Anthropology contra ethnography
Anthropology contra ethnography
复制标题
人类学反民族志
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Ingold
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
T. Ingold
民族志的目的是描述生活，因为它是生活和经验，由一个人，在某个地方，某个时候。相反，人类学是对世界上人类生活的条件和可能性的探究。人类学和民族志可能对彼此有很大的贡献，但它们的目的和目标是不同的。民族志本身就是目的，它不是人类学目的的手段。此外，参与观察是一种人类学的工作方式，而不是民族志数据收集的方法。研究人类学是与人一起研究，而不是对人进行研究;这种研究与其说是人种志的，不如说是教育的。人类学教育给我们提供了思考这个世界上人类生活状况的知识手段，而不必假装我们的论点是我们工作过的人的实践智慧的精华。我们的工作是与他们通信，而不是代表他们发言。只有承认人类学研究的投机性质，我们才能发出自己的声音，并与其他学科进行适当的接触。只有这样，我们才能引领未来大学的发展。
Ethnography aims to describe life as it is lived and experienced, by a people, somewhere, sometime. Anthropology, by contrast, is an inquiry into the conditions and possibilities of human life in the world. Anthropology and ethnography may have much to contribute to one another, but their aims and objectives are different. Ethnography is an end in itself; it is not a means to anthropological ends. Moreover, participant observation is an anthropological way of working, not a method of ethnographic data collection. To study anthropology is to study with people, not to make studies of them; such study is not so much ethnographic as educational. An anthropological education gives us the intellectual means to speculate on the conditions of human life in this world, without our having to pretend that our arguments are distillations of the practical wisdom of those among whom we have worked. Our job is to correspond with them, not to speak for them. Only by acknowledging the speculative nature of anthropological inquiry can we both make our voices heard and properly engage with other disciplines. And only then can we lead the way in forging the universities of the future.