哲学杂志철학 학술지哲学のジャーナルEast Asian
Journal of
Philosophy

Home > Book Series > Book > Chapter

Publication details

Publisher: Springer

Place: Berlin

Year: 1986

Pages: 107-126

Series: Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science

ISBN (Hardback): 9789401088947

Full citation:

, "On theories of fieldwork and the scientific character of social anthropology", in: Thinking about society, Berlin, Springer, 1986

On theories of fieldwork and the scientific character of social anthropology

pp. 107-126

in: I. C. Jarvie, Thinking about society, Berlin, Springer, 1986

Abstract

Theories of fieldwork explain why anthropologists do fieldwork. They are theories of method, since fieldwork is a method of doing anthropology (other methods include the arm-chair, the library, by proxy, the questionnaire, informants, and so on).2 There are parallel theories to explain why natural scientists employ the empirical method, i.e. observation and experiment. All schools of anthropology emphasize that fieldwork stands at the center of the subject. Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown, who thought anthropology was a science, placed the same emphasis on fieldwork as does Evans-Pritchard, who denies that it is a science. My concern is to pin down exactly what benefit anthropology and anthropologists derive from fieldwork.

Publication details

Publisher: Springer

Place: Berlin

Year: 1986

Pages: 107-126

Series: Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science

ISBN (Hardback): 9789401088947

Full citation:

, "On theories of fieldwork and the scientific character of social anthropology", in: Thinking about society, Berlin, Springer, 1986