Deaf Epistemologies, Identity, and Learning

34

2

Contributing to an Era of Epistemological

Equity: A Critique and an Alternative

to the Practice of Science

In July 2010, the organizing Committee of the International Congress on the

Education of the Deaf (ICED) rejected the resolutions of the 1880 ICED confer-

ence that excluded sign language in deaf education, apologized for the negative

consequences of these resolutions for deaf people worldwide,^1 and agreed to work

toward “a new era [of] deaf participation and collaboration” (see Jamieson &

Moores, 2011, p. 25; See also Chapter 1). The promising “rebirth of Deaf commu-

nities worldwide” was also reflected by the “global Deaf renaissance” theme of the

XvI World Congress of the World Federation of the Deaf held in Durban, South

Africa, in July 2011. The Congress’s aim was to “demonstrate that we are an essential

part of human diversity in the world and its development” (World Federation of the

Deaf, 2010).^2 At the XvII World Congress of the World Federation of the Deaf in

Istanbul, Turkey, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon stressed that “recognizing disabil-

ity as a part of human diversity is essential for appreciating the abilities of people

with disabilities” (World Federation of the Deaf, 2015). At the Congress, two of the

Resolutions declared were that the Congress “emphasizes deaf people are an import-

ant and crucial part of humanity, with unique cultural and linguistic contributions

to human diversity, and declares its collective commitment to strengthening diversity

in deaf communities around the world” (World Federation of the Deaf, 2015).

This new era should also be a time of intellectual emancipation of deaf people

around the world. How, after a long period of epistemic violence (Spivak, 1995),

The research in this chapter has been supported by a postdoctoral research grant from the Research

Foundation-Flanders.

1. In alignment with the naturalized epistemological stance of this chapter, which is oriented toward
   describing a diversity of human practices, a d/D distinction is not made. Breivik, Haualand, and Sol-
   vang (2002) reflect upon the (confusing) use of those terms and this distinction, which is in a constant
   stage of flux within the deaf community. Both spoken and signed practices can be described; this
   chapter predominantly concentrates on deaf cultural practices in deaf communities around the world.
   A normative and emancipatory view encourages people to develop their own perspectives. This also
   means that opportunities should be provided for deaf children to grow up in educational contexts with
   visual learning, sign language, and contact with deaf adults.


2. I thank Markku Jokinen for discussions of the parallels between the “new era” and “global deaf
   renaissance” themes.