32
Subtle Agroecologies
Real new knowledge emerges if the validity of the dominant paradigms is broadly being
challenged and is replaced by new paradigms (Kuhn, 1962).
• Scientifc facts are not in the frst place objectively true; they are rather the result of agreement within the scientifc community. This means that negotiation, networking and lobbying to get social recognition for the results of the research in the form of its publications are
all important aspects of scientists’ work (Latour and Woogar, 1979).
• Objective science is an illusion, as all observation, perception and interpretation are based
on more or less defcient instruments and theories. What is considered to be a ‘fact’ is basically an agreement within a school of scientists. There is not one universally valid method
of research, and the monopolistic claims to truth of conventional science are not justifed.
The history of sciences shows that there are different roads towards truth. Western science
is one and only one of the possible sciences, and it is time to correct scientifc arrogance
and scientifc imperialism. Exporting Western sciences and technologies has not exclusively brought well-being to indigenous peoples. We should stop the one-way traffc and
rather go for a mutual learning process (Feyerabend, 1975).
Based on the refections and positions of these philosophers of science, and building on the insights
of indigenous scholars, CAPTURED has chosen the following defnition of science: 2
Science is a body of knowledge formulated within a specifc worldview. It emerges from specifc
methods of learning and producing knowledge and uses a consistent theoretical framework that
includes assumptions, general principles and theories. It involves an active role of a specifc knowledge community that has reached consensus on validity of knowledge. The knowledge acquired and
the resulting science are products of a social process and are always limited and subject to modifcation in the light of new data, information and insights.
The plurality of worldviews and ways of learning can lead to a plurality of sciences. The degree
to which ontological positions and sources of knowing differ from each other determines the degree
of compatibility and/or complementarity of different sciences. A joint learning process or dialogue
between different forms of knowing would be impossible or meaningless if the sciences involved
exclude each other. Even if the basic assumptions and methods may seem incommensurable, complementarity may be sought. The CAPTURED programme does not aim at integrating the different ways
of knowing into one universal system of research and education. Rather, its focus is to understand the
diversity, the differences, possible contradictions and controversies. It looks for revitalisation of the different ways of knowing and co-evolution and possible communalities, complementarities and synergy.
On the basis of this defnition, the CAPTURED programme suggested that we look at a science
as having a certain expression in each of the following basic elements:
• The Ontology (or Worldview): The way the people see themselves and their relation with
the rest of the cosmos: the worldview
• The Gnoseology (or Methodology): Methods for learning, experimenting and teaching. It
is obvious that the way of learning is a directly related to the worldview.
• The Epistemology (or the Theoretical Framework): The way knowledge is organised: its
logic, theoretical frameworks and paradigms.
• The Axiology (or Values): The moral and aesthetic values of the people.
• The Knowledge Community: The experts, leaders, healers, guides and the way they carry
out peer reviews, have debates and discourses on worldviews, methods, theories and values
and agree on accepting or rejecting them.
In every culture, people have explicitly or implicitly formulated these notions and are engaged in
these knowledge-related processes, and therefore, we assume that in different cultures and different
2 This defnition and a discussion on the co-evolution of sciences have been elaborated in Haverkort et al. (2012).
Subtle Agroecologies
Real new knowledge emerges if the validity of the dominant paradigms is broadly being
challenged and is replaced by new paradigms (Kuhn, 1962).
• Scientifc facts are not in the frst place objectively true; they are rather the result of agreement within the scientifc community. This means that negotiation, networking and lobbying to get social recognition for the results of the research in the form of its publications are
all important aspects of scientists’ work (Latour and Woogar, 1979).
• Objective science is an illusion, as all observation, perception and interpretation are based
on more or less defcient instruments and theories. What is considered to be a ‘fact’ is basically an agreement within a school of scientists. There is not one universally valid method
of research, and the monopolistic claims to truth of conventional science are not justifed.
The history of sciences shows that there are different roads towards truth. Western science
is one and only one of the possible sciences, and it is time to correct scientifc arrogance
and scientifc imperialism. Exporting Western sciences and technologies has not exclusively brought well-being to indigenous peoples. We should stop the one-way traffc and
rather go for a mutual learning process (Feyerabend, 1975).
Based on the refections and positions of these philosophers of science, and building on the insights
of indigenous scholars, CAPTURED has chosen the following defnition of science: 2
Science is a body of knowledge formulated within a specifc worldview. It emerges from specifc
methods of learning and producing knowledge and uses a consistent theoretical framework that
includes assumptions, general principles and theories. It involves an active role of a specifc knowledge community that has reached consensus on validity of knowledge. The knowledge acquired and
the resulting science are products of a social process and are always limited and subject to modifcation in the light of new data, information and insights.
The plurality of worldviews and ways of learning can lead to a plurality of sciences. The degree
to which ontological positions and sources of knowing differ from each other determines the degree
of compatibility and/or complementarity of different sciences. A joint learning process or dialogue
between different forms of knowing would be impossible or meaningless if the sciences involved
exclude each other. Even if the basic assumptions and methods may seem incommensurable, complementarity may be sought. The CAPTURED programme does not aim at integrating the different ways
of knowing into one universal system of research and education. Rather, its focus is to understand the
diversity, the differences, possible contradictions and controversies. It looks for revitalisation of the different ways of knowing and co-evolution and possible communalities, complementarities and synergy.
On the basis of this defnition, the CAPTURED programme suggested that we look at a science
as having a certain expression in each of the following basic elements:
• The Ontology (or Worldview): The way the people see themselves and their relation with
the rest of the cosmos: the worldview
• The Gnoseology (or Methodology): Methods for learning, experimenting and teaching. It
is obvious that the way of learning is a directly related to the worldview.
• The Epistemology (or the Theoretical Framework): The way knowledge is organised: its
logic, theoretical frameworks and paradigms.
• The Axiology (or Values): The moral and aesthetic values of the people.
• The Knowledge Community: The experts, leaders, healers, guides and the way they carry
out peer reviews, have debates and discourses on worldviews, methods, theories and values
and agree on accepting or rejecting them.
In every culture, people have explicitly or implicitly formulated these notions and are engaged in
these knowledge-related processes, and therefore, we assume that in different cultures and different
2 This defnition and a discussion on the co-evolution of sciences have been elaborated in Haverkort et al. (2012).