Zeitlyn2009
Revision as of 12:28, 22 January 2016 by AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=David Zeitlyn |Title=Understanding Anthropological Understanding: For a Merological Anthropology |Tag(s)=empirical responsibility; merol...")
| Zeitlyn2009 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Zeitlyn2009 |
| Author(s) | David Zeitlyn |
| Title | Understanding Anthropological Understanding: For a Merological Anthropology |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | empirical responsibility, merology, partiality, postmodernism, practical adequacy, realism, relativism |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2009 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Anthropological Theory |
| Volume | 9 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 209–231 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/1463499609103550 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
In this article I argue for a merological anthropology in which ideas of `partiality' and `practical adequacy' provide a way out of the impasse of relativism which is implied by postmodernism and the related abandonment of a concern with `truth'. Ideas such as `aptness' and `faithfulness' enable us to re-establish empirical foundations without having to espouse a simple realism which has been rightly criticized. Ideas taken from ethnomethodology, particularly the way we bootstrap from `practical adequacy' to `warrants for confidence', point to a merological anthropology in which we recognize that we do not and cannot know everything, but that we can have reasons for being confident in the little we know.
Notes
