Copyright © 2018. Duke University Press Books. All rights reserved.

May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted

pathways ­t oward the epistemologies

of the south

The main tools of the epistemologies of the South are as follows: the abyssal
line and the dif­fer­ent types of social exclusion it creates; the sociology of ab-
sences and the sociology of emergences; the ecol­ogy of knowledges and inter-
cultural translation; and the artisanship of practices.

Abyssal and Nonabyssal Exclusions

I have been arguing that modern science, particularly modern social sciences,
including critical theories, have never acknowledged the existence of the abys-
sal line (Santos 2007a: 45–89; 2014). Modern social sciences have conceived
of humanity as a homogeneous w ­ hole inhabiting this side of the line and hence
as wholly subjected to the tension between regulation and emancipation. Of
course, modern science did acknowledge the existence of historical colonial-
under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

ism based on foreign territorial occupation, but it did not recognize colonial-
ism as a form of sociability that is an integral part of cap­it­ al­ist and patriarchal
domination, and which, therefore, did not end when historical colonialism
ended. Modern critical theory (which expresses the maximum pos­si­ble con-
sciousness of Western modernity) ­imagined humanity as a given, rather than
as an aspiration. It believed that all humanity could be emancipated through
the same mechanisms and according to the same princi­ples, by claiming rights

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/15/2019 10:46 AM via HELSINGIN
YLIOPISTO - UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI
AN: 1849429 ; Santos, Boaventura de Sousa.; The End of the Cognitive Empire : The Coming of Age of
Epistemologies of the South
Account: s5205063
 before credible institutions grounded on the idea of formal equality before the
Copyright © 2018. Duke University Press Books. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted

law. At the very heart of this modernist imagination is the idea of humanity as a
totality built upon a common proj­ect: universal ­human rights. Such humanistic
imagination, an heir to Re­nais­sance humanism, was unable to fathom that, once
combined with colonialism, capitalism would be inherently unable to relinquish
the concept of the subhuman as an integral part of humanity, that is to say, the
idea that t­ here are some social groups whose existence cannot be ruled by the
tension between regulation and emancipation, simply ­because they are not fully
­human. In Western modernity ­there is no humanity without subhumanities.
At the root of the epistemological difference ­there is an ontological difference.
In this regard, Frantz Fanon is an unavoidable presence. He eloquently de-
nounced the abyssal line between metropolis and colony, as well as the kinds
of exclusions that the abyssal line creates. He also formulated, better than any-
one ­else, the ontological dimension of the abyssal line, the zone of nonbeing
it creates, the t­ hing into which the colonized is transformed, a t­ hing that only
“becomes man during the same pro­cess by which it feels f­ ree” (Fanon 1968: 37).
Inspired by Fanon, Maldonado-­Torres proposes the concept of coloniality of
being as side by side with the concepts of coloniality of power and coloniality
of knowledge: “colonial relations of power left profound marks not only in
the areas of authority, sexuality, knowledge and the economy, but on the gen-
eral understanding of being as well” (2007: 242). “Invisibility and dehumaniza-
tion are the primary expressions of the coloniality of being. . . . ​The coloniality
of being becomes concrete in the appearance of liminal subjects, which mark,
as it w
­ ere, the limit of being, that is, the point at which being distorts meaning
and evidence to the point of dehumanization. The coloniality of being pro-
duces the ontological colonial difference, deploying a series of fundamental
existential characteristics and symbolic realities” (2007: 257).
The abyssal line is the core idea under­lying the epistemologies of the South. It
marks the radical division between forms of metropolitan sociability and forms
of colonial sociability that has characterized the Western modern world since the
fifteenth c­ entury. This division creates two worlds of domination, the metropoli-
tan and the colonial world, two worlds that, even as twins, pres­ent themselves
under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

as incommensurable. The metropolitan world is the world of equivalence and

reciprocity among “us,” t­ hose who are, like us, fully ­human. ­There are social dif-
ferences and power inequalities among us that are prone to creating tensions and
exclusions; in no case, however, do t­hese question the basic ­equivalence and
reciprocity among us. For this reason, the exclusions are nonabyssal. They are
managed by the tension between social regulation and social emancipation as
well as by the mechanisms developed by Western modernity to manage it, such

| 20 |  chapter 1
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/15/2019 10:46 AM via HELSINGIN
YLIOPISTO - UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI
AN: 1849429 ; Santos, Boaventura de Sousa.; The End of the Cognitive Empire : The Coming of Age of
Epistemologies of the South
Account: s5205063
 as the liberal state, the rule of law, ­human rights, and democracy. The strug­gle
Copyright © 2018. Duke University Press Books. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted

for social emancipation is always a strug­gle against social exclusions generated

by the current form of social regulation with the objective of replacing it by a
new and less excluding form of social regulation.
By the same token, the colonial world, the world of colonial sociability, is
the world of “them,” t­hose with whom no equivalence or reciprocity is imag-
inable since they are not fully ­human. Paradoxically, their exclusion is both
abyssal and non­ex­is­tent as it is unimaginable that they might ever be included.
They are on the other side of the abyssal line. The relations between us and
them cannot be managed by the tension between social regulation and social
emancipation, as happens on this side of the line in the metropolitan world,
nor by the mechanisms pertaining to it. ­These mechanisms, such as the liberal
state, the rule of law, h ­ uman rights, and democracy may be invoked but only
as a form of deception. On the other side of the line, the exclusions are abys-
sal, and their management takes place through the dynamics of appropriation
and vio­lence; the appropriation of lives and resources is almost always violent,
and vio­lence aims directly or indirectly at appropriation. The mechanisms at
work have evolved over time but remain structurally similar to ­those of histori-
cal colonialism, that is to say, ­those mechanisms involving violent regulation
without the counterpoint of emancipation. I mean the colonial and neo­co­lo­
nial state, apartheid, forced and slave l­abor, extrajudicial elimination, torture,
permanent war, the primitive accumulation of capital, internment camps for
refugees, the dronification of military engagement, mass surveillance, racism,
domestic vio­lence, and femicide. The strug­gle against appropriation and vio­
lence is the strug­gle for total liberation from colonial social regulation. Contrary
to the strug­gle for social emancipation on the metropolitan side of the abyssal
line, the strug­gle for liberation does not aim at a better and more inclusive form
of colonial regulation. It aims at its elimination. The priority given by the epis-
temologies of the South to abyssal exclusions and the strug­gles against them is
due to the fact that the epistemicide caused by the Eurocentric modern sciences
was far more devastating on the other side of the abyssal line, as colonial appro-
priation and vio­lence w ­ ere converted into the colonial form of social regulation.
under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

Modern critical theories recognized the dif­fer­ent degrees of exclusion but refused
to consider qualitatively dif­fer­ent types of exclusion and w ­ ere therefore totally
unaware of the abyssal line. This is not to say that nonabyssal exclusions and the
strug­gles against them are not equally impor­tant. Of course they are, if for no
other reason than ­because the success of the global strug­gle against modern dom-
ination cannot be achieved if it does not include the strug­gle against nonabyssal
exclusions. If the epistemologies of the South do not grant any epistemological

pathways t­ oward the epistemologies of the south  | 21 |

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/15/2019 10:46 AM via HELSINGIN
YLIOPISTO - UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI
AN: 1849429 ; Santos, Boaventura de Sousa.; The End of the Cognitive Empire : The Coming of Age of
Epistemologies of the South
Account: s5205063
 privilege to nonabyssal exclusions, it is only b­ ecause the latter benefited from
Copyright © 2018. Duke University Press Books. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted

much cognitive investment and b­ ecause the strug­gles against them for the
past five hundred years have been far more vis­ib­ le po­liti­cally. From the perspec-
tive of the epistemologies of the South, nonabyssal exclusions and the strug­gles
against them gain a new centrality once the existence of the abyssal line is recog-
nized. The po­liti­cal agenda of the groups struggling against cap­i­tal­ist, colonial,
and patriarchal domination must then accept as a guiding princi­ple the idea that
abyssal and nonabyssal exclusions work in articulation, and that the strug­gle for
liberation ­will be successful only if the dif­fer­ent strug­gles against the dif­fer­ent
kinds of exclusion are properly articulated.
An incursion into the lived experience of abyssal and nonabyssal exclusion
may help to clarify what has been stated. Following the end of historical co-
lonialism, the abyssal line persists as colonialism of power, of knowledge, of
being, and goes on distinguishing metropolitan sociability from colonial socia-
bility.1 ­These two worlds, however radically dif­fer­ent, coexist in our postcolo-
nial socie­ties, both in the geo­graph­ic­ al global North and in the geo­graph­i­cal
global South. Some social groups experience the abyssal line while crossing
between the two worlds in their everyday life. In what follows, I pres­ent three
hy­po­thet­i­cal examples that are all too real to be considered a mere figment of
the so­cio­log­i­cal imagination.
First example: In a predominantly white society, a young Black man in sec-
ondary school is living in a world of metropolitan sociability. He may well con-
sider himself excluded, ­whether ­because he is often avoided by his schoolmates
or ­because the syllabus deals with materials that are insulting to the culture or
history of p­ eoples of African descent. Nonetheless, such exclusions are not abys-
sal; he is part of the same student community and, at least in theory, has access to
mechanisms that ­will enable him to argue against discrimination. On the other
hand, when the same young man on his way back home is stopped by the police,
evidently due to ethnic profiling, and is violently beaten, at such a moment the
young man crosses the abyssal line and moves from the world of metropolitan
sociability to the world of colonial sociability. From then on, exclusion becomes
abyssal and any appeal to rights is no more than a cruel façade.
under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

Second example: In an overwhelmingly Christian society bearing strong Is-

lamophobic prejudices, a mi­grant worker holding a work permit inhabits the
world of metropolitan sociability. He may feel discriminated against ­because
the worker next to him earns a higher salary, even though they both perform
the same tasks. As in the previous case, and for similar reasons, such discrimi-
nation prefigures a nonabyssal exclusion. However, when he is assaulted in the
street just ­because he is a Muslim and therefore immediately deemed to be a

| 22 |  chapter 1
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/15/2019 10:46 AM via HELSINGIN
YLIOPISTO - UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI
AN: 1849429 ; Santos, Boaventura de Sousa.; The End of the Cognitive Empire : The Coming of Age of
Epistemologies of the South
Account: s5205063
 friend of terrorists, at that par­tic­ul­ar moment the worker crosses the abyssal
Copyright © 2018. Duke University Press Books. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted

line and moves from the world of metropolitan sociability to the world of co-
lonial sociability. In this way, exclusion becomes radical b­ ecause it focuses on
what he is rather than what he says or does.
Third example: In a deeply sexist society, a ­woman with a job in the for-
mal economy inhabits the world of metropolitan sociability. She is the victim
of nonabyssal exclusion to the extent that, in violation of employment ­labor
laws, her male coworkers receive a higher salary to perform the same tasks.
On the other hand, when she is returning home and is a victim of gang rape or
is threatened with death just ­because she is a ­woman (femicide), at that par­
tic­u­lar moment, she is crossing the abyssal line and moving from the world of
metropolitan sociability to the world of colonial sociability.
The crucial difference between abyssal and nonabyssal exclusion is that only
the former is premised upon the idea that the victim or target suffers from an
ontological capitis diminutio for not being fully h ­ uman, rather a fatally degraded
sort of ­human being. It is therefore unacceptable or even unimaginable that the
said victim or target be treated as a ­human being like us. As a consequence, the
re­sis­tance against abyssal exclusion includes an ontological dimension. It is bound
to be a form of reexistence. As long as the three modes of modern domination
(capitalism, colonialism, and patriarchy) are in force and act in tandem, large
social groups ­will experience in their lives and in a systematic way, however
differently in dif­fer­ent socie­ties and contexts, this fatal crossing of the abys-
sal line. Modern domination is a global mode of articulation between abyssal
and nonabyssal exclusions, an articulation that is both uneven, as it varies ac-
cording to socie­ties and contexts, and combined at the global level. Following
historical colonialism, the elusiveness of the abyssal line and the consequent
difficulty in recognizing ­these two types of exclusion are due to the fact that
the ideology of metropolitanness, as well as all the juridical and po­liti­cal ap-
paratuses that go with it, hovers above the world of colonial sociability as the
ghost of a paradise promised and not yet lost. The end of historical colonialism
produced the illusion that the po­liti­cal in­de­pen­dence of the former Eu­ro­pean
colonies entailed strong self-­determination. From then on, all the exclusions
under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

­were considered to be nonabyssal; accordingly, the only strug­gles considered to

be legitimate w ­ ere t­ hose that aimed at eliminating or reducing nonabyssal ex-
clusions. This power­ful illusion contributed to legitimate strug­gles that, while
attenuating nonabyssal exclusions, aggravated abyssal exclusions. Throughout
the twentieth c­ entury, Eu­ro­pean workers achieved significant victories, which
amounted to a compromise between democracy and capitalism, known as the
Eu­ro­pean welfare state and social democracy; nevertheless, such victories ­were

pathways t­ oward the epistemologies of the south  | 23 |

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/15/2019 10:46 AM via HELSINGIN
YLIOPISTO - UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI
AN: 1849429 ; Santos, Boaventura de Sousa.; The End of the Cognitive Empire : The Coming of Age of
Epistemologies of the South
Account: s5205063
 earned, in part at least, by intensifying the violent appropriation of h ­ uman and
Copyright © 2018. Duke University Press Books. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted

natu­ral resources in the colonies and neocolonies, that is to say, at the cost of
aggravating abyssal exclusions.2
As a consequence of the invisibility and confusion concerning dif­fer­ent
kinds of exclusion, social groups that are the victims of abyssal exclusion are
tempted to resort in their strug­gles to the means and mechanisms proper to
the strug­gle against nonabyssal exclusion. The current model of aid to devel-
opment is a good example of how an abyssal exclusion can be disguised (and
worsened) by treating it as if it w ­ ere nonabyssal. The per­sis­tence of the invisible
abyssal line, and the difficulty in disentangling abyssal from nonabyssal exclu-
sions, makes the strug­gles against domination even more difficult. However,
from the perspective of the epistemologies of the South, liberation is premised
upon building alliances between abyssally excluded groups and non–­abyssally
excluded groups, thereby articulating strug­gles against abyssal exclusions and
against nonabyssal exclusions. Without such an articulation, nonabyssal exclu-
sions, when viewed from the other side of the abyssal line (the colonial side),
look credibly like privileged forms of social inclusion. Conversely, abyssal
exclusions, when viewed from this side of the abyssal line (the metropolitan
side), are alternatively considered as the product of fate, of self-­inflicted harm,
or of the natu­ral order of ­things. By the same token, abyssal exclusions are
never seen on this side of the line (the metropolitan side) as exclusions, but
rather as a fatality or the natu­ral order of t­ hings. Historically, social groups
excluded by abyssal forms of exclusion have been forced to resort to means of
strug­gle adequate only for fighting against nonabyssal exclusions. No won­der
­there has been a lot of frustration.
Alliances and articulations are a demanding historical task, not only b­ ecause
dif­fer­ent strug­gles mobilize dif­fer­ent social groups and require dif­fer­ent means
of strug­gle but also ­because the separation between strug­gles against abyssal
exclusions and against nonabyssal exclusions overlap with the separation be-
tween strug­gles that are considered to be primordially against capitalism or
against colonialism or against patriarchy. Such separation gives rise to contra-
dictory kinds of hierarchies among strug­gles and among collective subjectivi-
under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

ties carry­ing them out. Thus a strug­gle conceived of as being against capitalism
may be deemed successful to the extent that it weakens a strug­gle that con-
ceives of itself as being against colonialism or against patriarchy. The opposite
is likewise pos­si­ble. Of course, ­there are differences between kinds of strug­gles,
but such differences should be mobilized to potentiate the cumulative effect
of the strug­gles and not to justify reciprocal boycotts. Regrettably, reciprocal
boycott is what has happened more frequently.

| 24 |  chapter 1
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/15/2019 10:46 AM via HELSINGIN
YLIOPISTO - UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI
AN: 1849429 ; Santos, Boaventura de Sousa.; The End of the Cognitive Empire : The Coming of Age of
Epistemologies of the South
Account: s5205063
 The difficulties in establishing alliances cannot be ascribed to the myopia of
Copyright © 2018. Duke University Press Books. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted

social leaders alone, or to the dif­fer­ent histories and contexts of the strug­gle.
­Between abyssal and nonabyssal exclusions ­there is a structural difference that
affects the strug­gles against them. Unlike the strug­gles against nonabyssal exclu-
sions (which fight for change in terms of the logic of regulation/­emancipation),
the strug­gles against abyssal exclusions entail a radical interruption of the logic
of appropriation/violence. Such an interruption entails a break, a discontinu-
ity. Fanon’s insistence that vio­lence is necessary in the decolonization pro­cess
must be interpreted as an expression of the interruption without which the
abyssal line, even if it shifts, goes on dividing the socie­ties into two worlds of
sociability: the metropolitan world and the world of coloniality. Interruption
may manifest itself in e­ ither physical vio­lence or armed strug­gle, on the one
hand, or in boycott or lack of cooperation, on the other (more on this below).
Recognizing the abyssal line entails acknowledging that alliances between the
strug­gles against the dif­fer­ent kinds of exclusion cannot be built as if all
exclusions ­were of the same kind. Eurocentric critical thought was built upon
a mirage, namely that all exclusions ­were nonabyssal. However vehement the
statements against liberal po­liti­cal theory, to think that the strug­gles against
domination can be conducted as if all exclusions ­were nonabyssal is a liberal
prejudice.

The Sociology of Absences and the

Sociology of Emergences
Both of t­ hese tools are based on the distinction between abyssal and nonabyssal
exclusions, as well as on the dif­fer­ent ways in which capitalism, colonialism, and
patriarchy combine to generate specific clusters of domination. The sociology of
absences is the cartography of the abyssal line.3 It identifies the ways and means
through which the abyssal line produces nonexistence, radical invisibility, and
irrelevance. Historical colonialism was the central drawing ­table for the abyssal
line, where the nonabyssal exclusions (­those occurring on the metropolitan side
of the line) ­were made vis­ib­ le while the abyssal ones (­those occurring on the
under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

colonial side of the line) ­were concealed. ­Today the sociology of absences is
the inquiry into the ways colonialism, in the form of the colonialism of power,
knowledge, and being, operates together with capitalism and patriarchy to pro-
duce abyssal exclusions, that is, to produce certain groups of p­ eople and forms
of social life as non­ex­is­tent, invisible, radically inferior, or radically dange­rous—in
sum, as discardable or threatening. Such an inquiry focuses on the five monocul-
tures that have characterized modern Eurocentric knowledge: valid knowledge,

pathways t­ oward the epistemologies of the south  | 25 |

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/15/2019 10:46 AM via HELSINGIN
YLIOPISTO - UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI
AN: 1849429 ; Santos, Boaventura de Sousa.; The End of the Cognitive Empire : The Coming of Age of
Epistemologies of the South
Account: s5205063