魔法的逻辑

IF 0.5 4区 社会学 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1086/725383
Marcus McGee
{"title":"魔法的逻辑","authors":"Marcus McGee","doi":"10.1086/725383","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article centers on a close reading of Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Frazer’s The golden bough, showing how Wittgenstein’s Remarks offer a prescient view of anthropology. More than a critique of Frazerian evolutionism, the Remarks sit on the vertiginous edge of anthropological and philosophical interest, opening onto questions like: “what are the limits of thought?” and “how do we learn something new?” This article deepens an understanding of the Remarks by examining moments at which they reconsider Wittgenstein’s own prior work, namely the Tractatus logico-philosophicus. By contextualizing the Remarks in a broader movement of thought—one that spans, fissures, and connects what are conventionally isolated as Wittgenstein’s “early” and “late” work—it explores an isomorphism suggested by the Remarks between what Wittgenstein calls “philosophical” and anthropological “problems.” In doing so this article presents, and enacts, a version of Wittgenstein’s thought that might serve as a compelling, albeit mercurial, exemplar for anthropological inquiry.","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The logic of magic\",\"authors\":\"Marcus McGee\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/725383\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article centers on a close reading of Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Frazer’s The golden bough, showing how Wittgenstein’s Remarks offer a prescient view of anthropology. More than a critique of Frazerian evolutionism, the Remarks sit on the vertiginous edge of anthropological and philosophical interest, opening onto questions like: “what are the limits of thought?” and “how do we learn something new?” This article deepens an understanding of the Remarks by examining moments at which they reconsider Wittgenstein’s own prior work, namely the Tractatus logico-philosophicus. By contextualizing the Remarks in a broader movement of thought—one that spans, fissures, and connects what are conventionally isolated as Wittgenstein’s “early” and “late” work—it explores an isomorphism suggested by the Remarks between what Wittgenstein calls “philosophical” and anthropological “problems.” In doing so this article presents, and enacts, a version of Wittgenstein’s thought that might serve as a compelling, albeit mercurial, exemplar for anthropological inquiry.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51608,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/725383\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725383","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文以维特根斯坦对弗雷泽的《金树枝》的评语为中心,详细解读了维特根斯坦的评语如何提供了一种有先见之明的人类学观点。《评论》不仅仅是对弗雷泽进化论的批判,而是站在人类学和哲学兴趣的令人眼花缭乱的边缘,提出了这样的问题:“思想的极限是什么?”以及“我们如何学习新东西?”本文通过考察他们重新考虑维特根斯坦自己先前的工作,即逻辑哲学论的时刻,加深了对评论的理解。通过将《评论》置于一个更广泛的思想运动中——一个跨越、分裂和连接维特根斯坦“早期”和“晚期”作品的传统上孤立的运动——它探索了维特根斯坦所谓的“哲学”和人类学“问题”之间的同质性。在这样做的过程中,本文呈现并实施了维特根斯坦思想的一个版本,这个版本可能会成为人类学研究的一个引人注目的范例,尽管变化无常。
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
The logic of magic
This article centers on a close reading of Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Frazer’s The golden bough, showing how Wittgenstein’s Remarks offer a prescient view of anthropology. More than a critique of Frazerian evolutionism, the Remarks sit on the vertiginous edge of anthropological and philosophical interest, opening onto questions like: “what are the limits of thought?” and “how do we learn something new?” This article deepens an understanding of the Remarks by examining moments at which they reconsider Wittgenstein’s own prior work, namely the Tractatus logico-philosophicus. By contextualizing the Remarks in a broader movement of thought—one that spans, fissures, and connects what are conventionally isolated as Wittgenstein’s “early” and “late” work—it explores an isomorphism suggested by the Remarks between what Wittgenstein calls “philosophical” and anthropological “problems.” In doing so this article presents, and enacts, a version of Wittgenstein’s thought that might serve as a compelling, albeit mercurial, exemplar for anthropological inquiry.
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊最新文献
Economy, emulation, and equality: Sociogenesis in the postsocialist capitalocene Is subversion just another version of state aversion? Notes on Herzfeld’s Subversive archaism Home as a second skin On resistance and pluriversal voices of subversive archaism Migration, village sociality, and mistrust
×
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