你是支持我们还是反对我们?

IF 1.1 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY
Elżbieta Drążkiewicz
{"title":"你是支持我们还是反对我们?","authors":"Elżbieta Drążkiewicz","doi":"10.3167/aia.2023.300102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nWhen the COVID-19 pandemic hit, two contrasting images quickly became representative of the crisis. On the one hand, there were heroic doctors working day and night with the novel virus, risking their lives and making sacrifices to save others. On the other, there were ‘anti-maskers’ and ‘anti-vaxxers’: people doubting if the virus is real, questioning the effectiveness of protective measures, suspicious that the crisis is nothing more than an elaborate plot, a scam aimed to redesign their world and to destroy the values they hold dear. Reflecting on research conducted in Ireland with people separated by the conspiratorial divide, this paper examines some methodological and analytical challenges of doing simultaneous research with opposing stakeholders. Analysing my own entanglements in the conflicts over vaccines and conspiracy theories in this paper I argue that the pandemic was not just a battle to secure the acceptability of specific medical technology (the COVID-19 vaccine) but was also about safeguarding respectability of science and maintaining the rule of experts. It was about preventing ontological turn, the end of the era of reason, a dawn of modernity.","PeriodicalId":43493,"journal":{"name":"Anthropology in Action-Journal for Applied Anthropology in Policy and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are You with Us or Against Us?\",\"authors\":\"Elżbieta Drążkiewicz\",\"doi\":\"10.3167/aia.2023.300102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nWhen the COVID-19 pandemic hit, two contrasting images quickly became representative of the crisis. On the one hand, there were heroic doctors working day and night with the novel virus, risking their lives and making sacrifices to save others. On the other, there were ‘anti-maskers’ and ‘anti-vaxxers’: people doubting if the virus is real, questioning the effectiveness of protective measures, suspicious that the crisis is nothing more than an elaborate plot, a scam aimed to redesign their world and to destroy the values they hold dear. Reflecting on research conducted in Ireland with people separated by the conspiratorial divide, this paper examines some methodological and analytical challenges of doing simultaneous research with opposing stakeholders. Analysing my own entanglements in the conflicts over vaccines and conspiracy theories in this paper I argue that the pandemic was not just a battle to secure the acceptability of specific medical technology (the COVID-19 vaccine) but was also about safeguarding respectability of science and maintaining the rule of experts. It was about preventing ontological turn, the end of the era of reason, a dawn of modernity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43493,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anthropology in Action-Journal for Applied Anthropology in Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anthropology in Action-Journal for Applied Anthropology in Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3167/aia.2023.300102\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropology in Action-Journal for Applied Anthropology in Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/aia.2023.300102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

当COVID-19大流行袭来时,两幅对比鲜明的图像迅速成为危机的代表。一方面,英勇的医生们与新型病毒日夜奋战,冒着生命危险,做出牺牲来拯救他人。另一方面,有“反蒙面者”和“反疫苗者”:人们怀疑病毒是否真实,质疑保护措施的有效性,怀疑这场危机只不过是一个精心策划的阴谋,一个旨在重新设计他们的世界并摧毁他们所珍视的价值观的骗局。反映了在爱尔兰与阴谋分裂的人进行的研究,本文探讨了与反对利益相关者同时进行研究的一些方法和分析挑战。本文分析了我自己在疫苗和阴谋论冲突中的纠结,我认为,这场大流行不仅是一场确保特定医疗技术(COVID-19疫苗)可接受性的战斗,也是一场维护科学尊严和维护专家统治的战斗。它是为了防止本体论的转变,防止理性时代的终结,防止现代性的曙光。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are You with Us or Against Us?
When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, two contrasting images quickly became representative of the crisis. On the one hand, there were heroic doctors working day and night with the novel virus, risking their lives and making sacrifices to save others. On the other, there were ‘anti-maskers’ and ‘anti-vaxxers’: people doubting if the virus is real, questioning the effectiveness of protective measures, suspicious that the crisis is nothing more than an elaborate plot, a scam aimed to redesign their world and to destroy the values they hold dear. Reflecting on research conducted in Ireland with people separated by the conspiratorial divide, this paper examines some methodological and analytical challenges of doing simultaneous research with opposing stakeholders. Analysing my own entanglements in the conflicts over vaccines and conspiracy theories in this paper I argue that the pandemic was not just a battle to secure the acceptability of specific medical technology (the COVID-19 vaccine) but was also about safeguarding respectability of science and maintaining the rule of experts. It was about preventing ontological turn, the end of the era of reason, a dawn of modernity.
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
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
7.10%
发文量
7
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: Anthropology in Action (AIA) is a peer-reviewed journal publishing articles, commentaries, research reports, and book reviews in applied anthropology. Contributions reflect the use of anthropological training in policy- or practice-oriented work and foster the broader application of these approaches to practical problems. The journal provides a forum for debate and analysis for anthropologists working both inside and outside academia and aims to promote communication amongst practitioners, academics and students of anthropology in order to advance the cross-fertilisation of expertise and ideas. Recent themes and articles have included the anthropology of welfare, transferring anthropological skills to applied health research, design considerations in old-age living, museum-based anthropology education, cultural identities and British citizenship, feminism and anthropology, and international student and youth mobility.
×
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