Page 71 - Vinkler, Jonatan, Ana Beguš and Marcello Potocco. Eds. 2019. Ideology in the 20th Century: Studies of literary and social discourses and practices. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 71
Epistemology, Ideology, and Literature ... 71
tradiction here is that from a participatory point of view, harming oth-
ers always means harming oneself as well, but the colonizer is not aware
of this.
To dissolve this contradiction it is necessary to stress that the two
epistemologies Foerster differentiates are not to be thought of as oppo-
sitions. The non-oppositional difference becomes manifest in the recip-
rocal valuation. The participatory observer sees the external observer as
a legitimate part of the world who co-creates it with his way of knowing
and acting. Whereas the external observer, who positions himself apart
and above the world, to gain supremacy over it, sees himself rising on the
epistemological scale over the participatory observer. For him the partic-
ipatory observer is just an inferior part of the world that he is dominat-
ing. On implementing this hierarchy, the European colonizer, who draws
borders and boundaries, can downgrade the epistemology of the indige-
nous people as ‘savage’ or ‘barbarian’ (as Morgan termed it). A peaceful
coexistence of epistemologies, as Kordeš convincingly promotes (Kordeš
2004, 83–97) is beneficial in science, but in specific historical, economi-
cal, and political conditions, it is difficult to achieve. The epistemology of
an external observer fosters and legitimates capitalism and colonialism,
and they, when established, impose it on the colonialized and exploited.
When Mignolo writes about the ostensible character of the ‘zero
point epistemology’, he is a participatory observer. From this point of
view, there is no external position possible. On the other hand, the colo-
nizer, in the case he is aware of the problem of his epistemology, cannot
change it without calling into question the capitalist ideology (including
colonialism and patriarchy). In an already established colonial system not
even the colonizer has the freedom to choose his epistemology.
Foerster stated that the decision for an epistemology has diverse
and far-reaching, direct and indirect, consequences. To describe some of
them, he resorted to storytelling. In his dialogical autobiographic book
Part of the World (Teil der Welt), he is not only telling stories from his life,
but he also stresses the importance of stories, of narrating and the interac-
tion with the listeners (cf. Foerster 2002: xxiii, 27, 35, 66, 98), but he never
approached literary theory. So what could be the consequences for liter-
ature and literary studies? For the external observer language is a media-
tor between the observer and the world. The observer can use it as a tool
to master the world, or he can aestheticize it and ascribe some autonomy
to it. From a participatory point of view, language is part of the world and
every use of language is an activity that alters the world, like every other
activity (cf. Foerster 2002, 67; Kordeš 2004, 73). Another consequence of
tradiction here is that from a participatory point of view, harming oth-
ers always means harming oneself as well, but the colonizer is not aware
of this.
To dissolve this contradiction it is necessary to stress that the two
epistemologies Foerster differentiates are not to be thought of as oppo-
sitions. The non-oppositional difference becomes manifest in the recip-
rocal valuation. The participatory observer sees the external observer as
a legitimate part of the world who co-creates it with his way of knowing
and acting. Whereas the external observer, who positions himself apart
and above the world, to gain supremacy over it, sees himself rising on the
epistemological scale over the participatory observer. For him the partic-
ipatory observer is just an inferior part of the world that he is dominat-
ing. On implementing this hierarchy, the European colonizer, who draws
borders and boundaries, can downgrade the epistemology of the indige-
nous people as ‘savage’ or ‘barbarian’ (as Morgan termed it). A peaceful
coexistence of epistemologies, as Kordeš convincingly promotes (Kordeš
2004, 83–97) is beneficial in science, but in specific historical, economi-
cal, and political conditions, it is difficult to achieve. The epistemology of
an external observer fosters and legitimates capitalism and colonialism,
and they, when established, impose it on the colonialized and exploited.
When Mignolo writes about the ostensible character of the ‘zero
point epistemology’, he is a participatory observer. From this point of
view, there is no external position possible. On the other hand, the colo-
nizer, in the case he is aware of the problem of his epistemology, cannot
change it without calling into question the capitalist ideology (including
colonialism and patriarchy). In an already established colonial system not
even the colonizer has the freedom to choose his epistemology.
Foerster stated that the decision for an epistemology has diverse
and far-reaching, direct and indirect, consequences. To describe some of
them, he resorted to storytelling. In his dialogical autobiographic book
Part of the World (Teil der Welt), he is not only telling stories from his life,
but he also stresses the importance of stories, of narrating and the interac-
tion with the listeners (cf. Foerster 2002: xxiii, 27, 35, 66, 98), but he never
approached literary theory. So what could be the consequences for liter-
ature and literary studies? For the external observer language is a media-
tor between the observer and the world. The observer can use it as a tool
to master the world, or he can aestheticize it and ascribe some autonomy
to it. From a participatory point of view, language is part of the world and
every use of language is an activity that alters the world, like every other
activity (cf. Foerster 2002, 67; Kordeš 2004, 73). Another consequence of
