by Emeka Okoli

“The conquest of the earth, which mostly means the taking it away from those who have a different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into it too much. What redeems it is the idea only. An idea at the back of it; not a sentimental pretence but an idea; and an unselfish belief in the idea–something you can set up, and bow down before, and offer a sacrifice to….”

Conrad (1904, as cited in Said, 1994, p. vii)

The current Eurocentric epistemology that dominates Westernised university curricula is problematic because it does not permit the acceptance of non-Eurocentric ways of knowing. To decolonise the curricula and to dismantle the coloniality of knowledge, the creation of a decolonial atmosphere is required; one that encourages and fosters the harnessing of the diverse knowledge that students and scholars from historically marginalised backgrounds bring to higher education and psychology. As Santos (2016) argued, the West has refused to acknowledge that her understanding of the world is narrow and that the world is infinitely diverse. The Eurocentric view denies us alternative ways of understanding human relationships, feeling, and thinking.

Racial colonialism creates a world in which the colonised are only allowed to see themselves through the eyes of the coloniser. They are forced to become what Mills (2007) called “lay anthropologists” forced into learning the cultures, customs, and mindsets of their oppressors for their survival. Fanon (1967) argued that racially oppressed people are made to believe that their culture and skin colour are inferior. Mills (2007) shared this view when he wrote:

“[..] what people of colour quickly come to see – in a sense, the primary epistemic principle of the racialized social epistemology of which they are the object – is that they are not seen at all” (p. 18).

Exclusion produces economic, political, and psychological consequences. Fanon (1967) argued that the experience of exclusion and oppression is traumatising and may lead to certain sensitising actions in which the traumatised person starts to create a consciousness that could lead to a mind-body split. Here Fanon (1967) lays open the psychological consequences to the people so marked with “inferiority”. Fanon (1967) gives us an explanation of the psychopathology of racism and how it impacts individual development and well-being. It shows that colonialism is not only about exploiting people for profit or accumulation of capital but also includes actions that psychologically impact the oppressed, constraining their development and self-determination.

Image shows the following text: "Decolonial Research Collaborative"

This epistemic exclusion is at the centre of the call to decolonise psychology curricula. Some authors on decolonisation have suggested that academic institutions use various structures and processes to exercise Eurocentric domination and control which, if they remain unchallenged, can present an obstacle to the educational needs of historically marginalised groups and individuals (Alfred, 2005; Hodges & Jobanputra, 2012; Smith, 2003). These scholars argue that furthering the education priorities of minority groups require critical analysis of oppression and racism in academia as a necessity. A critical analysis activity, Mutua & Swadener (2004) argues, will de-centre the Western epistemology as the only site of authorised power for meaning-making and the development of theories. However, this critical analysis can only take place when colonisation is accepted as a reality. To this end, Mutua & Swadener (2004) suggests that there is ongoing rhetoric whereby people deny the existence of colonisation and its continuing impact on the historically marginalised.

One such impact is the feeling of exclusion from the academic curriculum. Hodges & Jobanputra (2012) highlighted the impact of exclusion on psychology undergraduate students:

“The sense of exclusion from curriculum, the feeling of estrangement from the university environment and the lack of acknowledgement of minority identities reported here may be conceptualised as a means through which psychology, as a discipline, marginalises those who fall outside of the White, male …. norm. Where minority issues were included, for example, in curriculum, they were almost always mentioned in the context of the unquestioned requirement to provide an explanation for ‘different’ identities and lifestyles” (p. 139).

Hodges and Jobanputra (2012) suggested that what students are reporting could be seen as a process of normalised absence and pathologized presence. This would be a reflection of a deep-rooted Eurocentrism, both within psychology as a discipline, and university education in general. Foucault (1989) argues that the university is a “neutralising” environment for students and provides a safe environment through which all students are rendered socially and politically ineffective. Hodge and Jobanputra (2012) extended this debate by arguing that the mind control propagated through normalisation and exclusion that Foucault is alluding to is practised here in much more selective ways. It is the identities of the minorities that are being wiped from the curricula in this process of normalisation. Where they are mentioned, they are in many ways regulated through the accepted process of ‘Othering’, which at best problematises, stigmatises and/or pathologizes them. These are presented as scientific knowledge.

Presenting interpretations as scientific knowledge may help reproduce and maintain the colonial power matrix and Teo (2010) suggested that damage done by empirical research is done through the interpretation of findings. He argued that any theoretical interpretation of research results that dehumanises or problematises the Other is ‘epistemological violence’. Thus, epistemological violence is:

“A practice that is executed in articles and books in psychology, when theoretical interpretations regarding empirical results implicitly construct the Other as inferior or problematic, despite the fact that alternative interpretations, equally viable based on the data, are available” (p. 298).

Teo (2010) went further to argue that these theoretical interpretations presented as knowledge of the Other in psychology books and articles are in reality interpretations of data with no established validity criteria. Interpretations disguised as knowledge in psychology and other academic articles, such as the idea that a certain ethnic group or race are intellectually inferior, is not only an act of dehumanisation but a violent act that has far-reaching consequences for both the racial group so categorised and other groups who now are made to look at the other as inferior. 

Decolonisation raises some vital questions that invite all in psychology to dialogue: to dialogue the position of psychology in a globalised world.

About the author

Emeka Okoli is a PhD candidate and lecturer within the department of psychology at NTU. His research focus is on decolonising the psychology curricula in Westernised universities. Emeka has presented academic papers in national and international conferences and received commendations for his innovative works in decolonising the psychology curricula. He is also involved in evidence-based research using randomised controlled trials for cultural adaptation of psychological interventions for mental health disorders.

References

Fanon, F., 1967. Black skin, White mask. Broadway, NY: Grove Press.

Hodges, I. & Jobanputra, S., 2012. Mapping exclusion in undergraduate psychology: Towards a common architecture of the minority student Experience. In: Educational Diversity: The Subject of Difference and Different Subjects. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 138-158.

Memmi, A., 1991. The coloniser and the colonised. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Mills, C. W., 2007. White ignorance. In: Race and epistemologies of ignorance. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 13-38.

Mutua, K. & Swadener, B., 2004. Decolonising research in cross-cultural contexts: Critical personal narratives. Albany, NY: Suny Press.

Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J., 2012. Coloniality of being and the phenomenon of violence. Journal of Developing Societies , 28(4), pp. 419-440.

Said, E. W., 1993. Culture and imperialism. New York: Vintage Books.

Said, E. W., 2003. Orientalism. London: Pengiun Books.

Santos, B. S., 2016. Epistemologies of the South and the future. From the European South, Volume 1, pp. 17-29.

Teo, T., 2010. What is epistemological violence in empirical social science?. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, Volume 45, pp. 295-303.

Image credits