"Anthropologists today use comparisons to describe and to explain, to generalise and to challenge generalisations, to critique and to create new concepts. In this multiplicity of often contradictory aims lie both the key challenge of anthropological comparison, and also its key strength. Matei Candea maps a path through that entangled conversation, providing a ground-up reassessment of the key conceptual issues at the heart of any form of anthropological comparison, whilst creating a bold charter for reconsidering the value of comparison in anthropology and beyond"--
"Anthropologists today use comparisons to describe and to explain, to generalise and to challenge generalisations, to critique and to create new concepts. In this multiplicity of often contradictory aims lie both the key challenge of anthropological comparison, and also its key strength. Matei Candea maps a path through that entangled conversation, providing a ground-up reassessment of the key conceptual issues at the heart of any form of anthropological comparison, whilst creating a bold charter for reconsidering the value of comparison in anthropology and beyond"--
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Gabriel Tarde is being brought forward as the misrecognised forerunner of a post-Durkheimian era. His sociology has been linked to Foucaultian microphysics of power, to Deleuze's philosophy of difference, and to the spectrum of approaches related to Actor Network Theory. This title asks what an alternative social science might look like.
This article reflects on the power and dangers of diagrams as a mode of anthropological exposition, comparing this particular form of non-text to the brief dalliance of mid-century anthropology with algebraic and logical formulae. It has been claimed that diagrams, like formulae, are clearer, simpler, or less deceptive than textual argument. By contrast, this article argues that diagrams are just as slippery and tricky as words, but that images and words slip and slide in different ways. Holding both diagrams and words together when building an argument enables not only a specific kind of rigor, but also moments of unexpected theoretical invention. This technique of holding together contrasting heuristics scales up as a productive epistemic device for anthropology more broadly.
What is censorship? Is it different from other forms of silencing, and if so how? For some, censorship is a transgression against a speaker imagined as essentially free, and must be denounced, whether it is displayed in plain sight in totalitarian regimes or hiding in the secret folds of Facebook's algorithms; for others, censorship is an unduly negative name for the inevitable (albeit never innocent) cuts and limitations which define and shape genres and styles of expression, be it academic, artistic or everyday. On this latter view, expression is always entangled with power, and policing the bounds of the sayable is just another field of political struggle – a struggle which takes place on campuses, in courtrooms or online. These are sometimes seen as two fundamentally opposed philosophical, political and epistemic visions: a "modern" or "liberal" vision of censorship, opposed to a "postmodern" or "relativist" one. Yet anthropologists in particular are well placed to see that these are still arguments from a common ground, which draw from a shared stock of Euro-American philosophical and political concepts and controversies. To this discussion, anthropology can provide some useful disturbances by expanding the cast of characters and the range of modalities of silence and expression.
A few years after the French press resonated with the immigration debates which inspired Derrida's influential thoughts on hospitality, the paradoxes of hospitality once again gripped the French public imagination, this time in relation to sanctuary given to a suspected murderer on the island of Corsica. This paper traces Corsican hospitality, in its various ethnographic, media, and philosophical/literary incarnations. Through a careful ethnographic account of the material‐semiotic moves which enable events on one scale to have effects and significance on another, the paper argues that analytical or philosophical uses of hospitality as a scale‐free abstraction should be treated with caution.RésuméIl y a quelques années, la presse française s'est faite la chambre d'écho d'un débat sur l'immigration qui inspira à Derrida des idées influentes sur l'hospitalité. Les paradoxes de l'hospitalité s'emparent à nouveau de l'imaginaire public français aujourd'hui, à cause cette fois du refuge qu'un homme soupçonné de meurtre a pu trouver en Corse. L'auteur retrace ici l'hospitalité corse sous ses différentes incarnations ethnographiques, médiatiques, et philosophiques ou littéraires. Par un compte‐rendu ethnographique scrupuleux des déplacements matériels et sémiotiques qui permettent aux événements à une échelle d'avoir un effet et une signification à une autre échelle, il recommande de se méfier des usages analytiques ou philosophiques de l'hospitalité considérée comme une abstraction dépourvue d'échelle.
