Interobjectivity

Sammut, Gordon; Moghaddam, Fathali M.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_158

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another class of epistemologies, termed interobjective discourses , may offer a potential way out of relying on these antiquated dichotomies (B. Davis, 2009, 1995; Latour, 1996; Sammut & Moghaddam, 2014).…”

Section: Historical Tensions Between Feminism and Evolutionary Psycho...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving the tension between feminism and evolutionary psychology: An epistemological critique.

Davis

2021

Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Feminist epistemologies have been instrumental in drawing attention to androcentric biases in knowledge production, the shortcomings of representational epistemologies like postpositivism that guide research in evolutionary psychology, in addition to the socially, politically, and historically situated nature of women’s subjective experiences. Nonetheless, these epistemologies continue to downplay the importance of women’s physical bodies, their interrelationships with other biological organisms and the physical environment, as well as their evolutionary histories as valid sources of knowledge. In the current article, I argue that normative epistemologies endorsed by both evolutionary psychologists (e.g., postpositivism) and feminist scholars (e.g., standpoint epistemology) are used to advance untenable arguments regarding the nature of knowledge, which continues to divide theorists and practitioners in both communities. An alternative interobjective epistemology, labeled complexity, is described and argued to facilitate a more fruitful engagement with women’s social, historical, biological, ecological, and evolutionary realities. My hope is that this epistemological shift can encourage greater interdisciplinary collaboration between feminist scholars, Darwinian feminists, and evolutionary psychologists, which can facilitate the creation of more sophisticated, elaborate, and complex ways of studying, understanding, and interacting with our increasingly complex worlds.

show abstract

Section: Historical Tensions Between Feminism and Evolutionary Psycho...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving the tension between feminism and evolutionary psychology: An epistemological critique.

Davis

2021

Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As illustrated in the last section, intergroup relations and interactions are predicated on bridging the gap between different objective cultural and representational systems and on establishing an interobjective relation (Moghaddam, 2003; Sammut, Bauer, & Jovchelovitch, 2018; Sammut & Moghaddam, 2014). The concept of interobjectivity can best be illustrated by relating it to the concepts of subjectivity and objectivity (Table 1).…”

Section: Interobjectivity and Meta‐representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Groups in contact: Meta‐representations, interobjectivity, and cultural incompatibilities

Wagner

2020

J Theory Soc Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This analysis departs from social identity being part and parcel of the system of social representations a group holds. Additionally, social identity is seen as being affectively laden with religious or other deeply ingrained ideological beliefs. These systems delimit the space of norms and behaviours where people socially construct the objects defining the local world as an objectively given. The local objectifications differ between groups and cultures and pose a problem for interaction and communication between members of different groups. Inter‐group discrepancies must be bridged by establishing a shared representational space and interobjective understanding. This understanding can be reached if both interactants mutually develop meta‐representations that allow them to grossly anticipate what to expect from the other and to orient their actions accordingly. But there is a catch in establishing interobjectivity: even if the interactants manage to overcome semantic and cognitive barriers, their interaction and open‐minded communication will be blocked if the two objectivities are ethically or affectively incommensurable. I illustrate this process by suggesting that native Europeans will feel blocked to establish interobjective acceptance for example with proponents of a slave holder culture whose values are incommensurable with European ideas of human equality. Accepting a slave holder's worldview would threaten the European's identity. A similar process seems to govern devout conservative Muslims living in 'gated communities' and enclaves in European cities who try to maintain their identity by avoiding regular contact with the non‐Muslim majority. Such contact would threaten their identity if their worldview and sharia rules were measured by the standards of human rights. Native Europeans on the other hand, will feel their own cultural objectivity to be incompatible with traditional Islam that does not equally observe human rights. The implications of such processes are discussed in terms of migrants' integration, multiculturalism, and socio‐political psychology.

show abstract