at any one moment to both agree and disagree with any proposition on the basis of a constrained choice between a whitefella or blackfella perspective”. This signifies that the position of which Indigenous people hold at the cultural interface to decide a continuous stance is recognized. Instead, reorganization for Indigenous agency should be constituted on what they know from this position. Simplistically stated, it is questioning why Indigenous people should have to choose positions instead of share what they know from both. Nakata's third and last principle states: “the idea that the constant ‘tensions’ that this tug-of-war creates are physically experienced, and both inform as well as limit what can be said and what is to be left unsaid in every day.” Nakata here is describing the physical worlds of how Indigenous and non-Indigenous differ in everyday context, and how these differences can inform of limit has it might be unacceptable in western colonist society that would otherwise be acceptable with other Indigenous people. Nakata states that these three principles allow him to forge a critical standpoint from the cultural interface and enable him to create better arguments in relation to his position within epistemologies and with other groups of ‘knowers’. However, one cannot overturn a position he is dominant in just because of his background due to the arguments being simplistic or misrepresented with no evidence to support itself etc. Thus, Indigenous standpoint theory can be defined as a “method of inquiry, a process for making more intelligible ‘the corpus of objectified knowledge about us’ as it emerges and organizes understanding of … lived realities”. Criticisms Critics argue that standpoint theory, despite challenging essentialism, relies itself on essentialism, as it focuses on the dualism of subjectivity and objectivity. In regard to feminist standpoint theory: though it does dispel many false generalizations of women, it is argued that focus on social groups and social classes of women is still inherently essentialist. Generalizations across the entire female gender can be broken into smaller more specific groups pertaining to women's different social classes and cultures, but are still generalized as distinct groups, and thus marginalization still occurs. West and Turner state that Catherine O'Leary (1997) argued that although standpoint theory has helped reclaim women's experiences as suitable research topics, it contains a problematic emphasis on the universality of this experience, at the expense of differences among women's experiences. Another main criticism of