1

'Origins of Modern Rationality'

'Dualism: the logic of colonization’ from ‘Feminism and Mastery of Nature’ by Val

Plumwood, 1993

Thet Lai Nu Aung

Student ID- 640435822

Faculty of Social Science, Chiang Mai University

Social Science Theory- 169701:702

August 3, 2021

 
 2

This chapter analyzes what dualism is, different ways of understanding dualism, features

of dualism, logic of dualism and how to overcome the dualistic nature.

In general, dualism comes into existence through making a distinction between the

seemingly superior entity and the inferior one and the rejection of the former's dependence on the

latter. It could be regarded as the power-based differentiation. However, based on different types

of practiced power, ways of differentiation may vary. It is explained, 'Dualism could also be seen

as an alienated form of differentiation in which power construes and constructs difference in

terms of an inferior and alien realm. In random tyrannies, beings may be selected for oppression

in the arbitrary and random ways. But in systematized forms of power, power is normally

institutionalized and 'naturalized' by latching on to existing forms of difference.' (Plumwood,

1993, p. 42). This explanation lets us see that tyrannical power allows tyrants to choose their

subjects to be under their oppressive rule according to their personal preferences to make a

difference between the former and the latter whereas institutionalized power sets a systematic

distinction between the oppressed and the oppressors. Either way, oppressions is a common

feature of such dualistic differentiation. Different forms of oppressors and the oppressed or

superside and underside reflect the nature of dualism: 'culture/nature, reason/nature, male/female,

mind/body (nature), master/slave, reason/matter(physicality), rationality/animality ( nature),

reason/ emotion(nature), mind, spirit/ nature, freedom/necessity( nature), universal/particular,

human/nature( non-human), civilized/primitive(nature), production, reproduction( nature),

public/private, subject/object, self/other' (Plumwood, 1993, p. 43). Depending on the essence of

these pairs of contrastive entities, we can find out which part of each pair embrace the category

of oppressor-associated entities and which belongs to list of the oppressed later.

 3

From their own perspectives on the world, different types of dualism are emphasized by

different philosophers such as Hegel and Rousseau, Plato, Descartes and Marx whose personal

choice may be misleading because their emphasis may make gender-oriented feature of the

dualism or male dominance highlighted by feminist philosophers unnoticeable (Plumwood,

1993, p. 45). These dualisms make us see a related set of identical entities such as humanity,

rationality and masculinity on one side and another contrasted set which includes nature,

physical, material and the feminine. According to 'Politics' by Aristotle, 'It is clear that the rule of

the soul over the body and of the mind and the rational element over the passionate, is natural

and expedient; whereas the equality of the two or the rule of the inferior is always hurtful. The

same holds good for animals in relation to men; for tame animals have a better nature than wild,

and all tame animals are better off when they are ruled by men; for then they are preserved.

Again, the male is by nature superior, and the female inferior; and the one rules, and the other is

ruled; the principle of necessity extends to all mankind……..' (as cited in Plumwood, 1993, p.

46). To relate this statement to the respective networks of related dualistic features mentioned

earlier, all entities considered as the co-existed ones with masculinity are associated with the

superior feature and deemed justifiable to dominate the other set of entities such as body, animals

and female. Here, this is also a reflection of the gendered character of the dualism as the female

is meant to belong to the category of the inferior and the male is associated with the superior.

The characteristics of dualism are: (1) backgrounding (denial), (2) radical exclusion

(hyperseparation), (3) incorporation (relational definition), instrumentalism (objectification),

homogenization or stereotyping. 'Backgrounding (denial)' is concerned with the denial of the

dependence on the other considered inferior in a dualism or its contribution and thinking of it as

a background to the foreground of a dominant entity. Regarding the backgrounding, Marilyn

 4

Frye describes, 'Women's existence is a background against which phallocratic reality is a

foreground……….It is essential to the maintenance of the foreground reality that nothing within

it refer in any way to anything in the background, yet it depends absolutely upon the existence of

the background.' (as cited in Plumwood, 1993, p. 48). This sheds light on us the importance of

the background or the inferior in building the identity of the foreground or the superior despite

that fact that the foreground seeks to deny its dependence on the background for its existence. It

is obvious that 'master' or 'male' entities will not come into being without the existence of 'slave'

or 'female' because these are the identifying labels to make a distinction between opposing

features. If an opposing identity do not co-exist with its counterpart, there will be no opposition,

which means no dualism will come into being then. In other words, two contrasted entities in a

dualism are interdependent although the dominant entity denies the importance of the other.

The feature of radical exclusion is to polarize and to make separation between the two

different dualistic spheres and to reduce the qualities of 'the other' or the dominated and to

highlight the significance of the differences between them and to confirm there is no common

qualities. The writer quotes Booker T. Washington's statement in 'Up from slavery' (1967) to

portray this, '' Booker T. Washington's statement in 'Up from slavery' (1967) relates how the

exaggerated and genteel cleanliness of the slave owners' establishments served to mark them off

from the 'animal-like' slaves, whose enforced filthiness (they were provided with no means to

wash) served the joint function of marking and justifying their condition, and of linking them to

animals. Thus the slave's being is part of a lower order in which other linked inferiors also have

their being_ the slave is the body, the slave is the animal, the male slave is

feminized.''(Plumwood, 1993, p. 50). This elaboration makes us understand that dualism is

intentional in setting the polarized boundaries between the inferior and the superior to signify the
 5

difference and to justify the dominance and oppression of the superior over the inferior and the

slave's existence is associated with that of the lower order in dualism_ body, animal and female.

With regard to 'incorporation', Simone de Beauvoir's remarked, 'Humanity is male and

man defines woman not in herself but as relative to him; she is not regarded as an autonomous

being……..' ( as cited in Plumwood, 1993, p. 52). This, in general, means, woman or any other

dominated entity of dualism cannot stand by themselves or their existence is not independent.

They become emerged as an incorporated part of the dominant entity. 'Instrumentalism

(objectification)' feature points out that the lower side of a dualism is supposed to prioritize the

interests of the upper side over their own personal ones. In other words, the lower side is

regarded as 'the instruments' or 'tools' of the upper side to meet the needs of the latter. The

essence of the last feature of dualism 'homogenization or stereotyping' is to disregard the

differences or multiplicity such as multicultural or multi-linguistic aspects of the inferior or the

diverse identity holders. And this gives rise to the coerced homogenization of the marginalized

groups and identity loss.

Apart from the characteristics of dualism, the writer gives an explanation of the logic of

dualism to make the nature of dualism visible to us, 'In classical logic, negation (~p) is

interpreted as the universe without p, everything in the universe other than what p covers, as

represented in the usual Venn diagram representing p as a figure surrounded by a square which

represents the universe, with ~p as the remainder……. ~p then can then not be independently or

positively identified but is entirely dependent on p for its specification.' (Plumwood, 1993, p.

56). Again, this logical example tells us about the interrelated nature of dualistic spheres for their

existence, which is reasonable enough as it takes two to make a difference.

 6

As it has already been learnt about the nature and characteristics of dualism, we come to

understand that dualism tends to favouritize the dominance of the superior entities and obscure or

eliminate the qualities of the inferior or the seemingly inferior entities as claimed by the superior,

which disregards the existence of diverse social, gender and multicultural identities. So, let us

explore the possible ways to escape from dualism. It is necessary to reconstruct the relationships

and identities through making differences free of hierarchy. In this case, making difference

should be a non-hierarchical difference as hierarchical distinctions usually leads to the

discrimination, segregation and prejudices among members of different social strata. Rejection

of backgrounding, radical exclusion, incorporation, instrumentalism and homogenization will

surely help recognize the contribution, the continuity affirmation, independent and resistant

feature, centrality and diversity of 'the other' commonly regarded as the underside, all of which

are meant to embrace common political rights, common humanity, desegregation, reconstruction

of the traditionally constructed master identity of human. Only then, could we all overcome the

oppressive and dehumanizing nature of dualism and appreciate the peaceful co-existence of the

diverse social identities and multiculturalism.

Reference

Plumwood, V. (1993). Dualism: The logic of colonization. In Feminism and the mastery of

nature (pp. 41–68). Routledge.