This study uses Lacanian metaphor and decolonial rhetoric as the theoretical framework in its analysis of the Iranian principalist intellectual Hassan Azghadi. It proposes that Iran’ s modern polity is defined by its dual stance towards modernity at one level and modernization at another. The analysis seeks to answer the question “ How does Azghadi’ s Rhetoric reproduce the nodal points of the IR’ s decoloniality? ” . To answer this question, we analyze the decoloniality in Azghadi’ s rhetoric by highlighting the use of metaphor in it. According to the decoloniality theory, delinking from the heritage of colonialism necessitates discourse-building. To understand the metaphoricity of Azghadi both as a discourse and as a rhetorical trope at the semantic level, we rely on “ conceptual metaphor” , a five-step method developed by Steen (1998). Azghadi’ s speech on Islamic Civilization-making is purposively selected for its resonating decolonial content. We contend that “ Islamic awakening” is a very broad metaphor that gives coherence to the idea of Islamic civilization-making. Under it, we come to four nodal points: VOCATION, TRANSCENDENCE, ORGANISM, and OTHERIZATION. While the first three construct the nodes of the IR’ s decolonial discourse, the last dislocates the rivaling capitalist and fundamentalist discourses. Finally, the minor metaphors under each node are studied based on Steen’ s model. In conclusion, we review how these metaphors inspire Azghadi’ s audiences for delinking from the liberal epistemology and re-appropriating the Islamic thought system as the cornerstone of their civilization.

Drawing upon the theories of Walter D. Mignolo, a decolonial critic, this study argues that Arundhati Roy's The Ministry of Utmost Happiness (2017) embodies the concept of cosmopolitan localism which has been put forward against the Western version of cosmopolitanism proposed by Immanuel Kant. The novel depicts cosmopolitan localism by emphasizing on Mignolo’s concepts of the multiplication of nodes, active intervention of local cosmopolitan projects, and the reduction of Western cosmopolitanism to its own local history. By placing Delhi at the center of the world within the novel, Roy disrupts Western-centric perspectives and emphasizes the significance of local contexts. The novel engages in debates on global issues that, at the same time, detail specific local contexts within India to highlight the complex situations in regard to identity, politics, and social issues. Roy shows various characters and experiences in a way that deepens the multiplicity of their views, underlining agency and activism from the locality. The novel addresses global issues such as political unrest and environmental degradation, highlighting the interdependence of various movements and the necessity for collective action. The article concludes that by exploring a wide range of perspectives, intersectional identities, and local languages and cultures, Roy embraces pluriversality rather than universality embedded in Western cosmopolitan ideas.

This commentary joins the chorus of rightful critiques of global health as it continues to further colonial agendas under the guise of supposed well-meaning efforts. Engebretsen and Baker rightfully call out the uptake of decolonial rhetoric in the field of global health, pointing out notable failures to actually challenge undergirding colonial structures and move beyond theory into meaningful action, using clear examples from the ongoing crisis in Gaza and global health’s ongoing response (or lack thereof). In this work I bring together essential foundations of decolonial scholarship in order to further the work Engebretsen and Baker have defined as crucial reckoning points for the field of global health. This commentary will (1) ground our conversation by defining true decolonization, (2) delineate the coloniality of knowledge and its manifestations in global health, and (3) conclude with a call to develop a decolonial praxis.

Universities are increasingly led by non-academic managers and corporate leaders, rather than academics. This shift comes after the adoption of capitalist logics and corporate practices which undermine the core purpose of higher education. The corporatisation of university governance has shifted the academy away from serving the public good, instead driving profit-driven agendas, academic-military alliances, and the marginalisation of liberatory and transformative scholarship. In this paper, we contemplate a radical reimagination of the current model of governance to reclaim the university as a site of knowledge creation, dissemination and social critique that values diversity, plurality and positive transformation. Drawing on principles of anarcho-syndicalism, we propose a decentralised, democratic model of academic governance that empowers marginalised voices, fosters critical inquiry, and prioritises collective wellbeing over capitalist interests. We emphasise that any reimagining of academic governance must incorporate decolonial and intersectional perspectives to challenge the colonial and imperial legacies that continue to shape higher education.

This essay examines the role of educational philosophy in fostering world peace, engaging historical and contemporary debates. While thinkers from Plato to Noddings argue that philosophy cultivates political virtues and ethical life, critics like Arendt and Rorty question its political efficacy. Drawing on Marxist and decolonial perspectives, the essay explores the limits of philosophical discourse detached from material struggles. It then critiques the transformation of testimonio from a genre of resistance literature to an academic research tool, arguing that this shift depoliticizes its original purpose. Instead, the essay calls for a return to testimonio as urgent evidence of injustice, particularly in the ongoing crisis in Gaza. By embracing immanent critique and resisting ideological co-optation, philosophers of education can contribute to peace through critical engagement with global struggles.

In the article “The Rhetoric of Decolonizing Global Health Fails to Address the Reality of Settler Colonialism: Gaza as a Case in Point,” Engebretsen and Baker call on researchers to re-examine the ways we employ the rhetoric of decolonization in global health. They critique the “reformist” strand of decolonization which fails to mitigate structural inequities resulting from settler colonialism. I extend the authors’ work by considering how researchers might harness decolonial approaches to identify and nuance the ways power relations, on a regional, national, or global level, lead to unnecessary suffering. I assert that this requires centering Indigenous voices and local knowledge and de-centering Eurocentric frameworks and presumed universality. My hope is that by being precise with the language we use to denounce atrocities, this will engender commitments and accountabilities that determine whether the response coming from global health leaders moves us towards increased health equity rather than empty rhetoric. 

This study investigates the ways in which Iranian sociologists conceptualize artificial intelligence as both an epistemic infrastructure and a geopolitical force within global knowledge production. Drawing on 32 in-depth interviews and grounded theory methodology, the research identifies a central analytic category: contested epistemic futures. This concept encapsulates the tensions between structural epistemic asymmetries and local efforts to reappropriate AI for culturally specific ends. Participants critiqued AI systems as carriers of Eurocentric epistemologies and instruments of digital colonization, but also highlighted strategic opportunities for local innovation, agency, and resistance. The analysis reveals five key thematic axes: epistemic asymmetry, decontextualization versus cultural specificity, technological determinism versus strategic agency, epistemic justice, and sociotechnical governance. These axes describe AI as neither a neutral tool nor an inevitable threat, but as a socially contingent technology shaped by political choices, institutional infrastructures, and cultural values. The study contributes to critical AI and decolonial epistemology by centering non-Western academic voices and proposing a relational, justice-oriented framework for AI governance.

he formative period of Alatas’ thought was that of colonialism, particularly in British Malaya and the Netherlands East Indies. While a student at the University of Amsterdam in the 1950s, he wrote his first piece on the problems of colonialism. Here, he divided the problems created by colonialism into three categories. The third category is the non-material, that is, the sociological, psychological and moral problems created by colonialism. Alatas believed that the greatest damage that colonialism brought about was in this third area and it was this problem that hampered the solution to many societal problems. It was also during this time that Alatas attached a great deal of importance to the nature of the elite in development. He suggested that the ruling elite which was nurtured in the colonial period lacked a well-integrated system of thought, having been unable to bring about a synthesis between their cultural heritage and Western thought. This chapter described Alatas’ decolonial perspective in terms of his theory, method and context.

This study aims to explore future scenarios in digital humanities and post-humanist education. A qualitative research design was employed to investigate expert perspectives on the evolving relationship between technology and humanities education. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews with 25 participants from online communities specializing in digital humanities, artificial intelligence, and post-humanist education. The study also incorporated a review of scientific articles to provide theoretical depth. Thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo software, ensuring a structured identification of key themes related to AI-driven humanities research, post-humanist learning environments, extended reality in education, ethical AI governance, and hyper-personalized learning. The study identified five major scenarios shaping the future of digital humanities and post-humanist education. AI-driven research is transforming humanities scholarship by augmenting textual analysis, historical reconstruction, and creative writing, though concerns about algorithmic bias and intellectual deskilling remain. Post-humanist learning environments, incorporating neurotechnologies and hybrid human-machine collaboration, challenge traditional pedagogical hierarchies. Extended reality in education offers immersive engagement but raises accessibility and digital divide concerns. Ethical AI governance and decolonial approaches to digital humanities are critical in ensuring inclusivity, transparency, and cultural representation. The rise of hyper-personalized education, driven by AI tutors and behavioral analytics, presents opportunities for adaptive learning but also risks reinforcing educational biases and reducing exposure to diverse perspectives. Post-humanist education represents both an extension and a challenge to humanistic traditions, requiring careful ethical governance, interdisciplinary collaboration, and equitable access to technological advancements. While AI and immersive technologies offer transformative potential, educators must prioritize critical AI literacy, ethical design, and human-centered approaches to maintain intellectual and ethical integrity in digital humanities education.