Challenging the way we know the world: overcoming paralysis and utilising discomfort through critical reflexive thought

Abstract

Reflexivity has been foregrounded as an important practice in scholarship regarding the scrutiny of ethical research and knowledge production. What is at risk, however, is reflexivity becoming counter-productive and consumed within the hegemony of Western practice, ultimately making little contribution towards disrupting power asymmetries. In this paper, we ask, at what point can critical self-reflexivity become productive, rather than self-indulgent and paralysing? Reflecting on the assumptions that underpin our scholarship, we ask, how can we utilise emotions of paralysis, discomfort and contradiction towards positive social change? Drawing on our experiences, we highlight the messy nature of reflexivity and argue that these emotions are important and entail a constant re-examination of the assumptions embedded in our pedagogy, scholarship and motives for engaging with the world. In so doing, we show how challenging the ways we know the world through reflexivity and critical thought are vital in the process of decolonising knowledge.

Reflections on the past, present, and potential futures of knowledge hierarchies in ocean biodiversity governance research

“…As individuals, we are shaped by our geography, race, gender, sex, ability, spirituality, socioeconomic status, discipline, age, and so much more, which again influences our work, our ways of being and knowing (onto-epistemologies), the intended reader (the gaze), and the standpoint we write from (the pose) (Baker et al, 2019;Trisos et al, 2021). Actively considering these influences is a necessary start to the process of breaking down knowledge hierarchies in biodiversity research, and challenging the way we know the world from our own critical thought and reflexivity (Idahosa and Bradbury, 2020).…”

“…In this section we delve deeper into a discussion on the importance of considering discomfort, conflict and failure in marine biodiversity research to ensure that projects, even those with the best intentions, cease to reinforce or perpetuate existing knowledge hierarchies. Idahosa and Bradbury (2020) emphasise the role of discomfort in limiting the risk of perpetuating colonial or Western knowledge hegemonies in knowledge production processes, arguing that we as researchers can and should 'utilise emotions of paralysis, discomfort and contradiction towards positive social change'. By critically reflecting on our own positionalities and how these may influence our behaviours and attitudes towards people and ways of knowing different from our own, we can better ensure that discomfort becomes productive instead of paralysing (Idahosa and Bradbury, 2020;Leavy, 2020).…”

“…Idahosa and Bradbury (2020) emphasise the role of discomfort in limiting the risk of perpetuating colonial or Western knowledge hegemonies in knowledge production processes, arguing that we as researchers can and should 'utilise emotions of paralysis, discomfort and contradiction towards positive social change'. By critically reflecting on our own positionalities and how these may influence our behaviours and attitudes towards people and ways of knowing different from our own, we can better ensure that discomfort becomes productive instead of paralysing (Idahosa and Bradbury, 2020;Leavy, 2020). In practice, embracing discomfort and reflexivity means acknowledging how our inherent biases shape the research process and experience, and can involve questions such as 'am I the right person to be researching this?…”

Co-production revisited: from knowledge plurality to action for disaster risk reduction

“…While the paper aims at a critical take on Western-driven DPM 33,3 scientific hegemony, we are aware that much of our arguments also draw from and are articulated through Western scholarship. For instance, this paper engages with the notion of reflexivity which, when understood in a normative manner, can reinforce Western knowledge structures while not engaging with how 'other' experiences the space (Idahosa and Bradbury, 2020;Sims, 2023). To such, we engage reflexivity more critically by confronting our privilege, complicity, and struggles in potentially reproducing relations of domination in knowledge production via our vignettes, while adopting the term "deep" and "reflexive" co-production throughout our paper.…”

Uncomfortable Knowledge: Toward a Pedagogy of Reflexivity

“…In recent years, anthropologists have sought to identify how to practice our discipline with reflexivity, respect, and ethical relations (e.g. Bourke, 2021;Cummins and Brannon, 2021;Ese-osa Idahosa & Bradbury, 2020). Some have questioned an apparent disciplinary moral superiority, the assumption that doing anthropology is doing good (Jöhncke, 2021).…”