Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 2654:2 [2015/08/03 21:43] – [Two ideas, two perspectives] Ryan Schram (admin)
+++ 2654:2 [2021/06/29 02:27] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 Available at http://anthro.rschram.org/2654/2
+## Alternative classrooms ##
+{{:blackburn.jpg|Blackburn Lecture Theatre}}
 ## A new kind of lecture ##
@@ Line 91: / Line 95: @@
 **Meyer Fortes**:
-> Kinship concepts, institutions, and relations classify, identify, and categorize persons and groups. ... [T]his is associated with rules of conduct whose efficacy comes, in the last resort, from a general principle of kinship morality that is rooted in the familial domain and is assumed everywhere to be axiomatically binding. This is the rule of **prescriptive altruism** which I have referred to as the principle of kinship amity and which Hiatt calls the ethic of generosity. (Fortes 2004 [1969]: 231-232)
+> Kinship concepts, institutions, and relations classify, identify, and categorize persons and groups. ... [T]his is associated with rules of conduct whose efficacy comes, in the last resort, from a general principle of kinship morality that is rooted in the familial domain and is assumed everywhere to be axiomatically binding. This is the rule of prescriptive altruism which I have referred to as the principle of kinship amity and which Hiatt calls the ethic of generosity. (Fortes 2004 [1969]: 231-232)
@@ Line 104: / Line 108: @@
 ## References ##
+Fortes, Meyer. 2004 [1969]. Kinship and the Social Order: The Legacy of Lewis Henry Morgan. London: Routledge.
 Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1930. “17. Kinship.” Man 30: 19–29. doi:10.2307/2789869.