How to do things with worlds

IF 0.5 4区 社会学 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY
Philip Swift
{"title":"How to do things with worlds","authors":"Philip Swift","doi":"10.1086/719520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is a recurring image in the work of the philosopher Michel Serres, that of the sun in Plato’s Republic (which makes its appearance in the famous allegory of the cave). The Platonic sun, says Serres, is “unique and total,” the single, scintillating source of truth and knowledge (Serres 1997: 42). But a shift in position—a transformation of perspective—allows us to see that “the central sun is nothing but a marginal star, a yellowish and mediocre dwarf, without true grandeur, in the immense concert of supergiants, red like Betelgeuse or blue like Rigel” (1997: 150). That is to say, Serres aims to question how it is that “our knowledge unjustifiably established the local solar system as a general law” (1997: 41), and his strategic countermove is instead to shift perspective, to pan back and imagine an expanded cosmos, in which Plato’s sun becomes one of many (see Watkin 2020: 53– 54; Blake 2014: 3–4). This, at any rate, was the image I had in mind when I endedmy article, musing onMaussian moons andmultiple suns. The paper is something of an oddity, to be sure, for it is not an ethnographically grounded case study; nor does it pretend to be a comprehensive investigation of translation in general; nor, yet again, is it a reflection on the conditions of possibility of ethnography (as Pina-Cabral frames the issue).What it is instead is merely an attempt to map out, in a very basic way, the coordinates for the felicity conditions of two opposing modes of anthropological translation and their attendant effects. To the extent, then, that the paper is an oddity, I am all the more grateful toHAU for deeming it to be worthy of publication in the first place, and I am especially indebted to the participants in this colloquium, for generously offering their considered criticisms. An exchange of this nature, consisting of comments on commentaries and replies to replies, can quickly become subject to what J. L. Austin once called “the law of diminishing fleas” (1979: 154), where my remarks—","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"29 1","pages":"285 - 295"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/719520","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: 1

Abstract

There is a recurring image in the work of the philosopher Michel Serres, that of the sun in Plato’s Republic (which makes its appearance in the famous allegory of the cave). The Platonic sun, says Serres, is “unique and total,” the single, scintillating source of truth and knowledge (Serres 1997: 42). But a shift in position—a transformation of perspective—allows us to see that “the central sun is nothing but a marginal star, a yellowish and mediocre dwarf, without true grandeur, in the immense concert of supergiants, red like Betelgeuse or blue like Rigel” (1997: 150). That is to say, Serres aims to question how it is that “our knowledge unjustifiably established the local solar system as a general law” (1997: 41), and his strategic countermove is instead to shift perspective, to pan back and imagine an expanded cosmos, in which Plato’s sun becomes one of many (see Watkin 2020: 53– 54; Blake 2014: 3–4). This, at any rate, was the image I had in mind when I endedmy article, musing onMaussian moons andmultiple suns. The paper is something of an oddity, to be sure, for it is not an ethnographically grounded case study; nor does it pretend to be a comprehensive investigation of translation in general; nor, yet again, is it a reflection on the conditions of possibility of ethnography (as Pina-Cabral frames the issue).What it is instead is merely an attempt to map out, in a very basic way, the coordinates for the felicity conditions of two opposing modes of anthropological translation and their attendant effects. To the extent, then, that the paper is an oddity, I am all the more grateful toHAU for deeming it to be worthy of publication in the first place, and I am especially indebted to the participants in this colloquium, for generously offering their considered criticisms. An exchange of this nature, consisting of comments on commentaries and replies to replies, can quickly become subject to what J. L. Austin once called “the law of diminishing fleas” (1979: 154), where my remarks—
如何处理世界
哲学家米歇尔·塞雷斯(Michel Serres)的作品中有一个反复出现的形象,即柏拉图《理想国》(Republic)中的太阳(在著名的洞穴寓言中出现)。柏拉图式的太阳,Serres说,是“唯一的和完整的”,是真理和知识的唯一的、闪烁的来源(Serres 1997: 42)。但是位置的改变——视角的转变——让我们看到“中央的太阳只不过是一颗边缘恒星,一颗淡黄色的平庸矮星,在巨大的超巨星的音乐中,没有真正的宏伟,红如参宿四,蓝如参宿七”(1997:150)。也就是说,Serres的目标是质疑“我们的知识如何不合理地将局部太阳系建立为一般规律”(1997:41),而他的战略对策是改变视角,回溯并想象一个扩展的宇宙,柏拉图的太阳成为众多宇宙中的一个(见Watkin 2020: 53 - 54;Blake 2014: 3-4)。不管怎么说,这是我写完这篇文章时脑海中浮现的画面,当时我正在思考摩斯的卫星和多个太阳。可以肯定的是,这篇论文有点奇怪,因为它不是一个基于人种学的案例研究;它也不假装是对一般翻译的全面调查;同样,它也不是对民族志可能性条件的反映(正如皮纳-卡布拉尔所阐述的那样)。相反,它只是试图以一种非常基本的方式,绘制出两种对立的人类学翻译模式及其随之而来的影响的幸福条件的坐标。因此,从某种程度上说,这篇论文是一篇奇怪的文章,我更感谢hau首先认为它值得发表,我特别感谢这次讨论会的参与者,他们慷慨地提出了经过深思熟虑的批评。这种性质的交流,包括对评论的评论和对回复的回复,可能很快就会受制于j·l·奥斯汀(J. L. Austin)曾经所说的“跳蚤减少法则”(1979:154)
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
×
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