Forum: ‘Utopian Confluences’

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY
Eldar Bråten
{"title":"Forum: ‘Utopian Confluences’","authors":"Eldar Bråten","doi":"10.3167/saas.2023.310210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many thanks to Ruy Blanes and Bjørn Enge Bertelsen for their response to my critique (Bråten 2022a) of their special section on ‘Utopian Confluences’ (especially, Blanes and Bertelsen 2021; Bertelsen 2021), and to Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale for publishing the exchange. The theoretical questions that arise from our diverging stances are, hopefully, of general interest. While I take Blanes and Bertelsen (hereafter B&B) to argue an epistemologically all-inclusive irrealism, I favour an ontologically discerning realism. It is tempting to pursue the many theoretical entailments of this contrast further, but let me in this final reply comment on the character of the exchange itself: the kind of intellectual discourse that our diverging positions seem to foster. I believe B&B's response is illustrative of a ‘post-critical’ approach that recasts principles of scholarly debate in problematic ways. Addressing this issue allows me also to clarify a perplexity in their response: How could I possibly read their contributions as ‘irrealist’ and instances of a ‘migration out of academia’?","PeriodicalId":35019,"journal":{"name":"Social Anthropology","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/saas.2023.310210","RegionNum":3,"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

Many thanks to Ruy Blanes and Bjørn Enge Bertelsen for their response to my critique (Bråten 2022a) of their special section on ‘Utopian Confluences’ (especially, Blanes and Bertelsen 2021; Bertelsen 2021), and to Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale for publishing the exchange. The theoretical questions that arise from our diverging stances are, hopefully, of general interest. While I take Blanes and Bertelsen (hereafter B&B) to argue an epistemologically all-inclusive irrealism, I favour an ontologically discerning realism. It is tempting to pursue the many theoretical entailments of this contrast further, but let me in this final reply comment on the character of the exchange itself: the kind of intellectual discourse that our diverging positions seem to foster. I believe B&B's response is illustrative of a ‘post-critical’ approach that recasts principles of scholarly debate in problematic ways. Addressing this issue allows me also to clarify a perplexity in their response: How could I possibly read their contributions as ‘irrealist’ and instances of a ‘migration out of academia’?
论坛:“乌托邦的汇合”
非常感谢Ruy Blanes和Bjørn Enge Bertelsen对我对他们关于“乌托邦的汇合”的特别部分的批评(br ten 2022a)的回应(特别是Blanes和Bertelsen 2021;Bertelsen 2021),以及社会人类学/人类学协会出版的交流。从我们不同的立场中产生的理论问题,希望能引起普遍的兴趣。当我接受Blanes和Bertelsen(以下简称B&B)在认识论上论证包罗万象的非实在论时,我更倾向于本体论上的辨明实在论。我们很想进一步探讨这种对比的许多理论内涵,但让我在最后的回答中评论一下这种交流本身的特征:我们不同的立场似乎促进了一种知识话语。我相信B&B的回应说明了一种“后批判”方法,它以有问题的方式重塑了学术辩论的原则。解决这个问题也让我澄清了他们回答中的一个困惑:我怎么可能把他们的贡献解读为“不现实”和“从学术界迁移出去”的例子呢?
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Social Anthropology
Social Anthropology Social Sciences-Anthropology
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale is the acclaimed Journal of the European Association of Social Anthropologists, the major professional organization for anthropologists in Europe. While European in profile, this leading Journal has a global scope. It publishes key contributions by both established and up-and-coming anthropologists. As part of the intellectual vitality of the Journal, it also features an exciting Debate in every issue, an important Review Essay which discusses outstanding books in adjoining disciplines or in public debate from an anthropological point of view, and a thriving Book Reviews Section.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信