Abstract
As a profession and academic-scientific area, Psychology was nourished by psychological knowledge that circulate on the cultural sphere, which the discipline unfolds in practices to meet social demands. When this knowledge, these practices and demands are naively or intentionally taken as universal, we risk reproducing epistemic violence, suppressing opportunities for sharing and contribution by different points of view culturally situated in the construction of what, based on Greco-Roman, Jewish and Christian traditions has been called psychology. Sixty years after the regulation of Psychology in Brazil, despite the efforts made in the last decades to listen to the Indigenous demands, Pindorama has a long way to go before these contributions ensue deep semantic ramifications, leading to conceptual and theoretical-practical revisions. This paper argues that qualifying psychology as Indigenous aims to provide opportunities for dialogue for indigenous psychologists, other psychologists, and anyone interested in reflecting on the diverse roots of psychological practices.
Keywords:
Dialogicity; Epistemic Violence; Indigenous Psychology; Ethnocentrism; Decolonization