A Critique of Eurocentric Social Science and the Question of Alternatives

This content is available through online browsing (free) program dependent on page scan. Screen readers can not currently scan, so please contact JSTOR user support for access. We will provide PDF copy of your screen reader

This article is divided into three parts. First, we will propose criticism of eurocentricism by social theory, with particular emphasis on the discussion of post colonialism. The aim here is to show how to extract two major discussion lines from this documentary system and these discussion lines establish the relevance to the line of exploration in Brazilian social thinking. Specifically it refers to the discussion about the difficulty of the relationship between the nation state and society in countries derived from the expansion of Europe and the practical discussion on the modern colonial status of these lands.

If Wallerstein, Quijano, Dussel use dependency theory as a common reference, they will also share criticism against Eurocentricism. But their motives are different. The criticisms of Quijano and Dussel against Eurocentricism not only deemed it a Spanish problem but also responded to the overwhelming celebration of America's discovery, which was regarded as the beginning of modern and European hegemony. Both agree that today's Latin America and the Caribbean are the result of hegemony of the North Atlantic (not just Spain and Europe). Criticism of Eurocentrism by Wallerstein is criticism of social science. "Social science has always been a Eurocentres in its entire system history, meaning that there is a social science education department in the university system." Criticism against euro centrism is one of social science's epistemology

My central argument is that there is a fundamental tension between the theories and methods in post colonialism that prevents its criticism against Eurocentricism from being converted to other non ethnic central social theory about it. Post colonialism, on the other hand, claims that macro theory is not bound by the general society, which is an absolute rejection of the concept of pursuing violence against the world, accepting the expectations of the European centers globally and deep suspicion It is reflected in. Social and cultural homogeneity This is because the international concepts include, rather rather include, interrelated diversity of society as ontological property. This interaction between society and the international community has avoided any theory, and it is only one of these two dimensions strategically fixed in social reality. This requires a clear theory to incorporate universality