babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Could you give us a hint, perhaps? A description of this indigenous teaching, and where it comes from? Because I've never come across anything like it from the Elders who teach at the community school my daughters go to, and I'm having some difficulty believing that what you are claiming is accurate.
Indigenous knowledge is valuable, but we do it no favours by claiming it is something it isn't. What you refer to as Eurocentric scientific knowledge is also valuable in a different way. Isn't all knowledge valuable?
While it is true that colonialism and the spread of the British empire had an effect on Darwin's ability to back up his theory of natural selection, that does not make the theory itself wrong or irrelevant.
I'm not qualified to give these teachings. I certainly am not about to debate the "Elders" at your kids' school through your understanding of their teachings as transmitted to me on an internet message board.
I'm not doing that. Indigenous knowledges are diverse and all of them include reason and scientific observation of the world. There is lots of value in European scientific knowledge but it absolutely has to be analyzed within the context that it exists. Anything else would be un-scientific.
And Darwin has an effect on colonialism, which still actively exists today despite the fall of the British Empire. I've never said that Darwin was "wrong" or "irrelevant" I have simply pointed out that what makes his contribution to knowledge unique is that it is the only theory of evolution by natural selection that accepted by eurocentric science/soceity. I also said that the binary of Darwin or creationism is actaully a eurocentric one and we need to stop obsessing about it if we are going to improve our understanding of the world and the continuation of colonialism.
If you're asking me to denounce the mythology of one culture while holding out the mythology of another culture as authoritative just because you wish to engage in an 'us' versus 'them' gotcha debate, you are biting at the wrong set of tires here Le T. To my mind, an outright acceptance of the existence of otherworld spirituality as fact from non-western cultures, just because their 'minds' might be better suited to that sort of thing than that which 'our' intellect has time for, is just as paternalistic and racist as saying that any scientific discovery other than that which western society has stumbled across is invalid. This is not a conversation about spirituality. This is a conversation about Darwin's significant contribution to the scientific understanding of evolution. You wish to introduce previous or concurrent discoveries. Bear in mind that one doesn't invalidate the other. The fact of the matter is that in our circumstances in the here and now, we have little to no exposure of contemporary or previous discoveries and observations regarding the topic at hand. This does not equate to a denial that such knowledge may exist, nor does it signify a lack of understanding as to why only one source of discovery has been acknowledged by the west as 'authoritative.'
Colonialism itself was and still is to a large extent supported through a mindset that has been contitioned to believe that a form of genetic mastery has the right to determine for others through exploitation, appropriation, theft, warfare, you name it, its perpetuated and continues to be. One would think that any and all information that can be placed on the table to debunk the real myth that there is a moral justification for colonialism and imperialism based on the the right of a 'superior' being to dominate another, could prove itself useful from whichever source it came from. I don't quibble as to where this information comes from, so long as it is available.
No, you didn't "simply point out" anything. You accused those of us who celebrate the scientific proof of evolution by natural selection of supporting eurosupremacist racism and cultural genocide.
You have yet to explain where we might find a different theory of evolution that ought to be accepted by eurocentric science/society, either in preference to, or on equal footing with Darwinianism. Is it any wonder that Darwinism is the "only theory of evolution by natural selection" that is accepted by eurocentric science (or as you call it, "science")?
Ironic, in a discussion of Darwin and scientific principles, that we just have to take this one on faith. That, or head to Paraguay and begin to befriend the local Guarani.
So, to recap: indigenous cultures got there first, this can't be supported, demonstrated or referenced in any way, and if we don't accept this claims as truth then we're some kind of intellectual Imperialist.
You don't really want to be an intellectual Imperialist, do you Timebandit?
It's not even to say that it 'can't.' It is to say that if such knowledge exists, without implication in any way that it doesn't, that such knowledge simply hasn't yet made inroads among the accumulated wealth of knowledge as it is generally understood within the imperialistic circles that we exist in. We can even acknowledge and understand why that is, while at the same time consider valid the material at hand, which may or may not corroborate, enhance, or add to that which already existed, but has yet to be revealed to a larger audience.
Actually i gave you a link to a conference happening this weekend in Peterborough, Ontario (not Paraguay) where you can go and get this info.
I'm not asking anyone to take anything on faith. I am asking them to overcome their privilege and do the work nessessary to access the knowledge that they are interested in.
This conversation seems to be going nowhere. People in this thread seem to know nothing about eurocentrism in knowledge production. People keep repeating racist lies. I was asked for "links" to validate my claim and i provided a few pretty awesome books that i'm sure no one has bothered to read and i gave a link to a conference that gathers elders and traditional teachers together and invites ANYONE no matter how ignorant to come and learn. If people can't even be bothered to take these basic steps then i'm done here.
You don't need the scare quotes around Elders - they are Elders from the local First Nations community and have graciously agreed to come and teach at community school programs in our city as part of the Aboriginal Studies curriculum. Your scare quotes are disrespectful.
Not qualified, eh? Nice cop out. You'll forgive me if I maintain my skepticism in the face of no information.
Cop out? You obviously don't know anything about respect if you think that a settler dude should start giving teachings on an internet message board.
This whole attempt was ridiculous and i'm done in this thread and with trying to counter the eurocentric racism that is endemic on rabble.
Apparently you need to document and table your evidence that they are in fact, elders from the local community. Meanwhile most of us appear quite willing to accept at face value your spoken word testimony that they are elders, and that they do indeed teach at the local school. The conversation here suggests that if you had merely said there was a school with a dedicated curriculum in your area, by omission you are purposefully denying and excluding the existence of other possible forms of knowledge sharing that can potentially be bought to bear upon the minds of the students at this partucular facility.
I will be at this conference this weekend (well a decent chunk of it anyways) and I absolutely plan on discussing your opinions with people.
I admit I haven't had time to read Le T's links, and I think they are an important step in understanding her point of view. Hopefully this thread is still alive so I can comment after taking a look at them.
Not a dude, for one thing. Yes, a "settler" (your term, not mine), but one who has had respectful interaction with FN community for a couple of decades. Next, I'm not "giving teachings", I'm just asking you to give us some direction - First Nations are diverse and I'd like a better idea where to look, since I've not run into anything of the sort from Cree Elders here. Lastly, I haven't said anything racist at all and you don't have a corner on the respect market.
It all makes perfect sense now.
Well that sounds like a good time to close this thread.