Michael David S. Casignia:

Decolonizing Knowledge
(Issues, Concerns, and Recommendations)

I. Integration and Issues

It has always been the crucial part of human nature to ask about his/her surroundings. Our inquisitive nature drives us to a seemingly perpetual acquisition of knowledge. However, knowledge, as we had been educated from the time that we first went to school up to the present, is utterly embedded with cultural values and is colonized by hegemonic powers. Hegemonic powers had used and still is using education as a way to colonize nations especially developing ones in a clandestinely indirect fashion. The article of Philip Altbach entitled “Education and Neocolonialism,” shows the role of education in subjugating the colonized countries in the past as part of the past imperial powers’ colonial policies. Altbach argues that such practices by these imperial powers are still present; however, no direct political control is involved although some aspects of domination remain. This evolved colonialism is what he called neocolonialism. In neocolonialism, the manners/ways of thinking of people are the ones being colonized by forcing the Third World nations to become dependent on western ideas, paradigms, and theories that are pretty much loaded with their cultural values. An example of this is Alan Bishop’s Western Mathematics: The Secret Weapon of Cultural Imperialism. According to him, mathematics which is believed to be universal and culture-free is actually laden with western cultural values namely objectism, rationalism, and power and control. The saddest part is that not only mathematics but even the various disciplines of the social sciences are being used as a tool in spreading western thoughts thereby intensifying neocolonialism. John R. Searle’s Is there a Crisis in American Higher Education elaborates the current situation of the social sciences by introducing two antagonistic factions: the traditionalists on the one side and the multiculturalists on the other. In his article, he expounded the points of the traditionalists of cultural emancipation, rationalism, and elitist in a sense that higher education is the relentless quest for intellectual quality, and the views of the multiculturalists or anti-traditionalists of multicultural representation, equality among culture both morally and intellectually, and WASPEM domination. However, Searle later conceded the traditionalist views. Syed Farid Alatas on the other hand, explained academic dependency and the division of the labor in the social sciences in a global perspective. According to him, academic dependency has become pandemic encompassing transcontinental borders, from the social sciences peripheral power consisting of the US, Great Britain, and France, to Third World developing nations and even other first world nations such as Japan, at least in terms of paradigms and theories. The division of labor in the social sciences on the other hand, is explained as dichotomized: theoretical, other country studies, and comparative for the first world, while, empirical, own country and single case studies for the Third World. Such dependence on social scientific ideas and the dichotomy of the division of labor in the social sciences is further explained by Randolph David’s Ang Pagkagapos ng Agham Panlipunang Pilipino. David argues the Filipino social scientists’ dependence on western ideas and paradigms in analyzing Philippine societal problems and that most of the social scientific papers that were meant to diagnose the perennial problems of the Philippine society were either catered to the American interests, done by the Americans themselves, or tried to preserve the prevailing status quo during those times. According to him, western social scientific paradigms and ideas are embedded with western cultural values that are different to that of the Filipino’s, that is why using such paradigms and ideas are inappropriate in understanding and answering the problems of the Philippine society. The differences of cultural values can be attributed to Searle’s account on brute facts and institutional facts. Accordingly, such values are created by institutions and such institutions are created by the intentionality of individuals. Values are after all, institutional facts and not brute fact (ie, facts independent of human institutions). And since the different societies create different human institutions, and in turn create different institutional facts, the question now is whether a certain institutional fact (eg. A value-laden knowledge) is enough to explain and answer different institutional problems (eg. Societal problems) of different cultures.

II. Recommendations

Academic dependence and neocolonialism are results of the past colonial practices as well as the economic dependence of the Third World to the First World. Even Altbach recognizes the immediate end to neocolonialism especially in education is rather far-fetched. An immediate renouncement by developing nations of western thoughts will lead only to a retaliation of western countries in economic terms. What the developing nations can do now is to ease their dependence on western knowledge. I agree to Bishop’s suggestions of the three levels of responses in western mathematics: 1) the use of ethno-mathematics (or indigenous knowledge), 2) cultural rebirth, and 3) the re-examination of the whole history of western mathematics (or other knowledge which claims to be universal). But these three levels of responses should be applied in a wider scope encompassing the social sciences, the humanities, and the physical sciences. I also concur with the views of the multiculturalists that we have the rights to know our own identity. The view is also conceded with respect to the issue that the social sciences should be multicultural. This is due to Randolph David’s view that the task of the social sciences is to analyze the structural features that allow social movements in the society as well as to have a deep grasp or understanding of oneself or one’s own identity. Social science peripheral powers should best of all, know that western methods, ideas, and paradigms cannot solve the different problems of different societies. This is because in order to understand and solve a societal problem, a social scientist must look deep inside and should have a greater understanding of the culture and language of the society that he/she is studying. A culture free paradigm or thought, whether it really exists, cannot solve a societal problem that is deeply rooted in cultural value. Now, the greatest task or challenge is on the educational system and the national university of every country. Since the most important function of education is not information or knowledge but formation (ie. Identity formation) and the task of every national university is to understand and at the same time preserve the identity of its country’s heritage.