The ethics of materiality

some insights from non-representational theory

Lynn Fendler

pp. 115-132

in: Paul Smeyers, Marc Depaepe (eds), Educational research, Berlin, Springer, 2014

Abstract

Why should we care about materiality? Assuming we are not interested in pursuing ontological debates about the number of angels capable of dancing on the head of a pin, why study materiality? In what ways might materiality be an issue with ethical implications for educational research in history or philosophy? To address aspects of this question, this essay draws on insights from "non-representational theory", an approach to theorizing that has been developed recently by geographers in the United Kingdom. The basis of non-representational theory is geography's longstanding scientific focus on material things of the world as they exist in space and time. In their attention to space and time, non-representational theories pertain to discussions of materiality. Non-representational theory describes itself as a critical alternative to the two mainstream epistemological positions in educational research, namely social constructivism and logical empiricism. Using insights from non-representational theory, I examine some implications for our current Research Community focus on "Material Culture and the Representation of Educational Research". My essay is organized around three issues: the role of the Cartesian subject/object dichotomy in constructing research objects, the privileging of timelessness and concomitant devaluing of the historical in evaluations of scientific knowledge, and the ethical implications of uniqueness in research approaches.