Search

In this paper, the author subjects the narrative of "interculturality" to a critique from an intercultural perspective, invoking the critical potential of intercultural philosophy in contrast to a culturalist "interculturality" light. The background of this analysis is the epistemic violence exercised by the West in the fields of knowledge, science, and education. This violence is particularly noticeable in the case of philosophy, leading to a sort of "philosophical homicide" (philosophicide) with respect to indigenous philosophies such as the Andean one in the case of Abya Yala. The paper concludes with some guidelines for the challenges that a critical intercultural philosophy must face in the XXI century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the fundamental axes that currently converge for the needs of nature and humanity. The philosophical statements contained in this reflection become valid when it comes to articulating ethical codes with the advancement of science and, at the same time, educating through an axiological system that leads to sustainable human development. In this order of ideas, it is pointed out how Western progress has led to catastrophic events for life on the planet, coupled with the excessive use of science, without any ethical criteria to regulate their actions. However, as a result of the moral reflection of recent times, of the voices of various social groups, scientific improvements have been questioned and directed towards the production of knowledge that allows human activity to be deployed positively on nature and on society, taking into account that, to make this possible, it is necessary to combine ethics, science and education, to walk towards progress in terms of sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I will try to offer a synthesis between two conflicting epistemological positions on the recent philosophical scene: positivism, whose heritage survives as the belief that science is the most genuine form of knowledge, and the defenders of incommensurability. Overcoming the controversy implies rejecting both the classical conception of knowledge (knowledge as theoria) --which, in fact, both positions presuppose-- and the hierarchical view of knowing in favour of a systemic view permitting epistemological pluralism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]