Non-Western knowledge systems hold totality and heterogeneity together, not apart
Evidence
Outside the West, virtually in all known cultures … , all systematic production of knowledge is associated with a perspective of totality. But in those cultures, the perspective of totality in knowledge includes the acknowledgement of the heterogeneity of all reality; of the irreducible, contradictory character of the latter; of the legitimacy, i.e. desirability of the diverse character of the components of all reality—and therefore, of the social. The [better, alternative] idea of social totality, then, not only does not deny, but depends on the historical diversity and heterogeneity of society, of every society. In other words, it not only does not deny, but it requires the idea of an “other”—diverse, different. — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection, 619
Categorization
- DEFINE: Distinguishes the non-Western ‘social totality’ (totality that requires the other) from European modernity’s totalizing totality that equates totality with sameness.
- XREF: Directly echoes the ‘Complaints About Immodesty’ and sacrifice articles’ theme: non-Eurocentric frameworks offer alternatives to Western universalism; also connects to Quijano’s decolonial canon which the reader’s rival-school reading needs. — connects to: Knowledge systems always leave internal fissures that enable regenerative critique; Indigenous knowledge and Western science can coexist as complementary polycultures — Robin Wall Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom,…, 487; Indigenous and Western knowledge converge but must be translated into mechanistic language — Robin Wall Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom,…, 580