Race scholarship challenges the clean divide between modern science and ethnoscience
Evidence
The first argues against conventional ways of contrasting modern sciences and “ethnosciences.” The second argues for setting the history of science and technology within larger social projects, especially European expansion. The third argues against the purported immunity of epistemologies and philosophies of science from racial, cultural, and imperial projects. — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1582
Categorization
- DEFINE: Distinguishes ethnoscience from modern science as a contested dichotomy — useful reference grounding for how these categories are problematized.
- XREF: connects to: Science followed race-thinking; it did not create it; Race retained power by distinguishing cultural capacity for European privilege rather than biology — Ann Laura Stoler, Along the Archival Grain_ Epistemic…, 981
Broader Connections
- Race retained power by distinguishing cultural capacity for European privilege rather than biology
#complicates(0.80) — Ann Laura Stoler, Along the Archival Grain_ Epistemic…, 981 - Science followed race-thinking; it did not create it
#corroborates(0.78)