Imagination as a Decolonial Tool: An Analysis of the Coloniality of Translation, Imagination, and the Theology of Rubem Alves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Figure: see text] This article analyzes Xiang's coloniality of translation in connection with Alves’ theology and other decolonial scholars in order to recognize the limitations of Eurocentric language and to highlight the urgent need to contextualize and de-absolutize gender concepts. It provides a brief overview of decolonial thinking and then delves into the coloniality of translation, emphasizing the potential dangers of appropriating Indigenous philosophies within European frameworks. Xiang's analysis reveals that translating Nahua gender concepts into English limits their rich complexities and cultural significance, perpetuating Eurocentric understandings. Xiang's work exemplifies how European world views infiltrate decolonial discourses, replicating dominant Eurocentric norms. Alves’ theology comes into play, emphasizing the need to liberate human imagination from limiting colonial logics. By advocating for a renewed imagination beyond colonial constraints, Alves opens up diverse and dynamic possibilities for theological thinking. Finally, I argue for the use of Alves’ concept of imagination as a decolonial tool, challenging the colonial configurations embedded within words and the social imaginary they create. I argue that embracing a continuous process of re-imagining fosters a comprehensive understanding of the complexities and potentialities present in diverse cultures. Simultaneously this article underscores the necessity of decolonial thinking as a never-ending project, urging scholars to engage with alternative knowledges and constantly challenge and subvert colonial logics within theological discourses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".