Differences

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

--- 2700:2022:11 [2022/05/09 15:57] – Ryan Schram (admin)
+++ 2700:2022:11 [2022/05/09 16:26] (current) – [Building support for a claim] Ryan Schram (admin)
@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 ===== Is anthropology a form of colonialism? =====
-According to Shah (2007), the 1901 and 1931 censuses of British India are major sources for the official sense of the category of //tribe// (see also Fuller 2017).
+According to Shah (2007), the 1901 and 1931 censuses of British India are major sources for the official sense of the category of //tribe// (see also Fuller 2016, 2017).
 They were designed by “anthropologists,” or so they said:
@@ Line 82: / Line 82: @@
 Marilyn Strathern on the question of personhood and social theory:
-> Far from being regarded as unique entities, Melanesian persons are as dividually as they are individually conceived. They contain a generalized sociality within. Indeed, persons are frequently constructed as the plural and composite site of the relationships that produced them.
+> Far from being regarded as unique entities, Melanesian persons are as dividually as they are individually conceived. They contain a generalized sociality within. Indeed, persons are frequently constructed as the plural and composite site of the relationships that produced them. (Strathern 1988, 13)
 <HTML><p>&nbsp;</p></HTML>
-> It is not enough, however, to substitute one antinomy for another, to conclude that Melanesians symbolize collective life as a unity, while singular persons are composite. Such a distinction implies that the relation between them might remain comparable to that between society and individual. And the problem with that as a relationship is the Western corollary: despite the difference between society and individual, indeed because of it, the one is regarded as modifying or somehow controlling the other. (Strathern 1988, 13)
+> We do not, of course, have to imagine that these ideas exist as a set of ground rules or a kind of template for everything that Melanesians do or say.... The intention is not an ontological statement to the effect that there exists a type of social life based on premises in inverse relation to our own. Rather it is to utilize the language that belongs to our own in order to create contrast internal to it. Consequently, the strategy of an us/them divide is not meant to suggest that Melanesian societies can be presented in a timeless, monolithic way.... The intention is to make explicit the practice of anthropological description itself. (Strathern 1988, 15–16)
@@ Line 137: / Line 137: @@
 ===== Building support for a claim =====
-These questions—and any essay question—has multiple possible answers. There are no right and wrong answers. Some answers have better reasons for them.
+These questions—and any essay question—have multiple possible answers. There are no right and wrong answers. Some answers have better reasons for them.
 Your best reasons in support of an answer will be based on a close reading of the chosen scholar’s empirical research