Our other Others: on perpetration, morality, and ethnographic unease

IF 1.2 2区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute Pub Date : 2024-10-26 DOI:10.1111/1467-9655.14212
Trine Mygind Korsby, Henrik Vigh
{"title":"Our other Others: on perpetration, morality, and ethnographic unease","authors":"Trine Mygind Korsby, Henrik Vigh","doi":"10.1111/1467-9655.14212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article critically assesses the impact of political and moral positions within contemporary anthropology. Re‐examining ideas of advocacy and the ethical within the discipline, it argues for an alternative political anthropology that focuses on perpetration rather than victimhood, offenders rather than the offended. If anthropology wants to be a discipline that works against social wrongs and suffering, then understanding the positions and perspectives of those causing them is, we contend, a necessary point of departure. Yet how can we approach people ethnographically who transgress bodily, legal, and moral boundaries, and why is this not more commonly done? In answering these questions, we analyse mainstream disciplinary ethics, both current and historical, and highlight some of the reactions that the study of perpetrators evoke in anthropologists. This illuminates an inconsistency within political anthropology. While there is ample theoretical and ethnographic nuance within the subdiscipline, this complexity seems to fade when we focus on perpetration. We suggest that anthropology engages more fully in the study of perpetration and approaches the issue by clarifying how (mis)dynamics are anchored within shared social worlds and historical becomings. This article thus calls upon us to expand our anthropological attention and curiosity beyond what might be morally comfortable.","PeriodicalId":47904,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute","volume":"86 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.14212","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article critically assesses the impact of political and moral positions within contemporary anthropology. Re‐examining ideas of advocacy and the ethical within the discipline, it argues for an alternative political anthropology that focuses on perpetration rather than victimhood, offenders rather than the offended. If anthropology wants to be a discipline that works against social wrongs and suffering, then understanding the positions and perspectives of those causing them is, we contend, a necessary point of departure. Yet how can we approach people ethnographically who transgress bodily, legal, and moral boundaries, and why is this not more commonly done? In answering these questions, we analyse mainstream disciplinary ethics, both current and historical, and highlight some of the reactions that the study of perpetrators evoke in anthropologists. This illuminates an inconsistency within political anthropology. While there is ample theoretical and ethnographic nuance within the subdiscipline, this complexity seems to fade when we focus on perpetration. We suggest that anthropology engages more fully in the study of perpetration and approaches the issue by clarifying how (mis)dynamics are anchored within shared social worlds and historical becomings. This article thus calls upon us to expand our anthropological attention and curiosity beyond what might be morally comfortable.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们的另一个他人:关于犯罪、道德和人种学的不安
本文批判性地评估了政治和道德立场对当代人类学的影响。文章重新审视了该学科内的倡导和伦理观念,主张建立另一种政治人类学,关注犯罪而非受害者,关注犯罪者而非被冒犯者。我们认为,如果人类学想要成为一门致力于消除社会错误和苦难的学科,那么了解造成这些错误和苦难的人的立场和观点就是一个必要的出发点。然而,我们怎样才能从民族学的角度接近那些超越身体、法律和道德界限的人,为什么没有更普遍地这样做?在回答这些问题的过程中,我们分析了当前和历史上的主流学科伦理,并强调了对犯罪者的研究会引起人类学家的一些反应。这揭示了政治人类学内部的不一致性。虽然该分支学科在理论和人种学方面有很多细微差别,但当我们关注犯罪时,这种复杂性似乎就消失了。我们建议人类学更全面地参与对犯罪的研究,并通过澄清(错误)动态如何立足于共同的社会世界和历史成因来解决这一问题。因此,本文呼吁我们将人类学的关注点和好奇心扩展到道德上可以接受的范围之外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
175
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute is the principal journal of the oldest anthropological organization in the world. It has attracted and inspired some of the world"s greatest thinkers. International in scope, it presents accessible papers aimed at a broad anthropological readership. It is also acclaimed for its extensive book review section, and it publishes a bibliography of books received.
期刊最新文献
Kendall, Laurel. Mediums and magical things: statues, paintings, and masks in Asian places. xx, 228 pp., illus., plates, bibliogr. Oakland: Univ. of California Press, 2021. £27.00 (paper) Women who pay their own brideprice: reimagining provider masculinity through Uganda's thriving wedding industry Our other Others: on perpetration, morality, and ethnographic unease Conceptualizations of ‘race’: surveys of Polish academics on the race concept Pettit, Harry. The labor of hope: meritocracy and precarity in Egypt. xii, 228 pp., illus., bibliogr. Stanford: Univ. Press, 2024. £23.99 (paper)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1