Abstract
This paper explores how the questions “Why a relative analysis ?” and “Why a critic of violence-ness of epistemology ?” in relation to the social mechanisms and representations that produce discrimination and oppression can be answered from a constructionist perspective.
We describe the predicaments constructionists have in dealing with issues concerning “essentialism vs. anti-essentialism” and “realism vs. anti-realism, ” as well as the difficulties they have in coping with the assumption of a transcendent viewpoint towards totality and omniscience.
We assume that the possible answers to our questions are as follows. The social mechanism and representation that produces discrimination and oppression also produces the dichotomy of nature and essence and appropriates the contingency of the human being. Moreover, it suppresses the otherness of the self. Hence, we formulate the question, “Why is the otherness of the self not suppressed?”
Finally, we offer the hard questions of the logics of resistance grounded in the concepts of existence and responsibility in an attempt to transcend the limits imposed by the totality and omniscience points of view.
