How Darwin can help Post-Structuralists Maintain that Apartheid was Unconditionally Unjust

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Generally, we want certain ethical claims to be unconditionally true. One such claim is “Apartheid was unjust”. In this paper, I discuss a group of South African post-structuralist philosophers who call their view Critical Complexity (CC). Because of post-structuralism’s radical contextualism, CCists can only claim that things are ‘as if’ Apartheid was unjust. They cannot claim that Apartheid was unconditionally unjust. Many will find this unsatisfying. I argue that a naturalised or Darwinian notion of rationality can help CCists (and perhaps post-structuralists in general) in this regard. This kind of rationality is what has come to be known as embodied rationality. We employ embodied rationality when navigating the ecological and social domains. It has, though, been co-opted for navigating the ethical domain. We can, then, claim that Apartheid was unconditionally unjust because it is embodied rational to do so. This does not involve embracing the kind of Cartesian rationality that CCists rightly reject.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)337-357
Number of pages21
JournalJournal of Ethics
Volume29
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2025

Keywords

  • Apartheid
  • Ecological rationality
  • Embodied rationality
  • Gerd Gigerenzer
  • Jacques Derrida
  • Post-structuralism

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'How Darwin can help Post-Structuralists Maintain that Apartheid was Unconditionally Unjust'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this