Abstract
Held (2020) portrays critical and Indigenous psychologists as subscribing to an epistemological “anti-objectivism” that inhibits their ability to combat oppression. She believes that their anti-objectivism yields a troublesome relativism in which truth is overly context-dependent; what counts as true knowledge for one Indigenous group may not count for another. This commentary explores whether critical and Indigenous psychologists are strict “anti-objectivists,” as Held contends. It also challenges the need for epistemological consistency, while encouraging a shift from “objectivism” and “subjectivism” as essentialized states to “objecting” and “subjecting” as complementary ways to explore and study the world.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
