封面和封底,第 40 卷第 1 号。2024 年 2 月

IF 1.5 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Anthropology Today Pub Date : 2024-01-31 DOI:10.1111/1467-8322.12804
{"title":"封面和封底,第 40 卷第 1 号。2024 年 2 月","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/1467-8322.12804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Front and back cover caption, volume 40 issue 1</p><p><b>EYE IN THE SKY: ANTHROPOLOGY IN THE DRONE ERA</b></p><p>A civilian contractor launches a V-BAT surveillance and reconnaissance drone from the USS Rushmore in the Philippine Sea. Manufactured by the California-based startup Shield AI, the V-BAT takes off vertically and operates autonomously without operator guidance or GPS (global positioning system). Its ‘swarming’ capability allows for potential combat use.</p><p>Drones have had a profound impact in theatres of war for decades, causing lethal outcomes for combatants and non-combatants alike. The US-led ‘war on terror’ in regions like Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen has seen drone strikes causing tens of thousands of deaths, including many civilians. Beyond the direct, destructive impact, American drone pilots report significant mental health issues like anxiety, depression and PTSD due to the nature of remote-controlled warfare.</p><p>Recent conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza have seen an expansion in the types of drones used, ranging from inexpensive commercial drones with explosives to advanced armed drones. While traditionally operated remotely, there is an increasing shift towards autonomous functioning.</p><p>This escalation in drone warfare technology, particularly the development of lethal autonomous weapon systems, has led to warnings of a global AI arms race involving powers like the US, China and Russia. The concept of ‘sensor-to-shooter’ machine learning infrastructures by military planners underscores the ethical, moral and sociopolitical dilemmas in a world increasingly leaning towards algorithmic warfare.</p><p>In this issue, Roberto González argues that anthropologists need to illuminate how drone warfare impacts societies, the effects on both operators and targeted populations and the broader sociopolitical implications of autonomous weapons. This critical, publicly oriented anthropological perspective is essential to navigating the complex interplay of technology, ethics and human values in modern warfare, offering a deeper understanding of the societal impacts of these rapidly evolving military technologies.</p><p><b>UNRAVELLING ‘REAL’ KINSHIP</b></p><p>This thought-provoking Illustration shows the contrast between the idealized concept of unilineal descent and the intricate realities of kinship in everyday life. The left side of the image displays a simplified, stylized, unilineal family tree. With its clear, vertical lines, this depiction symbolizes kinship as a straightforward, linear progression. It embodies an idealized perspective on lineage, where relationships are traced through a single ancestral line, mirroring classical kinship theory.</p><p>Conversely, the right side of the image presents a more complex and interwoven family tree. This part challenges the simplistic notions of unilineal descent, revealing kinship's rich, multifaceted nature. Here, the interconnected lines represent a spectrum of relationships extending beyond mere descent, encompassing marriage, adoption, communal ties and other social bonds. These aspects are frequently marginalized in conventional kinship models but, as anthropologists know, they are essential to understanding the full scope of human connections.</p><p>Sabina Cveček's insightful analysis in this issue shows how archaeologists’ interpretation of unilineal kinship systems tend to be incomplete. Her work underscores the disparity between theoretical models and the nuanced realities of kinship, prompting a call for a more dynamic interpretation of kinship as a socially constructed and evolving network. This illustration invites introspection on the diversity and complexity of kinship and advocates a more inclusive and holistic approach to studying human relationships.</p><p>Cveček argues that the dichotomy between idealized models and actual kinship dynamics is a recurring theme in anthropological literature. Anthropology remains crucial in understanding the depths and dimensions of kinship systems, even in today's era of scientific advancements like ancient DNA analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":46293,"journal":{"name":"Anthropology Today","volume":"40 1","pages":"i-iv"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8322.12804","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Front and Back Covers, Volume 40, Number 1. February 2024\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-8322.12804\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Front and back cover caption, volume 40 issue 1</p><p><b>EYE IN THE SKY: ANTHROPOLOGY IN THE DRONE ERA</b></p><p>A civilian contractor launches a V-BAT surveillance and reconnaissance drone from the USS Rushmore in the Philippine Sea. Manufactured by the California-based startup Shield AI, the V-BAT takes off vertically and operates autonomously without operator guidance or GPS (global positioning system). Its ‘swarming’ capability allows for potential combat use.</p><p>Drones have had a profound impact in theatres of war for decades, causing lethal outcomes for combatants and non-combatants alike. The US-led ‘war on terror’ in regions like Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen has seen drone strikes causing tens of thousands of deaths, including many civilians. Beyond the direct, destructive impact, American drone pilots report significant mental health issues like anxiety, depression and PTSD due to the nature of remote-controlled warfare.</p><p>Recent conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza have seen an expansion in the types of drones used, ranging from inexpensive commercial drones with explosives to advanced armed drones. While traditionally operated remotely, there is an increasing shift towards autonomous functioning.</p><p>This escalation in drone warfare technology, particularly the development of lethal autonomous weapon systems, has led to warnings of a global AI arms race involving powers like the US, China and Russia. The concept of ‘sensor-to-shooter’ machine learning infrastructures by military planners underscores the ethical, moral and sociopolitical dilemmas in a world increasingly leaning towards algorithmic warfare.</p><p>In this issue, Roberto González argues that anthropologists need to illuminate how drone warfare impacts societies, the effects on both operators and targeted populations and the broader sociopolitical implications of autonomous weapons. This critical, publicly oriented anthropological perspective is essential to navigating the complex interplay of technology, ethics and human values in modern warfare, offering a deeper understanding of the societal impacts of these rapidly evolving military technologies.</p><p><b>UNRAVELLING ‘REAL’ KINSHIP</b></p><p>This thought-provoking Illustration shows the contrast between the idealized concept of unilineal descent and the intricate realities of kinship in everyday life. The left side of the image displays a simplified, stylized, unilineal family tree. With its clear, vertical lines, this depiction symbolizes kinship as a straightforward, linear progression. It embodies an idealized perspective on lineage, where relationships are traced through a single ancestral line, mirroring classical kinship theory.</p><p>Conversely, the right side of the image presents a more complex and interwoven family tree. This part challenges the simplistic notions of unilineal descent, revealing kinship's rich, multifaceted nature. Here, the interconnected lines represent a spectrum of relationships extending beyond mere descent, encompassing marriage, adoption, communal ties and other social bonds. These aspects are frequently marginalized in conventional kinship models but, as anthropologists know, they are essential to understanding the full scope of human connections.</p><p>Sabina Cveček's insightful analysis in this issue shows how archaeologists’ interpretation of unilineal kinship systems tend to be incomplete. Her work underscores the disparity between theoretical models and the nuanced realities of kinship, prompting a call for a more dynamic interpretation of kinship as a socially constructed and evolving network. This illustration invites introspection on the diversity and complexity of kinship and advocates a more inclusive and holistic approach to studying human relationships.</p><p>Cveček argues that the dichotomy between idealized models and actual kinship dynamics is a recurring theme in anthropological literature. Anthropology remains crucial in understanding the depths and dimensions of kinship systems, even in today's era of scientific advancements like ancient DNA analysis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46293,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anthropology Today\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"i-iv\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8322.12804\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anthropology Today\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8322.12804\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropology Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8322.12804","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

封面和封底标题,第 40 卷第 1 期EYE IN THE SKY: ANTHROPOLOGY IN THE DRONE ERA一家民用承包商从菲律宾海的拉什莫尔号驱逐舰上发射了一架 V-BAT 监视和侦察无人机。V-BAT 无人机由总部位于加利福尼亚州的初创公司 Shield AI 制造,可垂直起飞,在没有操作员引导或 GPS(全球定位系统)的情况下自主运行。几十年来,无人机在战场上产生了深远的影响,对战斗人员和非战斗人员都造成了致命的后果。在美国领导的阿富汗、巴基斯坦和也门等地区的 "反恐战争 "中,无人机袭击造成数万人死亡,其中包括许多平民。除了直接的破坏性影响外,美国无人机飞行员还报告说,由于遥控战争的性质,他们存在焦虑、抑郁和创伤后应激障碍等严重的心理健康问题。最近在乌克兰和加沙的冲突中,使用的无人机类型不断扩大,从携带爆炸物的廉价商用无人机到先进的武装无人机,不一而足。无人机战争技术的升级,尤其是致命的自主武器系统的开发,已导致美国、中国和俄罗斯等大国发出了全球人工智能军备竞赛的警告。军事规划者提出的 "从传感器到射手 "机器学习基础设施的概念,凸显了这个日益倾向于算法战争的世界所面临的伦理、道德和社会政治困境。在本期杂志中,罗伯托-冈萨雷斯(Roberto González)认为,人类学家需要阐明无人机战争如何影响社会,对操作者和目标人群的影响,以及自主武器更广泛的社会政治影响。这种批判性的、以公众为导向的人类学视角对于驾驭现代战争中技术、伦理和人类价值观之间复杂的相互作用至关重要,可以让我们更深入地了解这些快速发展的军事技术对社会的影响。画面左侧展示了一棵简化的、风格化的单系家谱。通过清晰的垂直线条,这幅画将亲缘关系象征为一种直截了当的线性发展。相反,图片右侧的家谱则更为复杂,交织在一起。这一部分挑战了单系血统的简单观念,揭示了亲缘关系的丰富性和多面性。在这里,相互连接的线条代表了超越单纯血统的各种关系,包括婚姻、收养、社区联系和其他社会纽带。这些方面在传统的亲属关系模式中经常被边缘化,但人类学家都知道,它们对于理解人类关系的全部范围至关重要。萨宾娜-切韦切克(Sabina Cveček)在本期杂志中进行的富有洞察力的分析表明,考古学家对单线亲属关系系统的解释往往是不完整的。她的作品强调了理论模型与细微的亲属关系现实之间的差距,从而呼吁将亲属关系作为一个社会构建和不断发展的网络进行更动态的解释。Cveček 认为,理想化模式与实际亲属关系动态之间的对立是人类学文献中反复出现的主题。Cveček 认为,理想化模式与实际亲属关系动态之间的对立是人类学文献中反复出现的主题。即使在当今科学进步(如古代 DNA 分析)的时代,人类学对于理解亲属关系系统的深度和广度仍然至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Front and Back Covers, Volume 40, Number 1. February 2024

Front and back cover caption, volume 40 issue 1

EYE IN THE SKY: ANTHROPOLOGY IN THE DRONE ERA

A civilian contractor launches a V-BAT surveillance and reconnaissance drone from the USS Rushmore in the Philippine Sea. Manufactured by the California-based startup Shield AI, the V-BAT takes off vertically and operates autonomously without operator guidance or GPS (global positioning system). Its ‘swarming’ capability allows for potential combat use.

Drones have had a profound impact in theatres of war for decades, causing lethal outcomes for combatants and non-combatants alike. The US-led ‘war on terror’ in regions like Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen has seen drone strikes causing tens of thousands of deaths, including many civilians. Beyond the direct, destructive impact, American drone pilots report significant mental health issues like anxiety, depression and PTSD due to the nature of remote-controlled warfare.

Recent conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza have seen an expansion in the types of drones used, ranging from inexpensive commercial drones with explosives to advanced armed drones. While traditionally operated remotely, there is an increasing shift towards autonomous functioning.

This escalation in drone warfare technology, particularly the development of lethal autonomous weapon systems, has led to warnings of a global AI arms race involving powers like the US, China and Russia. The concept of ‘sensor-to-shooter’ machine learning infrastructures by military planners underscores the ethical, moral and sociopolitical dilemmas in a world increasingly leaning towards algorithmic warfare.

In this issue, Roberto González argues that anthropologists need to illuminate how drone warfare impacts societies, the effects on both operators and targeted populations and the broader sociopolitical implications of autonomous weapons. This critical, publicly oriented anthropological perspective is essential to navigating the complex interplay of technology, ethics and human values in modern warfare, offering a deeper understanding of the societal impacts of these rapidly evolving military technologies.

UNRAVELLING ‘REAL’ KINSHIP

This thought-provoking Illustration shows the contrast between the idealized concept of unilineal descent and the intricate realities of kinship in everyday life. The left side of the image displays a simplified, stylized, unilineal family tree. With its clear, vertical lines, this depiction symbolizes kinship as a straightforward, linear progression. It embodies an idealized perspective on lineage, where relationships are traced through a single ancestral line, mirroring classical kinship theory.

Conversely, the right side of the image presents a more complex and interwoven family tree. This part challenges the simplistic notions of unilineal descent, revealing kinship's rich, multifaceted nature. Here, the interconnected lines represent a spectrum of relationships extending beyond mere descent, encompassing marriage, adoption, communal ties and other social bonds. These aspects are frequently marginalized in conventional kinship models but, as anthropologists know, they are essential to understanding the full scope of human connections.

Sabina Cveček's insightful analysis in this issue shows how archaeologists’ interpretation of unilineal kinship systems tend to be incomplete. Her work underscores the disparity between theoretical models and the nuanced realities of kinship, prompting a call for a more dynamic interpretation of kinship as a socially constructed and evolving network. This illustration invites introspection on the diversity and complexity of kinship and advocates a more inclusive and holistic approach to studying human relationships.

Cveček argues that the dichotomy between idealized models and actual kinship dynamics is a recurring theme in anthropological literature. Anthropology remains crucial in understanding the depths and dimensions of kinship systems, even in today's era of scientific advancements like ancient DNA analysis.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Anthropology Today
Anthropology Today ANTHROPOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: Anthropology Today is a bimonthly publication which aims to provide a forum for the application of anthropological analysis to public and topical issues, while reflecting the breadth of interests within the discipline of anthropology. It is also committed to promoting debate at the interface between anthropology and areas of applied knowledge such as education, medicine, development etc. as well as that between anthropology and other academic disciplines. Anthropology Today encourages submissions on a wide range of topics, consistent with these aims. Anthropology Today is an international journal both in the scope of issues it covers and in the sources it draws from.
期刊最新文献
News Calendar Protesting the future: The evolution of the European farmer Classified ‘Skateboarding is not a sport’: Creativity at the margins of capitalism
×
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