法庭上的人类学家,却不合时宜

M. de Koning
{"title":"法庭上的人类学家,却不合时宜","authors":"M. de Koning","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this rejoinder to Wiersinga’s article which deals with my role as an Expert Witness in a Dutch terrorism trial, I will respond based upon my notes at the time and my subsequent reflections about it. As I will show, the anthropologist and the judge can, and should, meet but this also turns the neutrality of the researcher into a matter debate. Furthermore, in this meeting anthropological knowledge becomes entangled with other logics and methods which raises many ethical questions as Wiersinga has rightfully pointed out. These questions and issues are not specific for the case I was involved in but has a bearing on the issue of cultural expertise in a broader sense for the time. I end my contribution with two pleas: one for more reflection among anthropologists on ethical issues in relation to cultural expertise and another to academic institutions to support their scholars in court.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Anthropologist in Court and out of Place\",\"authors\":\"M. de Koning\",\"doi\":\"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this rejoinder to Wiersinga’s article which deals with my role as an Expert Witness in a Dutch terrorism trial, I will respond based upon my notes at the time and my subsequent reflections about it. As I will show, the anthropologist and the judge can, and should, meet but this also turns the neutrality of the researcher into a matter debate. Furthermore, in this meeting anthropological knowledge becomes entangled with other logics and methods which raises many ethical questions as Wiersinga has rightfully pointed out. These questions and issues are not specific for the case I was involved in but has a bearing on the issue of cultural expertise in a broader sense for the time. I end my contribution with two pleas: one for more reflection among anthropologists on ethical issues in relation to cultural expertise and another to academic institutions to support their scholars in court.\",\"PeriodicalId\":130064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇回复Wiersinga关于我在荷兰恐怖主义审判中作为专家证人的文章中,我将根据我当时的笔记和后来的思考来回应。正如我将要展示的,人类学家和法官可以,也应该相遇,但这也把研究者的中立性变成了一场争论。此外,在这次会议中,人类学知识与其他逻辑和方法纠缠在一起,这引发了许多伦理问题,正如Wiersinga正确指出的那样。这些问题和问题并不是我所参与的案例所特有的,而是与当时更广泛意义上的文化专业知识问题有关。我以两个请求结束我的贡献:一个请求人类学家更多地思考与文化专业知识有关的伦理问题,另一个请求学术机构在法庭上支持他们的学者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Anthropologist in Court and out of Place
In this rejoinder to Wiersinga’s article which deals with my role as an Expert Witness in a Dutch terrorism trial, I will respond based upon my notes at the time and my subsequent reflections about it. As I will show, the anthropologist and the judge can, and should, meet but this also turns the neutrality of the researcher into a matter debate. Furthermore, in this meeting anthropological knowledge becomes entangled with other logics and methods which raises many ethical questions as Wiersinga has rightfully pointed out. These questions and issues are not specific for the case I was involved in but has a bearing on the issue of cultural expertise in a broader sense for the time. I end my contribution with two pleas: one for more reflection among anthropologists on ethical issues in relation to cultural expertise and another to academic institutions to support their scholars in court.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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