Search

In order to understand the articulation between decoloniality and interculturality, it is necessary to analyze categories that include, on the one hand, historical aspects and, on the other hand, power relations and asymmetries. In this way, the need to assume a critical stance from the concepts of culture and coloniality becomes concrete. The objective of this article is to understand how western knowledge has generated a project of modernity, through discourses in which the construction of otherness goes through different processes of assimilation and incorporation of the other. These condition the adjustment of otherness, according to the dominant social standards, from essentialist conceptions, which ends in processes of differentiation and discrimination. The method used is the critical documentary review. The paper concludes that decolonization poses the challenge of dissociating itself from knowledge that distorts reality, and must distance itself from rationalities that fragment, classify, label and generate rhetoric with which social division is reinforced and segregation and exclusion are legitimized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the incommensurable and incommensurable nature of subalternity, which materializes a position without an identity whose intelligibility is complex, especially when we try to access the configurations of its ontopolitical schema. Subalternity constructs a binary opposition to the nation-state. It is necessary to fight for the production of new criteria of legibility of the educational and cultural subject. This problem is reduced to an obstruction in its ontopolitical and existential rules of intelligibility of a wide constellation of specific heterogeneous groups amalgamated through political, structural, relational, contingent and historical issues that determine their units of cultural legibility. The method employed is that of critical documentary review, organizing a critical corpus of review works derived from intercultural studies, subalternity and postcoloniality. Each of them are key to promote other types of epistemological performances in this regard. Among the main findings and conclusions, we note that subalternity documents a deeper methodological problem: we do not know exactly what the cultural and political agency of such groups consists of. The only thing we should not forget is that we, educators, are at the service of subaltern groups, our task is to learn from their environment, to become a disciple of their cultural space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]