Decolonising Knowledge Decolonising Design & Engineering Rolando Vázquez Melken

Show video

Hello and welcome to the second lecture in  Studium Generale's Decolonising Knowledge series.   I'm your host Klaas van der Tempel. With me  today as well - you can't see her yet - is   my co-host Anne-Linn Machielsen, who  will be asking some questions later   on. And our speaker dr Rolando Vázquez, associate  professor of sociology at the UCR and UCU.  

Dr. Vázquez, if I can turn to you, in your first  lecture for us you introduced us to the concept of   decolonisation um and now you're  going to tell us more about   how it applies specifically to our business  here in Delft which is design and engineering thank you Klaas well you know i was thinking that   today there is a big debate around a new  initiative from the European Commission for the European Green Deal that aims to turn  the EU climate neutral by 2050. And the big   debate that came out of it is because  they named it the New Bauhaus - there's   a debate about the New Green Deal? - yes and and  particularly because they named it the New Bauhaus   I think it's an important entry point to our  discussion on design and engineering because the   EU people thought that it would be nice to call  it New Bauhaus and we thought [laughing] it's   not a nice name for a project for renewing  Europe, right? Now why that is the point and the why is because Bauhaus  is a central part of the heritage, European heritage of modernism  that it's a design, design and engineering   movement in Germany in the early 20th century that  is very well known in the circles of design and   engineering and art and we thought,  well, you know if we want to produce   or to move towards a Europe that is  environmentally sustainable and not just   sustainable that but that cares for the Earth  and and I would say not just for its impact   in the European continent but for its impact  globally right it's not just about reducing   emissions here but all the emissions of what  we consume that are done somewhere else right then we thought the Bauhaus could not work and  because the principles of modernism were such that   the human had the power to transform the earth  for its own benefit right so this anthropocentric   humanism that will say the human is superior to  the Earth we can extract whatever we want for the   earth to design it ourselves right to produce  a designed environment to me to me Bauhaus I   don't know much about it I just have this image  of architecture of just straight edges and boxes   right and yeah and functionalism  very much but so that's what we are   we are thinking well you know a heritage that  connects to the Earth in this way and that was not   diverse at all and not inclusive at  all is not a name that can be used for   an inclusive Europe and an ecologically viable  Europe you know so I think uh I'm raising this um this political issue that is  happening today around the name   because it shows for us how we need  to overcome the tradition of modernism   in design and engineering right  and the two main elements that um that we see are happening in  the modernist tradition or the   the whole idea of modern civilization that gets  expressed in design and engineering is one: the the anthropocentric principle as  I said the human over the Earth   and the Earth as an object that we consume  and that is leading us to a term I use in my   writings that is Earthlessness towards the loss  of the Earth right if we keep on moving that   modernist idea of progress and technology we  will end up consuming the whole planet right   and that is connected to um to the second  problem that is uh the idea that only some   humans have the power to design the  world right through their own rationality   and this we think is the problem of Eurocentrism  of a monoculture becoming a global design   so that says our way of living is better than  the Indigenous ways of living for example   and they are in the past they need to modernize  right and this uh this tendency is leading us   towards what I have called worldlessness so we  can understand the problems of modernism being   yes producing a utopia of civilization  and progress on the basis of a relation   to Earth that is leading us to Earthlessness and  a relation to other people of the world that is   denigrating or erasing their knowledges and  their ways of living to worldlessness so um   so that's the problem we have  with the Bauhaus and we think   if a continent like Europe has  to renew itself it has to move   itself towards pluriversality towards inclusion  towards a non-anthropocentric relation to   to life on Earth and a completely  different way of living, it sounds like   it would imply a different way of living so have  you have you requested an alternate or supplied an   alternative to the EUinstead of Bauhaus? well  you know our our concern is not just the name   itself like it's the philosophy the philosophy  behind it and and we are saying well you know   we need a participative approach we need  to listen to the plurality of voices in   Europe because there's a great diversity in  Europe that gets also silenced under this name Bauhaus right so we want   an inclusive process it's not about  the name the name is just a sign that a sign that is that it is stepping on a legacy  that is not inclusive and ecocide right but at   the core are you also is decoloniality saying  that technology is bad per se because as I   you know understand humanity one of  the things that makes us human is our   technology and we all have it right well that's a it's a very important question and  one that uh have to explain a little bit more so on the one hand you have the European  or the Western critique of technology   that is very important for us as well uh where  in moments like the Jew holocaust and Hiroshima   many thinkers thought well technology is not  necessarily good you know because you needed a lot   of technology for the Jew holocaust like a lot of  architects and design put in place and bureaucracy   and you also needed a lot of technology for the  nuclear bomb right and so many thinkers thought uh   for example the Frankfurt School or Zygmunt Bauman  or Hannah Arendt thought well there needs to be   an ethical orientation to technology  right technology is not good in itself   right and not only that that possibly the  ways of practicing technology have been such   that they don't open the spaces for these ethical  questions right for why I am undo am I doing this   why I'm designing this right is it for  extraction or is it for caring of the   Earth right is it for war or is it for  healing right and so so I think there is let's say let's call it a central myth of  modernity that is the idea that instrumental   rationality will save the world you know like  progress instrumental rationality? yeah so like   like uh technological progress will lead us to  a better world like it's an equation you know   and uh social critique has shown well there is  not such an equation right the development of   technology doesn't necessarily lead to a better  world and I think the fact that we are facing   climate collapse and extinction has a lot to  do with the technologies we have developed   that are that are capable of massively consuming  the resources of Earth and polluting the planet   right so the colonial inflection to this  critique is to say is not to go against   the possibility of let's say technology but  is to transform this question of what for   whose technology for whom right for what type  of life right and this question needs to be there so um so instead of this let's  call it arrogance of modernism of   designing the good life for others how  would it be a design or an engineering that   is starting from listening to others right for  allowing for other forms to express themselves   right I remember a cartoon that was in a book on  diversity that showcased the difference between   peoples in the Pacific and the Netherlands and  how the approach to the sea right some people   will have raised houses to allow the sea to come  in and to go down right and have boats and other   people will build dams you know so I think this  shows a lot how you connect to the world and to   the flows of nature or or against them by the  use of technology both are technologies right   but they have a very different  understanding of our relation to the Earth one that tries to control more and  one that tries to live sort of in   harmony with natural processes  yes so for example in um I mean many Indigenous philosophers or indigenous  sciences know this right uh for example they know   that putting a dam on a river would kill the  life of the river right and down the river   and will cause great ecological damage but  the dam is producing electricity not for the   people that live there but for the people that  live that are pretty far away in the consumer   society right right so this is for an example  where their knowledge is very clear that they   know the relations of the river with the network  of life right in the ecosystem that the engineers   that want to produce electricity are not asking  themselves about they are not asking this question   right so is this is this uh a role that technology  plays in colonisation as well would you say   with engineering and design doing things  the way that we do are we colonising   the world to make it Earthless as you call  it or more human controlled? yes for sure   the the movement of let's call it coloniality of  modernity coloniality has imposed the power of a   technological world over other technologies other  forms of living and of relating with the world   right so when you uh destroy a full rainforest  to produce soya milk for example right so what   is is it worth and for whom right for who is that  soya milk and whose lives are being endangered not   also non-human lives right and the heritage  I think what is very uh important to see is   the long history the temporal dimension  of these technological interventions right   when you create a soya plantation or a palm  oil plantation it will last for some time to be   consumed immediately and to produce a lot of money  but it has destroyed a habitat that took millions   of years to be there right and so it is and you  can also think it in the um in most of these uh   processes where where you take things that have  been produced through a very long temporality   temporality that exceeds the life of  the human like the minerals like the oil   and we just burn it in one instant right in the  car and I think that relation between the instant   consumption that destroys the long-temporality  of life is what Indigenous philosophies are very   clearly seeing and saying aloud but we don't hear  it because we don't teach that in our universities   they are saying aloud you are killing the earth  and we cannot hear it you know I mean now we have   the science that is measuring it and now we see  climate collapse coming and the climate crisis   because we can measure it but it  has been said for a very long time   in other systems of knowledge right and I think  decoloniality is saying today well we need to   listen to those knowledges and we need to  value them in order to transform the way we are   producing our world you know can we can we come  up with an example for this I'm thinking of the   Netherlands for example which is an extremely  designed and engineered landscape you know   even the forests are planted in rigid straight  lines um what what can design and engineering   technology do to decolonise such an environment?  yeah I mean first is the awareness of it I think   my students are always surprised when I tell them  that the European continent is the first continent   of ecological devastation because everything is  planted by man and here using the masculine right   and so we are worried that the rainforest  in the Amazon is being lost but we actually   in the Netherlands live in a place where  nature is gone and if you go and see the   the 16th century paintings you see these enormous  trees around the houses right and you would think   oh it's maybe a tropical area no this was the  Netherlands you know with these ancient trees and   so it shows that that this model of what I'm  calling instrumental rationality using the   philosophical term that puts the human in the  capacity of using the Earth as its instrument has caused ecological devastation around the world  but also in Europe right so that is um I mean we   can clearly see that one of the big reasons of  colonisation is the search for resources that were   being extinct in Europe you know so so I think  the awareness is very important because that might help recognize other systems of knowledge where  we can learn from right instead of thinking   we are always at the top of knowledge and  we don't have nothing to learn from others   right I think now there is clear  evidence that we have a lot to learn   from people that knew very well how to consume  the Earth but they decided not to they decided   to preserve Earth because they didn't put  themselves as owners of the Earth right   so how we I think the big transformation  that climate collapse is bringing is also a   transformation of this humanism that is based on  a superiority over Earth and their life on Earth   they certainly challenge us to think  differently about our technology but I   know here in Delft for example there are steps  towards circularity uh bio-based biomimicry   etc how exactly does uh decolonising you know  nuance itself so how's it different from that I mean I think one of the conversations to have  is about the what I called in the previous talk   'the humbling' of the position of the  of the researcher and the student right   I think for example when you listen to  Indigenous knowledges First Nations knowledges   um you can see that their deep knowledge  of Earth processes is one in which uh not that let me see let me say that they are not  researching the Earth as we would do it through   our methodologies but they are listening  to the Earth, they are learning from it   right so they would say for example one of the  great thinkers from Bolivia, Mamani was saying   you know our political system of democracy of the  Ayllus we learn it from the llamas from the from   the animals of the mountains right because they  live in community and they care for each other   so I think that is just an  example of a non-anthropocentric   view of the world where what can we learn from  Earth instead of how can we transform Earth right   and I think that is an exercise of listening  that many other civilizations especially   First Nations today still carry the idea that  their sources of knowledge their ancestors are living beings on Earth right and the Earth itself   instead of me classifying the Earth and dissecting  the Earth to study it you see it's a reverse flow   so how can I receive how can I understand  the Earth can we develop a design   and a technology that listens to the knowledge  of the Earth instead of that wants to design   Earth processes you know and I think that will  be it's a reversal of the question you know   thank you I'm gonna give the floor to my co-host  and I think she'll have some questions for you as   well yes um thank you again um I have some  questions about the Indigenous philosophy   um yeah because I was uh thinking uh like how  um can we ensure that if we listen to their   voices that it is used in an ethical way because  what I sometimes see right now is that there's   also again a lot of green washing when I  see that Indigenous people are coming to the   Paris Agreement or that there is like a  Seventh Generations brand that is coming now yeah I think it's we have to be aware and this  is part of decolonial awareness of the dangers   of appropriation of other people's knowledges  right so there is a distinction between   really listening and when I listen I go beyond  myself because I in the in the listening exercise   you get transformed you begin thinking differently  from appropriation that is kind of a touristic   exercise of I go somewhere I get the knowledge of  others I take photos but I remain myself right and   I think that is something that is always at  play in the in these relations so Indigenous   philosophies are there they are speaking they  are in activism and but they often just get   appropriated to let's say as a token of inclusion  for example right and they they are not really   taken at the level of seriousness that implies if  we really listen to their knowledge we are being   called to transform ourselves and our institutions  right and I think that is the colonial moment   it's not just it's not just about uh let's say  soft multiculturalism where you include everybody   but this how I can take seriously their knowledge  so that it transforms the way I do things   right the way I think about myself and that's the  question of positionality if you think you are at the center of the world you just include them  and we assume you are good because you have the   power to include them and so that is kind of the  arrogant position and the non-decolonial position   right and that just preserves your position  of superiority whereas decolonial position   of listening implies the humbling of okay I  know my position is very limited it's implied   in colonial history I know I'm implicated  in the dismissal of the knowledge of others   I will listen to it so that I begin  transforming the way I think because I   know my thinking is insufficient right it's  a very different yes exercise yeah and um   yeah in general um Indigenous communities are  way more connected to nature and they are also   more surrounded by nature if I'm looking here  my life in the Netherlands I'm surrounded with   a lot of buildings, technology, everything is  made by human what do you think that is needed   here in the Netherlands to reconnect with nature  if nature is so far away most of the times well two things one is yes you you see the  human-nature divide has been a master narrative   of modernity whereby putting Indigenous people  close to nature people say okay they are behind   the human that is separated from nature and  the decolonial sense is the reverse right the   human that is separated from nature is producing  conditions of Earthlessness of the loss of the   Earth and is suffering from the separation from  Earth and it is the relational philosophies of   Indigenous people that are teaching us that that  separation that needs to be overcome that they we   need to relate back and to relate to Earth is not  to be backward is to be ahead you know of of the   crisis we have today so it is a very big answer  for the crisis today and so in that sense I do   see in the Netherlands many people connecting back  so many of my students practice permaculture or work with the forest so they are trying to change  the way they they eat things they produce locally   so yes nature has been severely damaged  and we live in a logic that is extremely   separated from nature and I think we need to  become aware of that that that separation is   producing is an impoverishment of life you  know instead of being richer because we are   more separated from nature I think we have grown  really poor right and that is already a turning   of the narrative of the more technological you  are like the more artificial environment you are   then you are better you know and which will be  the line of linear progress and development right   in the Western narrative we are saying listening  to Indigenous philosophies that is the reverse   that we have grown poorer and we are becoming  a term I have used before orphans of the Earth   you know we are endangering the Earth we are  killing the Earth and ourselves we are suffering   from that separation so I think in Indigenous  philosophies First Nations philosophies are really   um one of the most important sources of knowledge  to overcome this disaster this separation that is   produced by the paradigm of a humanity that to be  more human is to be separated from Earth thank you thank you Anne-Linn Rolando we are running  out of time um I think I'd like to ask you   if you have any personal tips for the  students and engineers here in Delft in relation to their their study you know writing  a thesis doing a project um you know where should   they look for more information how should  they converse about this with their uh their   professors their teachers or with the university  itself as an institution? yeah I think uh   especially now in the times of corona and  social distancing I think we have seen that   the university is a great place not because of  the knowledge that comes through the screen that   you can have in youtube but but it's a great  place because you can relate to people right so   practices of talking among each other of raising  these questions are very important I think the   asking with others instead of individual  studying you know and instead of distancing   I think that is the beginning of of this  awareness and and then the second is to   put whatever they are studying in in relation to  the crisis of our times so the climate collapse   and and social inequality racism denigration  the impoverishment of the majority of the   population of the world and then whatever  you study you should ask what is this for   right is this furthering the colonial divide  is this furthering the colonial wounds   is this furthering social inequality or climate  collapse or the reverse or is this healing the   colonial wound is it listening to others or and  is it relating back to Earth or is it separating   us more from Earth and I think if you have these  basic questions in whatever you are studying you   ask for the purpose of what you are studying and  it's not about questioning the science it's about   asking the what for right so in our view  a good science is a science that has a a   purpose an ethical guidance an orientation  so we are not criticizing the methodology   of two plus two is four but we are questioning  what for why am I learning this is it useful   for the ethical question is it useful to help  others to undo social fractures to heal the Earth   or is this knowledge being instrumental to  increase the crisis in which we are living this is a good final thought it's a it's a simple  tool to ask this question over and over again what   is it for why am I doing this uh but not easy  I would expect yeah in relation of the colonial   difference so what is for the answer should not  be to produce more technology or more money or   what is it for in relation to the crisis of  our time right the destruction of Earth and the   impoverishment and suffering of others so if you  put the suffering of others and the destruction of   Earth in your picture then you know okay this  knowledge what is it for can I put it at the   service of this or not is it am I being trained  to serve something that I'm against ethically   or can I really redirect it for things  that are that give a purpose to what I know   you know so so we speak of moving from  expert knowledge to meaningful knowledge   and meaningful knowledge is expert knowledge but  expert knowledge is not necessarily meaningful   knowledge on its own yes all right well thank  you dr Vázquez for joining us for this lecture   um I have many more questions to ask you I'm sure  Anne-Linn does as well but we are out of time   um yes if I can turn to our people our viewers  at home I would like to say uh this series   of decolonial decolonizing knowledge will  continue so please um visit sg.tudelft.nl   and keep an eye out for subsequent events events  in this series thank you for joining us thank   you thank you

2021-03-10

Show video