--'s Friends [entries|friends|calendar]
--

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ calendar | livejournal calendar ]

[28 Sep 2016|11:59pm]

saldumi
A peculiar timidity, however, takes hold of anthropology when the moment comes to extend this methodological skepticism to our own cosmology, either because it is thought implicitly that it is shared by all and that humans everywhere can distinguish between a matter of nature and a matter of society, or because it is believed that the dissociation between these two orders of phenomena is a scientific tool as transhistorical as the periodic table of the elements. But this is wrong on both counts: only in the last third of the nineteenth century did the dualism of nature and culture take shape in Europe as an epistemological device allowing a simultaneous discrimination between distinct orders of phenomena and distinct means of knowing about them. Admittedly, the idea of nature took its first faltering steps in ancient Greece and formed the pivot around which the scientific revolution unfolded during the seventeenth century. This revolution legitimized the idea of a mechanical nature, where the behavior of each element can be accounted for by laws within a totality understood as the sum of the parts and interactions of these elements. But opposite this nature, at once an autonomous ontological32 domain, a field of inquiry and of scientific experimentation, an object inviting practical exploitation and amelioration, there was not yet a collective counterpart. For singular communities, differentiated by customs, language, and relations-what we now term "cultures" -to emerge as scientific objects susceptible of being opposed to the field of natural regularities, it was necessary to wait until the end of the nineteenth century and the intense debates that, particularly in Germany with philosophers like Heinrich Rickert, lead to the distinction between the methods and objects of the sciences of nature and the sciences of culture. There is therefore nothing universal about this contrast. Nor is there either anything properly demonstrable about it. Distinguishing among the objects of the world those that are a matter of human intentionality and those that stem from the universal laws of matter and of life is an ontological operation, a hypothesis and a choice with regard to the relations that beings maintain with one another as a result of the qualities which are ascribed to them. Neither physics, nor chemistry, nor biology can provide proof of this, and it is furthermore extremely rare that the practitioner of these sciences, in their everyday use, actually refer to the abstraction that is nature as their domain of investigation. (I explore these issues in Chapter 3 of my book, Beyond Nature and Culture.)
Anthropology, no doubt because it is in great part the daughter of philosophy, has thus been averse to questioning the universality of the Modern cosmology. It is true that it has not gone so far as to claim that all cosmologies are similar to ours-this would not be very plausible. Simply, we see others, the non-moderns, through the distorting lens that structures our own cosmology, and thus as so many singular expressions of culture in contrast with a unique and universal nature. In other words, we do not envision non-Western civior even pre-modern Western ones, as complete systems of conceptualization of the world alternative to our own, but as more or less exotic ways of accounting for the state of a world that our own system of conceptualization has established (this idea brilliantly developed by Roy Wagner in The Invention of Culture). Making modern dualism the template for all the states of the world has thus lead anthropology to a particular form of academic eurocentrism, which consists in believing not that the realities that humans objectivize are everywhere identical, but that our own manner of objectivizing is universally shared.

(Philippe Descola "The Ecology of Others")
post comment

[29 Sep 2016|12:12am]

klusais_okeans
aww, netīšām uzdūros Krievijas vīriešu tiesību aktīvisma mājaslapai: http://mentales.ru/
post comment

baložu būda ģertrūdes ielā [28 Sep 2016|10:19pm]
pajautaa
[kvarks]
Ciba, kas visu zina: kas tā par baložu būdu Ģertrūdes ielā pie Avotu ielas? Nesen pamanīju - nākot no ĢIT labajā pusē pagalmā pirms Avotu ielas. Nekad tādu nebiju pilsētā redzējusi, liekas intriģējoši, kāpēc, priekš kam, kam pieder, kopš kuriem laikiem? Katru reizi ieraugot māc ziņkārība.
2 comments|post comment

par bitītēm un putniņiem [28 Sep 2016|12:10pm]

daria
Līdz šim Em bija apmierināta ar sīkākiem dzemdību apstāstiem, bet par to, kā bērns nonāk dzemdē, pietika ar "Tētis ielika mammai sēkliņu vēderā."
Ja neskaita neapmierinātību, ka viņa neredzēja, kā tas notika, sīkāki komentāri netika prasīti.
Šis rīts sākās ar jautājumu: "Bet kā tā sēkliņa nonāca Tavā vēderā?"
4.5 gadi.
7 comments|post comment

[28 Sep 2016|09:44pm]

virginia_rabbit
Simoniņš ir izdzēsis manī mazā Eiženiņa failu. Es vairs nevaru atcerēties, kāds bija mazs E. Mēģinu saķert to sajūtu kā sapni pēc pamošanās, bet slīd laukā. Liekas, bija apmēram tāpat kā tagad, es jutu to pašu. Es mīlu E, tādu, kāds viņš ir tagad - delveri, vampīru, bet man vienmēr licies, ka es viņu mīlu kopā ar visu milzīgo satikšanās, sagaidīšanas sentimenta bagāžu, bet nē - tam celiņam pa virsu tagad rakstās Simoniņš, it kā divām bēbīšsajūtām savietoties nav iespējams, tās ir tik lielas. toties ir skaidrs, ka sajūtas par bēbīti nav atkarīgas no bēbīša, tās ir manas sajūtas, tās ir manas bēbīšalkas un bēbīšbailes. un tās ir atkal tieši tādas pašas, es ar viņu runāju tāpat, saku tās pašas muļķības. Un S tikai pamazām piesaka savu personību un kaut ko atšķirīgu attiecībās, kas līdz šim ir ļoti līdzīgas attiecībām ar E.
post comment

[28 Sep 2016|09:40pm]

virginia_rabbit
Ingmārs ir hotelī ar seifu.
2 comments|post comment

[28 Sep 2016|06:52pm]

jojo
labu gribēdama draudzenes bebi e-pastā nosaucu par sweaty pie. cerams, nepamanīs.
1 comment|post comment

iesnas ibio [28 Sep 2016|07:37pm]

intenormal
[ music | Jens Lekman - A Higher Power ]

šādā laikā un kondīcijā nekādu alu. 

viskijs it is!
post comment

[28 Sep 2016|07:02pm]

grizzly_bear
šovakar spēlēšu mūziku kaņepē, ja nu kas.
1 comment|post comment

Kur nopirkt? Xmas edition. [28 Sep 2016|06:59pm]
pajautaa
[santa_be]
Klau, vajag iegādāties sieviešu naktskreklu ar garām rokām, krūšu apkārtmērs vismaz 112 cm, Kur tādu lai pērk?

/meklēju omai ziemassvētku dāvanu.
2 comments|post comment

gadskārtu zīmes [28 Sep 2016|06:16pm]

rasbainieks
ja godīgi, jau nedēļas trīs vīnu dzeru sarkanu
16 comments|post comment

[28 Sep 2016|06:06pm]

virginia_rabbit
tāds skumjš vakariņš - VIDs un rudens. Ingmārs ceļojumā. jūtos pamesta.
8 comments|post comment

sezonālās gaudas [28 Sep 2016|05:45pm]

zin
tumšs metās jau 6-os
un ir auksts un slapjš, un pelēks
tad būs klāt pelēkā ziema
atkal jācer izdzīvot līdz pavasarim.
visas vasaras ir trakoti īsas. par maz saules.. par maz siltuma...
2 comments|post comment

zeme [28 Sep 2016|05:36pm]

vilibaldis
labi, labi, labi arī ar šo es mēģināšu tikt galā paturot prātā, ka katrs pats sev tuvākais.
post comment

par dzimšanas dienu [28 Sep 2016|05:15pm]

ingmars
Krievu dzimšanas diena.
post comment

Tukša, mokoša ziņkāre [28 Sep 2016|05:29pm]

iztulko

[shelly]
Ko īsti nozīmē izteiciens "tripping a dwarf"?
2 comments|post comment

nah war [28 Sep 2016|04:58pm]

intenormal
[ music | Against Me! - Animal ]

pēdējā laikā taisni vai gribas, lai te tiešām sāktos karš. tad mēs redzētu, kā uzvestos visi skaļie bļāvēji, kuri ar putām uz lūpām solās aizstāvēt dzimteni. un vēl ir tie, kuri apgalvo, ka sīriešiem kaujasspējīgā vecumā jācīnās par savu zemi. mjā. pat izdrāztam ezim tak skaidrs, ka mahača gadījumā arī latvistānā nebūs divas armijas ar skaidru frontes līniju pa vidu. un vai tad nepietiek ar 2pk, kur mūsējie karoja abās pusēs? esmu pārliecināts, ka mūsdienu scenārijos pušu būs daudz vairāk.

post comment

lēmums [28 Sep 2016|04:51pm]
pajautaa
[intenormal]
vai kāds jurisprudencē gudrāks humanoīds varētu man izskaidrot - ko nozīmē tas, ka lēmums pieņemts rezolūcijas veidā?
post comment

[28 Sep 2016|04:10pm]

klusais_okeans
Consider the whole of your life, what you already do, all your doings. Now please exclude everything which is naturally physiologically necessary (or harmful), such as breathing and sleeping (or breaking an arm). For what remains, exclude everything which is for the satisfaction of a social demand, a very large area which includes foremost your job, but also care of children, being polite, voting, your haircut, and much else. From what remains, exclude everything which is an agency, a "means" -- another very large area which overlaps with others to be excluded. From what remains, exclude everything which involves competition. In what remains, concentrate on everything done entirely because you just like it as you do it. (Henry Flynt)
1 comment|post comment

[28 Sep 2016|03:04pm]

vilibaldis
Ot maitas, tikko ka es uz darbu tā kaimiņam šorīt māju apzaguši. Laikam takš vaktējuši.
3 comments|post comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]