Foodscapes – a Neopragmatic Redescription

Abstract

This paper aims to redescribe the rapidly developing research on Foodscapes from a neopragmatic perspective. Redescriptions, in the sense of Richard Rorty, become necessary when time-honored vocabularies have become fragile. This redescription is done by means of a double approach, on the one hand with direct reference to philosophical neopragmatism as represented by Richard Rorty, on the other hand to the theory of Three Landscapes derived from Karl Popper’s Three Worlds Theory, in order to give redescription a structure by means of which theories of medium scope can be placed in the meta-theoretical perspective of the neopragmatic approach of ‘horizontal geographies’. In derivation of Popper’s theory, Landscape 3 is understood as that part of the World 3 that relates to interpretations, categorizations, and valuations of World as Landscape. Landscape 2 accordingly encompasses the individual aspects of consciousness perceiving Landscape. Landscape 1 is understood as that part of the tangible World 1 that is synthesized into Landscape from the perspective of Landscape 2 and 3. Foodscapes 1, 2, and 3 are understood to be those respective parts of the relative landscape that are associated with the production, distribution, and consumption of food. In this respect, it hardly seems possible to adequately examine Foodscapes, in their complexity, on the basis of a single theoretical perspective. A metatheoretical perspective, for dealing with this challenge, is offered by neopragmatism, which provides hints on the triangulation of theories, methods, modes of constructing ‘scapes’, researchers, data, and last, but not least, forms of representation. The proposal of a neopragmatic re-description of Foodscapes presented here starts from epistemological questions of contingent interpretations of the world, from which an ontological engagement with different levels of Foodscapes is derived, which is operationalized methodologically.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 97 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.