Drug Decriminalization in Maryland Through an African Centered Research Paradigm- Analysis and Recommendations

are value laden is the belief that objectivity is an illusion (Akbar,1984; Ani, 1994). It is
believed to be illusionary because Afrocentricity disagrees with the notion of
objectification, the belief that the knower should, and can, emotionally detach himself or
herself from that which he or she is attempting to know—even if the targeted entities are
humans and their social environments. This, of course, nurtures the well-discussed
"subject/object" duality. From an Afrocentric viewpoint, this duality is inappropriate
because "in the pure Africanized worldview of the unity of [people] and the phenomenal
world, there is no empty perceptual space between the self and phenomena" (Dixon, 1976,
p. 70). Further, this duality fosters and reinforces a process of knowing that is sterile and
incomplete.” (Schiele, 2000).
Schiele argues the those who attempt to resurrect the notion of scientific objectivity confuse the
perceived ability to detach their emotions from research and focus on data as proof of their
objectivity, where in reality their belief that they can separate themselves from the world around
them is an illusion and fundamentally misconstrues the ability of the subject to exist outside of the
world, and other people. The idea of the thinking subject to be able to transcend the influences of
the world, to create themselves as an autonomous being of pure logic, goes back to the famous
statement of philosopher Rene Descartes “I think therefore I am.” Scholars of African descent have
often countered this view of rational, autonomous subjectivity with a notion of collective subject,
with the human subject coming into being through their reciprocal relationships with others, often
expressed through the notion of “Ubuntu” and the phrase “I am because we are”. This seemingly
academic distinction reflects a deep divide between two different systems of thought, with the
AARP challenging the researcher's ability to separate themselves from their research and forcing
them to take accountability for how their research interacts with the world.
This is important because the critical 4th stage of Akbar’s AARP, heuristic research,
suggests that research findings should be applied to make recommendations for what should be
done to materially improve conditions for the oppressed. While the dominant vision of research
views knowledge in and of itself as a laudable goal and seeks to turn research findings into grist
for the mill of scientific progress (i.e., more research), the AARP says explicitly research findings
should be used to recommend changes to the world. This is often seen as outside the scope of the
academic’s role, which is to produce knowledge that others may use to recommend political
interventions, but to be involved directly in advocating policy changes would violate scientific
notions of “objectivity.” AARP recognizes that objectivity and the notion that the researcher
should be morally separated from the applications and ramifications of their research is false and
obscures the responsibility the researcher has to use research as a tool to address the material
conditions of oppression. This is not to say emancipatory research has the trust, or capability, to
eliminate white supremacy, but that it has its own role to play in the struggle for liberation.
4151 Park Heights Avenue, Suite 207, Baltimore, MD 21215 • www.lbsbaltimore.com • (410) 374-7683