'Forgive us our Debt, as we Forgive our Debtors': Our Debt to Graeber
'Forgive us our Debt, as we Forgive our Debtors': Our Debt to Graeber
复制标题
“宽恕我们的债务，就像我们宽恕我们的债务人一样”：我们对格雷伯的债务
DOI：
10.1080/14442213.2015.1103359
复制
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Gregory C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gregory C
最近在2014年发布的债务的更新和扩展版本：第一个5000年促使我反思格雷伯的书对人类学和人类学家的持久意义。这本书获得了惊人的流行成功，并成为国际畅销书，但我们在学术界应该认真对待这本书吗？有什么实质内容吗？它是否对我们思考和研究人类学的方式提出了挑战？债务是人类学中最广泛和最根本的术语。它不亚于对人类目前道德状况的批判，通过对过去5000年债务历史的深刻审视，为未来提供了希望。它雄心勃勃的范围邀请比较与马克思的19世纪经典资本和波兰尼的20世纪经典大转型，这两个都是试图解释我们从哪里来，我们现在在哪里，我们可以和应该去的未来。格雷伯的《债务》是激进的，因为它试图通过揭示当今对债务的理解中的道德矛盾和困惑，来颠覆关于货币和信贷的主流经济学正统观点。他这样做是为了问：“我们的道德感和正义感被简化为商业交易的语言，确切地说，这意味着什么？”(13，强调部分已添加）。他通过追溯5000年的战争、征服和奴隶制的历史来反思这个问题，这些历史带来了这种减少的过程。他对考古学、历史学和人种学数据的调查是泰勒和弗雷泽经典传统中的考古学。他很清楚，他的方法是不时髦的，今天的知识界共识是，我们没有
The recent release in 2014 of an updated and expanded version of Debt: The First 5000 Years prompts me to reflect on the enduring significance of Graeber’s book for anthropology and anthropologists. The book has been an astonishing popular success and has become an international bestseller but should we in the academy take the book seriously? Is there any substance to it? Does it represent a challenge to the way we think about and do anthropology?Debt is anthropology in the broadest and most radical sense of the term. It is nothing less than a critique of the present moral state of humanity that provides hope for the future by means of an encyclopaedic examination of the history of debt over the past 5000 years. Its ambitious scope invites comparison with Marx’s nineteenth-century classic Capital and Polanyi’s twentieth-century classic The Great Transformation, both of which were attempts to explain where we have come from, where we are now and where we could and should go in the future. Graeber’s Debt is radical in the sense that it seeks to turn the prevailing economic orthodoxy about money and credit upside down by revealing the moral contradictions and confusions that inform present-day understandings about debt. He does this by asking ‘What, precisely, does it mean to say that our sense of morality and justice is reduced to the language of a business deal?’(13, emphasis added). He ruminates on this question by tracing the 5000-year history of war, conquest and slavery that brought about this process of reduction. His survey of the archaeological, historical and ethnographic data is encyclopaedic in the classic tradition of Tylor and Fraser. He is well aware that his approach is unfashionable and that the intellectual consensus today is that we no