Talk:Anthropology: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Joe Quick (→Intro) |
imported>Stephen Ewen |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Was it Geertz who described anthropology as an intellectual poaching license? I like that metaphor. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] | [[User talk:Joe Quick|Talk]] | Was it Geertz who described anthropology as an intellectual poaching license? I like that metaphor. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] | [[User talk:Joe Quick|Talk]] | ||
:It was Kluckhohn and Geertz quoted him, don't remember his point, however. Geertz is superbly rich. I give his "Notes on a Balinese Cockfight" to people newly interested in anthropology. | |||
:I think the idea of "covering the world" in some sense in the Intro is important to convey a sweeping sense of the scope and areas in which anthros work. We can think about changing the applied example to one from, say, development anthropology. I would like to include a U.S. example, however, to show that anthropology is not only done outside of the West among "those others". In the "Controversies" section, or perhaps better in "The Post-modern Challenge" section, one thing I am thinking is to include the core concern you are raising about "using" others. The "Controversies" section - I have in mind things like the Yanomami controversy and the AAA Code of Ethics in response. Everything is still of course tentative, however. [[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 05:17, 27 February 2007 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 05:17, 27 February 2007
Intro
Ah, yes, the all-important Intro. This intro is itself 228 words. So I offered a tentative start in it and suggested an outline. Input is more than welcomed, of course. Stephen Ewen 04:19, 27 February 2007 (CST)
Nice start. I'm worried, though, that your second paragraph gives the idea that Africans are physical, Haitians are cultural, Chamorro people are interesting only for their language and this all somehow gets applied in the U.S. Maybe it would be better to give examples for each subfield relating to a single group? Maybe I'm being overly careful.
Was it Geertz who described anthropology as an intellectual poaching license? I like that metaphor. --Joe Quick | Talk
- It was Kluckhohn and Geertz quoted him, don't remember his point, however. Geertz is superbly rich. I give his "Notes on a Balinese Cockfight" to people newly interested in anthropology.
- I think the idea of "covering the world" in some sense in the Intro is important to convey a sweeping sense of the scope and areas in which anthros work. We can think about changing the applied example to one from, say, development anthropology. I would like to include a U.S. example, however, to show that anthropology is not only done outside of the West among "those others". In the "Controversies" section, or perhaps better in "The Post-modern Challenge" section, one thing I am thinking is to include the core concern you are raising about "using" others. The "Controversies" section - I have in mind things like the Yanomami controversy and the AAA Code of Ethics in response. Everything is still of course tentative, however. Stephen Ewen 05:17, 27 February 2007 (CST)