Abstract

The place of humans in nature and the nature of humans eludes us and yet there are those certain these issues can be reduced to biological explanations. Similarly, there are those rejecting the biological determinist hypothesis in favour of the equally unsubstantiated cultural construction hypothesis. This thesis draws on neo-Marxism and feminist intersectional post-positivist standpoint theory to posit biological and cultural determinism as privileged and flawed knowledge produced within relations of asymmetrical power. Instead “social construction” is preferred viewing knowledge of both nature and culture as partial and constructed within an historical, socioeconomic and political context according to asymmetrical power. Social constructionists prefer to question the role of power in the production of knowledge rather than asking questions about the place of humans in nature and the nature of humans; and trying to answer those questions through methods imbued with western, colonial, patriarchal, homophobic, and positivist ideals. As a starting point the postmodern view that knowledge is incomplete and has no ultimate authority is accepted. However, this thesis departs from postmodernism on the premise that knowledge is not all relative and can be critiqued by drawing on neo-Marxist and feminist intersectional post-positivist standpoint theory. Standpoint theory presumes a knowledge power nexus and contends accountable, ethical and responsible knowledge can be produced provided an “upwards perspective” is applied commencing with the standpoint of the most marginalised group within a given context. This approach to knowledge is applied to critically assess the role played by law in reproducing hierarchy and oppression in the categories of socioeconomic class, gender, sexuality and race to show that the law is sociobiological. My thesis is that human hierarchy and oppression are not natural or inevitable and are instead socially constructed through human action and institutions, including law. As social constructions, hierarchy and oppression must continually be justified as natural and inevitable otherwise they are vulnerable to change and destabilisation. It is argued here that a dominant justification for hierarchy and oppression is sociobiology because it naturalises and reifies human action and institutions as being determined by biology. As a legal justification sociobiology is defined as any discourse purporting to be based on “nature”, biological or evolutionary theories and “facts” to justify or reify hierarchy and domination. Unlike other ideologies, sociobiology is a dominant ideology because it is used to justify hierarchy and oppression in all the usual categories - class, gender, sexuality and race – and there is evidence of this in law. The argument is novel to the extent that sociobiology is not a dominant ideology in a conventional sense - as a cause of stratification - but in the sense that it is a dominant thematic excuse; whether or not those excuses are actually accepted. Nor is it posited as a dominant ideology in the sense that it is a top-down ideology imposed on, or duping subalterns. Rather, sociobiology is dominant because it can supply excuses for the naturalisation of human action in general and because it is more amenable to application by the powerful than the disempowered by virtue of that power. In western societies ideologies were once grounded in theology according to Christian decrees and beliefs. Since the Renaissance and the shift from feudalism to capitalism, ideologies have become more secular. A leading secular ideology is sociobiology being a collection of ideas closely linked to the antecedents of capitalism and continuing alongside it to the present day. Sociobiology is understood in this thesis in three overlapping ways. It includes modern sciences clustered around E.O. Wilson'’s famous 1975 essay Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. It is also a long historical tradition of scholarly theories about human nature and the place of humans in nature sharing the idea that human hierarchies on the basis of race, gender, sexuality and class are attributable variously to the work of God, nature, biology, and genes. Lastly it is an ideology. As an ideology, sociobiology is taken to be part of a long tradition of using the authority of privileged “knowledge” about nature to justify action and institutions that have the effect of creating and retaining hierarchy and oppression. This includes law.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call