| Abstrakt: |
In recent decades, with the paradigm shift in development literature with an inward-looking epistemological orientation, theorists have proposed indigenous knowledge as an effective alternative for rural development. This article evaluates the alternative capacity of this approach. Having examined the origins of this approach, it is believed that the superficial emphasis on it is a kind of pseudo-epistemic extremism and is a source of controversy. Two significant factors are responsible: the not-so-successful experience of development programs with an authoritarian technocratic nature and the emergence of critical discourses such as postmodernism and postcolonialism. The article argues that this belief has caused a kind of radical stance (for and against) towards two knowledges (indigenous and scientific), which is rooted in Cartesian dualism. This has, in practice, led to exaggerated polar stances: abstractionism from realities. The article concludes that despite the advantages proposed for Indigenous knowledge, this knowledge is susceptible to various challenges such as romanticization, neglecting distinctiveness and power relations, focusing merely on experiences and skills, specificity, as well as dependence on geographies and settings, etc. Considering the high hegemonic power of new/official science to create a cognitive balance, the article recommends practical measures, including promoting awareness of indigenous knowledge as a form of decolonization education to develop sustainable political collective actions to confront the process of power and domination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
