Reclaiming ontology for decoloniality: a critical realist critique of Mignolo’s meta-theoretical priority of epistemology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, I develop a critical engagement between decolonial thought and critical realism to propose a realist foundation for decoloniality. Through an internal critique of Walter Mignolo's work, I challenge the meta-theoretical prioritization of epistemology over ontology that underpins his critique of Western modernity. I argue that this position ultimately undermines the very possibility of meaningful decolonial critique, which requires a realist understanding of social structures such as the colonial matrix of power (CMP). By retrieving ontology as a legitimate category for decolonial analysis, I show that critical realism provides the necessary philosophical resources to account for the reality of coloniality beyond epistemic frameworks. This realist orientation allows decolonial critique to transcend cultural relativism, affirming its universal critical claims against Eurocentrism and its commitment to unveiling enduring structures of domination.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.098 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".