Anthropologists are increasingly invited to participate in collaborations with natural scientists, among other experts, in their capacity as anthropologists. Such invitations give pause for thought about the character of the positions and practices that an anthropologist can occupy and perform. This article draws on participant observation in the Socio-Technical Integration Research (STIR) project, an endeavor based at Arizona State University, which aimed to modulate scientific practice. I observe and analyze the disquiet of participating social scientists by questioning the epistemic, ethical, and affective parameters of such modulation, in which social scientists were ultimately positioned and framed as actants—and not engaged as thinking subjects—for the reflexivity of natural scientists toward natural scientific work. I describe how such a method for increasing and extending the scope of scientific reflexivity was ultimately bound to the dominant instrumental norms and values of contemporary technoscience. The article suggests that reflection on problems of collaboration through questions of position and mode of engagement opens the scope and parameters for contemporary anthropological inquiry into anthropological collaborations within domains of science and technology.
{"title":"FROM ANTHROPOLOGIST TO ACTANT (AND BACK TO ANTHROPOLOGY): Position, Impasse, and Observation in Sociotechnical Collaboration","authors":"Anthony Stavrianakis","doi":"10.14506/CA30.1.09","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14506/CA30.1.09","url":null,"abstract":"Anthropologists are increasingly invited to participate in collaborations with natural scientists, among other experts, in their capacity as anthropologists. Such invitations give pause for thought about the character of the positions and practices that an anthropologist can occupy and perform. This article draws on participant observation in the Socio-Technical Integration Research (STIR) project, an endeavor based at Arizona State University, which aimed to modulate scientific practice. I observe and analyze the disquiet of participating social scientists by questioning the epistemic, ethical, and affective parameters of such modulation, in which social scientists were ultimately positioned and framed as actants—and not engaged as thinking subjects—for the reflexivity of natural scientists toward natural scientific work. I describe how such a method for increasing and extending the scope of scientific reflexivity was ultimately bound to the dominant instrumental norms and values of contemporary technoscience. The article suggests that reflection on problems of collaboration through questions of position and mode of engagement opens the scope and parameters for contemporary anthropological inquiry into anthropological collaborations within domains of science and technology.","PeriodicalId":51423,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Anthropology","volume":"30 1","pages":"169-189"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2015-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.14506/CA30.1.09","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66759688","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Imagining Precarious Life in Tulum, Mexico","authors":"Laurence Cuelenaere, J. Rabasa","doi":"10.14506/CA29.1.PE","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14506/CA29.1.PE","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51423,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Anthropology","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2014-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66758918","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1998-05-01DOI: 10.1525/CAN.1998.13.2.224
Ralph A. Litzinger
If nationalism entails the imagining of a collective historical subject (Anderson 1991; Duara 1994), then post-Mao China has been a conflicted subject,1 where public and private debates have raged over the meanings of the nation. Recent work on post-Mao nationalist discourse has underscored the conflicted nature of this national subject, focusing in particular on the relationship of urban intellectuals (zhishifenzi) to the Chinese state. Wang Jing, for example, has written of the 1980s in China as a period of utopian vision and emergent crises, in which the urban cultural elite (typically associated with the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, various research centers and think tanks, and college campuses and semiofficial journals) maintained a contradictory relationship with Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms and with the notion of Chinese socialism as an alternative to Western liberalism (Wang Jing 1996:2-3; see also Bodman and Wan 1991; Chicago Cultural Studies Group 1992; Nonini 1991; Zhang Xudong 1994). Others have pointed to how the reform-era intellectual elite has "pitted itself, a reconstructed, colonized subject, against a despised Communist Party system" (Barlow 1991:218). The Cultural Revolution is afforded a privileged position in much of this scholarship,2 portrayed as a misguided political experiment or as a ghostly other haunting the nation with memories of violence, prison, and blood (see, for example, Watson 1994a). And who can forget the tragic events on Tiananmen Square in the spring of 1989? Scholars are only now beginning to assess the historical significance of Tiananmen and the "deep cultural crisis" that has ensued with the post-Tiananmen expansion of a consumer society and the diminished position and influence of the intellectual among the populace (Lu 1996:140). In short, with these "traumas
如果民族主义需要想象一个集体的历史主体(Anderson 1991;最近关于后毛时代民族主义话语的研究强调了这一民族主题的矛盾性，尤其关注城市知识分子与中国国家的关系。参见Bodman and Wan 1991;芝加哥文化研究小组1992;Nonini 1991;张旭东1994)。另一些人则指出，改革时代的知识精英是如何“将自己，一个重建的、被殖民的主体，与被鄙视的共产党制度对立起来的”(Barlow 1991:218)。文革在这些学术研究中被赋予了特殊的地位，2被描绘成一场误入歧途的政治实验，或者被描绘成一个萦绕着暴力、监狱和血腥记忆的幽灵(例如，参见Watson 1994)。学者们现在才开始评估天安门事件的历史意义，以及随着天安门事件后消费社会的扩张和知识分子在民众中的地位和影响力的下降而随之而来的“深刻的文化危机”(Lu 1996:140)。简而言之，这些“创伤”
{"title":"Memory Work: Reconstituting the Ethnic in Post-Mao China","authors":"Ralph A. Litzinger","doi":"10.1525/CAN.1998.13.2.224","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/CAN.1998.13.2.224","url":null,"abstract":"If nationalism entails the imagining of a collective historical subject (Anderson 1991; Duara 1994), then post-Mao China has been a conflicted subject,1 where public and private debates have raged over the meanings of the nation. Recent work on post-Mao nationalist discourse has underscored the conflicted nature of this national subject, focusing in particular on the relationship of urban intellectuals (zhishifenzi) to the Chinese state. Wang Jing, for example, has written of the 1980s in China as a period of utopian vision and emergent crises, in which the urban cultural elite (typically associated with the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, various research centers and think tanks, and college campuses and semiofficial journals) maintained a contradictory relationship with Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms and with the notion of Chinese socialism as an alternative to Western liberalism (Wang Jing 1996:2-3; see also Bodman and Wan 1991; Chicago Cultural Studies Group 1992; Nonini 1991; Zhang Xudong 1994). Others have pointed to how the reform-era intellectual elite has \"pitted itself, a reconstructed, colonized subject, against a despised Communist Party system\" (Barlow 1991:218). The Cultural Revolution is afforded a privileged position in much of this scholarship,2 portrayed as a misguided political experiment or as a ghostly other haunting the nation with memories of violence, prison, and blood (see, for example, Watson 1994a). And who can forget the tragic events on Tiananmen Square in the spring of 1989? Scholars are only now beginning to assess the historical significance of Tiananmen and the \"deep cultural crisis\" that has ensued with the post-Tiananmen expansion of a consumer society and the diminished position and influence of the intellectual among the populace (Lu 1996:140). In short, with these \"traumas","PeriodicalId":51423,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Anthropology","volume":"13 1","pages":"224-255"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"1998-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1525/CAN.1998.13.2.224","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66846065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：