Violeta Furlan , N. David Jiménez-Escobar , Fernando Zamudio , Celeste Medrano
{"title":"‘Ethnobiological equivocation’ and other misunderstandings in the interpretation of natures","authors":"Violeta Furlan , N. David Jiménez-Escobar , Fernando Zamudio , Celeste Medrano","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsc.2020.101333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In this contribution we seek to enrich the theoretical and methodological approaches of ethnobiology. The essay takes elements of Amerindian anthropology, classical ethnobiological studies and the freedoms provided by feminist philosophers to open up reflection. The central background of the essay is the method of “controlled equivocation” proposed by Viveiros de Castro (2004). We present a series of five ethnobiological equivocations ranging from the categorical equivocal, going through the subtle equivocal to the strictly ontological ones. The cases occurred in different territories of Argentina, including a case in an academic context. Through the fieldwork cases, we give an account of the origin of equivocations, the context for their emergence, which are the disciplinary nuances that cause them and even some academics’ preconceptions. To inhabit the equivocation allows opening the possibilities of coexistence among people –and their respective worlds–, especially if these people are in different power positions. We propose the method of controlled equivocation as a theoretical-discursive tool, which permits us to rethink the current concepts of ethnobiology. Thus, we want to broaden the current definition of ethnobiology understood as a dialogue from different scientific points of view.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48557,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C-Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.shpsc.2020.101333","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C-Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848620301448","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
In this contribution we seek to enrich the theoretical and methodological approaches of ethnobiology. The essay takes elements of Amerindian anthropology, classical ethnobiological studies and the freedoms provided by feminist philosophers to open up reflection. The central background of the essay is the method of “controlled equivocation” proposed by Viveiros de Castro (2004). We present a series of five ethnobiological equivocations ranging from the categorical equivocal, going through the subtle equivocal to the strictly ontological ones. The cases occurred in different territories of Argentina, including a case in an academic context. Through the fieldwork cases, we give an account of the origin of equivocations, the context for their emergence, which are the disciplinary nuances that cause them and even some academics’ preconceptions. To inhabit the equivocation allows opening the possibilities of coexistence among people –and their respective worlds–, especially if these people are in different power positions. We propose the method of controlled equivocation as a theoretical-discursive tool, which permits us to rethink the current concepts of ethnobiology. Thus, we want to broaden the current definition of ethnobiology understood as a dialogue from different scientific points of view.
在这一贡献中,我们寻求丰富民族生物学的理论和方法方法。本文以美洲印第安人人类学、古典民族生物学研究和女权主义哲学家提供的自由为基础,展开反思。本文的中心背景是Viveiros de Castro(2004)提出的“控制模糊”方法。我们提出了一系列的五种民族生物学的模棱两可,从范畴的模棱两可,经过微妙的模棱两可到严格的本体论的模棱两可。这些病例发生在阿根廷的不同领土,包括一例学术方面的病例。通过田野调查案例,我们给出了模棱两可的起源,其出现的背景,这是学科的细微差别,导致他们甚至一些学者的先入之见。置身于这种模棱两可之中,可以打开人与人之间——以及他们各自的世界——共存的可能性,尤其是当这些人处于不同的权力地位时。我们提出控制模糊的方法作为一种理论论述工具,它允许我们重新思考当前的民族生物学概念。因此,我们希望拓宽民族生物学的当前定义,将其理解为来自不同科学观点的对话。
期刊介绍:
Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences is devoted to historical, sociological, philosophical and ethical aspects of the life and environmental sciences, of the sciences of mind and behaviour, and of the medical and biomedical sciences and technologies.
Contributions are from a wide range of countries and cultural traditions; we encourage both specialist articles, and articles combining historical, philosophical, and sociological approaches; and we favour works of interest to scientists and medics as well as to specialists in the history, philosophy and sociology of the sciences.