Assessment 1 Reflective Journal
The purpose of this assessment exercise is twofold: firstly, it aims to get you to think critically about
several key issues raised in your readings and the accompanying lectures; secondly, it aims to get
you to begin using the critical terminology you will have encountered in your readings and the
accompanying lectures. Thinking critically means thinking in a way that demands and seeks clarity of
ideas, precision with definitions, and an understanding of key presuppositions.
Presuppositions are in many ways the most important focus of what critical thinking entails because
it essentially demands that we inte
ogate what we take for granted, i.e. that which we don’t think
about but nonetheless think with. Critiques of ‘white privilege’, ‘gender bias’, ‘homophobia’ and so
on are all critiques of presuppositions, assumptions that are made about the world that aren’t
factored into thought. When we think or say, ‘that’s no job for a woman’ (as people have said in the
past about a range of professions) we are presupposing a set intrinsic limits and restrictions relating
to our understanding of what being a woman entails. Overturning those assumptions has been a
century long labour of critical thinking and activism.
Taking that same critical mindset of refusing to accept assumptions at face value, your task with the
following questions is to write short critical responses (250 words per question) that address the
critical issues they raise. I have added a
ief outline of the issues that I think these questions raise,
ut you should feel free to add your own, and to respond selectively (ie I don’t expect you to
espond to all the issues).
Question 1 (week 2)
According to Nixon, we lack the means to represent slow forms of violence. Why is this a problem?
Issues to consider:
• What does Nixon mean by representation?
• What makes slow forms of violence particularly resistant to representation?
• Is this intrinsic to slow violence? Or is it a failure of our creative imaginations (as Fredric
Jameson might argue)?
• Think of an example of something that is abundantly represented – romantic love, let’s say –
then ask why it might matter that something such as slow violence is not abundantly
epresented.
Question 2 (Week 3)
Birch says we need to hear indigenous peoples as saying something true. What does he mean by
this? What does it mean to hear something as true?
Issues to consider:
• What does Birch mean by the word ‘true’?
• How does his use of the word ‘true’ compare with other possible meanings of this word?
• What does Birch mean by ‘hear’? What is the opposite of not hearing? Is not hearing the
same as not listening?
• What will happen if we don’t hear indigenous peoples as saying something true?
Question 3 (Week 4)
What does Moreton-Robinson mean by white sovereignty?
Issues to consider:
• What is meant by the term ‘sovereignty’?
• Why does Moreton-Robinson use the term ‘white sovereignty’ rather than settler
sovereignty, or colonial sovereignty?
• Why is the issue of sovereignty a central concern for Moreton-Robinson? What other
concepts does it displace or replace?
Question 4 (Week 5)
According to Danowski and Viveiros the anthropomorphic and the anthropocentric worldviews are
dialectically opposed?
Issues to consider:
• What do Danowski and Viveiros mean by dialectical? (Hint: its meaning does not derive from
the word ‘dialect’ as it is used in linguistics – so look it up!)
• What is the difference (according to Danowski and Viveiros) between the anthropomorphic
and the anthropocentric worldviews?
• Why (according to Danowski and Viveiros) are they dialectically opposed and not simply
opposites?
• What is the significance (according to Danowski and Viveiros) of the difference between the
anthropomorphic and the anthropocentric worldviews?