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  5. ↑ Bonifacio, Valentina (2013). "Meeting the Generals: A Political Ontology Analysis of the Paraguayan Maskoy Struggle for Land". Anthropologica. 55 (2): 385–397. ISSN   0003-5459. JSTOR   24467344.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Blaser, Mario (2009). "POLITICAL ONTOLOGY: Cultural Studies without 'cultures'?". Cultural Studies. 23 (5–6): 873–896. doi:10.1080/09502380903208023. ISSN   0950-2386. S2CID   147112636.
  7. 1 2 3 4 Blaser, Mario (2009). "The Threat of the Yrmo: The Political Ontology of a Sustainable Hunting Program". American Anthropologist. 111 (1): 10–20. doi:10.1111/j.1548-1433.2009.01073.x.
  8. ↑ Espinosa Arango, Mónica L (2021). "Missing the political: A southern critique of political ontology". Anthropological Theory. 21 (4): 411–436. doi:10.1177/1463499620974797. ISSN   1463-4996. S2CID   230580935.
  9. 1 2 Blaser, Mario (13 January 2014). "The Political Ontology of Doing Difference... and Sameness". Society for Cultural Anthropology. Retrieved 2022-04-28.
  10. ↑ Todd, Zoe (2016). "An Indigenous Feminist's Take On The Ontological Turn: 'Ontology' Is Just Another Word For Colonialism: An Indigenous Feminist's Take on the Ontological Turn". Journal of Historical Sociology. 29 (1): 4–22. doi:10.1111/johs.12124.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.