Today I’m going to speak about the most complicated “anthropology challenges”. One of them is related to the old and controversial authority conflict, that criticize the anthropology capacity of represent “the others” across the ethnography tool. James Clifford said that during a long time the anthropologist use the pretension how argument that give the true of him ethnographies. So, here we have the first problem, the capacity of one person to represent another culture only through the experiences living with that “other people”.
The second problem is related to the first problem , the anthropology have been used to use one kind of methodology paradigm-qualitative-with one kind of methodology tool-the ethnography- take as consequence a serious problem of representatively, validity and pertinence. Because, by one side, the anthropology work only have produced description, any kind of explication about a social problematic. In the other side, the capacity to speak about “the other” as an all is so far because the people consulted are too little.
However, there are solutions for both problems. About the first problem, James Clifford establish the “multivocality”, an ideal anthropologist with the capacity of represent all the voices not only the most important the calls “key informants”.
Concerning to the second problem, Patricio Tudela teacher of the signature calls “methodology research workshop” said us that we don’t have to take one or another option- qualitative or quantitative paradigm, as real opposite options, because now the usual in the anthropology work was use both to interpret and explain the reality. The different with our work are the anthropology perspective that began from the people expectations, from the “cultural capital” as said Bourdieu. Then, to get the necessary representation for the validity of the research we-the anthropologist- have to use the “ETIC” vision, I mean, we must to use quantitative methods like a survey.
Finally, another challenge that this discipline facing us is decide how specialty take, we have three options, archeology, social anthropology and physical anthropology. Those are so different but of course across in some aspects for the same all are very interesting to me.
I would like to take this oportunity to left one interest blog calls "The Angry Anthropologist goes hollywood". In this post he speak about the strikes!
PS: I want apologies to you Miss for the dissapointment of this course, I want to give thank to you, because I have learnt so much in this course, to read and write more fluent in english. Thanks and my apologies again!
Today I’m going to speak about the most complicated “anthropology challenges”. One of them is related to the old and controversial authority conflict, that criticize the anthropology capacity of represent “the others” across the ethnography tool. James Clifford said that during a long time the anthropologist use the pretension how argument that give the true of him ethnographies. So, here we have the first problem, the capacity of one person to represent another culture only through the experiences living with that “other people”.
ResponderEliminarThe second problem is related to the first problem , the anthropology SVA have been used to use one kind of methodology paradigm-qualitative-with one kind of methodology tool-the ethnography- take as consequence a serious problem of representatively, validity and pertinence. Because, by one side, the anthropology work only have produced description, any kind of explication about a social problematic. In the other side, the capacity to speak about “the other” as an all is so far because the people consulted are too little.
However, there are solutions for both problems. About the first problem, James Clifford establish the “multivocality”, an ideal anthropologist with the capacity of represent all the voices not only the most important the calls “key informants”.
Concerning to the second problem, Patricio Tudela teacher of the signature calls “methodology research workshop” said us that we don’t have to take one or another option- qualitative or quantitative paradigm, as real opposite options, because now the usual in the anthropology work was use both to interpret and explain the reality. The different with our work are the anthropology perspective that began from the people expectations, from the “cultural capital” as said Bourdieu. Then, to get the necessary representation for the validity of the research we-the anthropologist- have to use the “ETIC” vision, I mean, we must to use quantitative methods like a survey.
Finally, another challenge that this discipline facing us is decide how specialty take, we have three options, archeology, social anthropology and physical anthropology. Those are so different but of course across in some aspects for the same all are very interesting to me.
I would like to take this oportunity to left one interest blog calls "The Angry Anthropologist goes hollywood". In this post he speak about the strikes!
PS: I want apologies to you Miss for the dissapointment of this course, I want to give thank to you, because I have learnt so much in this course, to read and write more fluent in english. Thanks and my apologies again!
Fran,
no problem apologies accepted I think sometimes i demand too much hehe..
anyway keep going and good luck miss
p.s. you got a 7