"Deprovincializing" sociology: the post colonial contribution (original) (raw)
Related papers
Rethinking Postcolonial Sociology
Journal of Classical Sociology., 2024
Gregor McLennan sees my book, The Colonial Origins of Modern Social Thought: French Sociology and the Overseas Empire, as inaugurating a new phase of “multiplex” postcolonial sociology. This approach moves away from sweeping generalizations about Eurocentrism, Manicheaism, complicity, and pervasive coloniality in “Western” sociology. It pays closer attention to sociology’s internal heterogeneity and is less distrustful of scientific norms such as validity, objectivity, evidence, autonomy, scientific neutrality, and explanation. More specifically, my approach relies (1) on the idea of “context” from the classic sociology of knowledge and intellectual history; (2) on the concept of “field” from Bourdieu; (3) on methods of “close reading” and textual interpretation from literary criticism; and (4) on the “historians’ craft” (Bloch) of using the most extensive available archive of published and unpublished sources. I argue that we can evaluate historical thinkers in their contexts, assessing the constraints and spaces of possibility they faced, and then examine their intellectual choices, the moves they make in the social scientific game. This approach aligns more closely with the ideas of the founders of postcolonial theory, who were more interested in classical texts that “brush up unstintingly against historical constraints” than in texts that remain “inertly of their time (Edward Said). McLennan agrees that postcolonial sociology is indebted to European Enlightenment traditions; I focus on its roots in the sociology of knowledge and sociological historicism. The article then responds to McLennan’s main “probes.” The first concerns the methodological problem of “labelling investigations as ʽsociologyʼ and specific people as ʽsociologistsʼ,” and the limits of field theory. The second concerns my “outline of a theory of colonial sociological practice,” which tries to understand the dilemmas facing sociologists in colonial situations and the historians who study them. The third probe addresses the question of the scientific exploitation of empire. The sociologists I emphasize did not approach the colonized as a pool of resources to be extracted and exploited but worked across the colonial boundary line in generating knowledge. Although the book focuses on the mid-20th century decades, I return in my comments to Durkheim, upon whose shoulders much of the later work was erected. The key is that Durkheim theorized colonialism and empires and politically an anticolonialist. He described colonies as anomic spaces and rejected the biological race concepts and hierarchical notions of civilization. He rejected universalistic values, while advocating an international system of states governed by historically specific morality and law rather than violence. Finally, Durkheim reversed the “imperial gaze,” directing it back at Europe.
In this study, historical and sociological discourse of colonialist movements will be critically analyzed by referring post-colonial theories. In doing so, it is proposed to shed light on the process of colonialism, its reason, consequences and impact on colonialized territories in the light of social science discipline. In order to generate a systematic study, the issue problematized will be examined in an historical approach. That is why, the text will include some sub-titles that might show the development and status of colonialist discourse in social science (and specifically sociology) literature. After that, some deconstructive theories on colonialist discourse will be mentioned in consideration of new/contrary arguments on race and culture. At the end of the study, Orientalizm as one of the well-known colonialist discourse of Western dominance will be discussed. This paper doesn't propose to give detailed information on colonialist movements in an historical context. It, rather, proposes to underline the Western view of the World and movements on colonialized countries encouraged by these view. That is why, throughout the stud, modern Western theories will be attributed to colonialist approaches and actions.
How did the process of decolonization reframe the social sciences? This article maps the interventions made by theorists of and from the ex-colonial countries in reconceptualizing sociology both as practice and as an episteme. It argues that there are geographically varied and intellectually diverse decolonial approaches being formulated using sociological theory to critique the universals propounded by the traditions of western sociology/social sciences; that these diverse knowledges are connected through colonial and global circuits and that these create knowledge geographies; that collectively these diverse intellectual positions argue that sociology/social sciences are constituted in and within the politics of 'difference' organized within colonial, nationalist and global geopolitics; that this 'difference' is being reproduced in everyday knowledge practices and is being structured through the political economy of knowledge; and that the destabilization of this power structure and democratization of this knowledge is possible only when there is a fulsome interrogation of this political economy, and its everyday practices of knowledge production within universities and research institutes. It argues that this critique needs to be buffered by the constitution of alternate networks of circulation of this knowledge.
Putting colonialism into the picture: Towards a reconstruction of modern social theory
Kasetsart Journal of Social Science, 2022
This review essay presents and discusses revisionist approaches to the sociological canon with special emphasis on G. K. Bhambra and J. Holmwood's (2021) recent book Colonialism and modern social theory. Hereby, we draw attention to recent calls to open up the early sociological canon in order not only to open up for a more adequate account of modernity but also to address critically the concepts and categories that form mainstream sociology.
Colonial Sociology and the Historical Sociology of the Social Sciences
Social Science History
George Steinmetz's book on the colonial origins of modern social thought is an eye-opener and a game-changer. The book represents a learned, deeply researched, and admirably constructed study: broad in scope, spanning a considerable period of time and tackling a pressing problemcolonial social sciencein a sophisticated and challenging manner. Since the book has a meaning that is well beyond its specific object of study, it is worthwhile situating it in the broader context. I would say Colonial Origins has a fourfold significance. First, it changes our understanding of sociology and can inspire a shift in sociologists' self-understanding. Demonstrating that, in France, "colonial sociology" was a subfield of considerable intellectual and institutional importance represents a discovery, perhaps a rediscovery, which should have consequences, not just for specialists in the history of sociology, but for the discipline as a whole: for the authors who will be selected for anthologies and textbooks, and, more generally, for what should be included in the thematic and theoretical repertoire of the discipline. In addition to this forward-looking dimension, there is the retrospective questioning, examining the amnesia, the active and passive modes of ignorance of this colonial past. These are social processes as well, in need of sociological scrutiny, and they are an integral part of the analysis that Steinmetz presents. Second, and beyond the case of France, the book is a research program and a model for studying colonial sociology in other contexts, colonial and non-colonial, and an invitation to do so comparatively. Although Steinmetz announces further work himself, such an effort will hopefully be joined by others, so that the inquiries can become a collective and transnational research effort. There is every reason to examine comparable (sub-)fields in other countries, their structural dynamics as well as the intellectual production they have given rise to. To mention just one intriguing comparative question among others, have there been equivalents of figures like the Tunisian scholar Albert Memmi and the Algerian sociologist Abdelmalek Sayad, important social thinkers who were born and grew up as colonial subjects? Third, the book contributes to the trans-disciplinary intellectual debate about colonialism, post-colonialism, and decolonization. The conclusion of the book
"Coloniality, modernity, decoloniality A new introduction to the second edition of *Unbecoming Modern*, 2019
In this new introduction, we propose to undertake three tasks. Each of these moves imaginatively extends and critically supplements the discussion in the earlier introduction to the volume. These considerations crucially concerned the pressing requirements of: (1) historically grounding colonialisms; (2) adequately specifying the terms of modernity; and (3) prudently addressing the imperatives of power and difference in critical endeavor. Unsurprisingly, on offer ahead are deeper historical specifications of colonial cultures, succinct understandings of the contradictions of modernity as well as the contentions of its subjects, and prudent readings of de-colonial claims. These themes are reflected in the title of this introductory essay. After this prologue, they are presented as an act in three scenes, followed by an epilogue.
THE STUDY OF POST – COLONIAL THEORY
Post Colonial is the study of the history ,culture ,literature and that was the main concern in the former colonies of England ,Spain ,France and other powers .Post-Colonial study reveals the exploitation done on the colonized country by the colonized powers .Here, the aim of this study is to analyses the theoretical approach in various colonies that is concerned with the impact of colonization in various countries .Post-colonialism represents an ideological response to colonial thought describing a system that comes after colonialism.
"Notes on the 'Post-Colonial'," Social Text, 31/32 (Spring 1992) pp. 99-113.
Social Text, 1992
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.