Scholarlink

<p>Recently, Majority World scholars have decried the exclusion of indigenous knowledge systems and lived experiences from the global knowledge economy. There have been persistent calls, particularly in psychology, to decolonize the field by centering knowledge frameworks and indigenous perspectives from Majority World contexts. One barrier to decolonizing efforts in post-colonial settings is the challenge associated with epistemic agency: the systematic denial of Majority World scholars’ capacity to draw from their own indigenous resources to conceptualize and theorize from their given epistemic locations. Scholars have suggested that Minority World researchers practice epistemic humility by realizing that their way of knowing is merely <i>a</i> way of knowing, and by actively recognizing and engaging with other ways of knowing. Such practices are crucial to avoid enfolding Majority World scholars into dominant Western ontological and epistemological frameworks, which contributes to reproducing and perpetuating dominant Western knowledge frameworks in former colonies. In this article, we ask the question: how can we foster the habit of speaking up for other ways of knowing to achieve decolonization of knowledge? To address this, we introduce the concept of <i>academic boldness</i> to this debate—the willingness and confidence to be innovative and articulate one’s unique knowledges, theories and concepts even if this may lead to pushback, questioning or being ignored—as one such critical resource required to contest and resist received Western knowledge systems. We trace the origin of the exclusion of Majority World knowledges, the hegemony of Western epistemologies, the gatekeeping powers of Minority World scholars, and the presumed authority of universalist knowledge claims to the history of colonization. We draw from our own experiences of working with African and Western researchers to show how challenges related to academic boldness could unintentionally recolonize Majority World scholars by enfolding them into Western default knowledge structures.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Academic Boldness: A Critical Resource for Decolonizing Knowledge

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月21日

查看全文
  • Stephen Baffour Adjei,
  • Sigrun Marie Moss

摘要

Recently, Majority World scholars have decried the exclusion of indigenous knowledge systems and lived experiences from the global knowledge economy. There have been persistent calls, particularly in psychology, to decolonize the field by centering knowledge frameworks and indigenous perspectives from Majority World contexts. One barrier to decolonizing efforts in post-colonial settings is the challenge associated with epistemic agency: the systematic denial of Majority World scholars’ capacity to draw from their own indigenous resources to conceptualize and theorize from their given epistemic locations. Scholars have suggested that Minority World researchers practice epistemic humility by realizing that their way of knowing is merely a way of knowing, and by actively recognizing and engaging with other ways of knowing. Such practices are crucial to avoid enfolding Majority World scholars into dominant Western ontological and epistemological frameworks, which contributes to reproducing and perpetuating dominant Western knowledge frameworks in former colonies. In this article, we ask the question: how can we foster the habit of speaking up for other ways of knowing to achieve decolonization of knowledge? To address this, we introduce the concept of academic boldness to this debate—the willingness and confidence to be innovative and articulate one’s unique knowledges, theories and concepts even if this may lead to pushback, questioning or being ignored—as one such critical resource required to contest and resist received Western knowledge systems. We trace the origin of the exclusion of Majority World knowledges, the hegemony of Western epistemologies, the gatekeeping powers of Minority World scholars, and the presumed authority of universalist knowledge claims to the history of colonization. We draw from our own experiences of working with African and Western researchers to show how challenges related to academic boldness could unintentionally recolonize Majority World scholars by enfolding them into Western default knowledge structures.