PERCEPTIONS ON NATURE THROUGH THE EPISTEMOLOGIES OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH
Keywords:nature, epistemologies of the north, epistemologies of the south, extraction
This study claims that epistemologies of the North and South hold contradictory perceptions vis-à-vis nature. Studying these perceptions is the interest of this present paper since it argues that Northern epistemologies adopt an objectifying visualization of nature compared with Southern epistemologies which hold an earthly centered and biocentric attitude regarding nature. This paper starts from the belief that nature is indispensable for the existence of Man on this planet and, hence, must be preserved for the coming generations. For epistemologies of the North, the research analyzes the work of Descartes who talked about res extensa and res cogitans, Rousseau who discussed the importance of the social contract in the organization of modern societies and Adam Smith who contributed in the development of capitalism. For epistemologies of the South, it refers to terms like pantheism which claims that God is everywhere, sumak kawsay or Pachamama which consider nature and earth as a mother that cares for her children. Utilizing the comparative approach in critiquing the two epistemologies, the research concludes that epistemologies of the South and the North must interfere and interact to learn from each other. This is very important for the development of knowledge in general and the preservation of nature in particular.
Bartlett, L., Vavrus, F. (2016): Rethinking case study research: A comparative approach. – Taylor & Francis 140p.
Butterfield, H. (1931): The Whig Interpretation of History. – Electronic Library of Historiography 82p.
Descartes, R. (2018). Meditations on First Philosophy with Selections from the Objections and Replies (M, Moriarty, Trans.). – Oxford University Press 330p.
de Sousa Santos, B. (2018): The end of the cognitive empire: The coming of age of epistemologies of the South. – Duke University Press 392p.
de Sousa Santos, B. (2015): Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. – Routledge 284p.
Dussel, E. (1995): The Invention of the Americas: Eclipse of “the Other” and the Myth of Modernity, trans. – Michael D. Barber, New York: Continuum 215p.
Freiberger, O. (2019): Considering comparison: A method for religious studies. – Oxford University Press 256p.
Harrison, P. (1997): Native Americans: A pantheist spirituality of nature. – World Pantheism Official Portal. Retrieved from:
Huggan, G., Tiffin, H. (2015): Postcolonial ecocriticism: Literature, animals, environment. – Routledge 306p.
Kovel, J. (2007): The Enemy of Nature: The End of Capitalism or the End of the World? – Zed Books 345p.
Lalander, R. (2014): Rights of nature and the indigenous peoples in Bolivia and Ecuador: A Straitjacket for Progressive Development Politics? – Iberoamerican Journal of Development Studies 3(2): 148-172.
Levine, M.P. (1994): Pantheism, ethics and ecology. – Environmental Values 3(2): 121-138.
Lvi-Strauss, C. (1966): The savage mind. – University of Chicago Press 290p.
Mason, T.V., Szabo-Jones, L., Steenkamp, E. (2013): Introduction to postcolonial ecocriticism among settler-colonial nations. – Ariel: A Review of International English Literature 44(4): 1-11.
Max Planck Institute (2009): Bolivia (Plurinational State of ) 2009. – Oxford University Press 96p.
Mignolo, W.D. (2017): Coloniality is far from over, and so must be decoloniality. – Afterall: A Journal of Art, Context and Enquiry 43(1): 38-45.
Owen, H.P. (1971): Concepts of Deity. – Palgrave Macmillan 185p.
Rousseau, J,J. (1994): Discourse on Political Economy and the Social Contract (C, Betts, Trans.). – Oxford University Press 256p.
Rousseau, J.J. (2008): Discourse on political economy and the social contract. – Oxford University Press 216p.
Smith, A. (1977): An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. – Chicago University Press 754p.
Spinoza, B. (1996): Ethics (E. Curley, Trans. & Ed.). – Edinburgh University Press 193p.
Wallerstein, I.M. (2006): European universalism: The rhetoric of power. – New Press 128p.