What Anthropological Reflexivity Is/Was All About? A Methodological Formalization

In this study, I suggest that reflexivity in anthropology can be viewed as a coordinative definition that helped anthropology survive its three crises – the crisis of ethnographic representation, the crisis of scientific realism, and the crisis of anthropological authority. In addition, reflexivity,...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Miloš Milenković
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN FR SR
Publicado:	University of Belgrade 2016
Materias:	Anthropology GN1-890
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/d8774e41d64641e3aaacb2dce18a393f
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:d8774e41d64641e3aaacb2dce18a393f
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:d8774e41d64641e3aaacb2dce18a393f2021-12-02T03:02:19ZWhat Anthropological Reflexivity Is/Was All About? A Methodological Formalization0353-15892334-8801https://doaj.org/article/d8774e41d64641e3aaacb2dce18a393f2016-03-01T00:00:00Zhttp://eap-iea.org/index.php/eap/article/view/453https://doaj.org/toc/0353-1589https://doaj.org/toc/2334-8801In this study, I suggest that reflexivity in anthropology can be viewed as a coordinative definition that helped anthropology survive its three crises – the crisis of ethnographic representation, the crisis of scientific realism, and the crisis of anthropological authority. In addition, reflexivity, in a specific sense, can be taken as a substitute for experiment, a subsititute even better than comparative studies, and can thus help fulfill the long dream of consolidating anthropology on firm scientific grounds (a dream I believe is, though, no longer necessary). This text should be understood as a part of a series of studies that strive towards the methodological formalization of supposedly formalization-resistant concepts of postmodern anthropology. In reality, reflexive anthropology became postmodern science only by admitting to be experimental art, but the question is who would understand and, more importantly, finance and apply this concept? The incorporation of reflexivity into the core of anthropology enabled it to finally achieve the status of science, in the most conservative and general methodological sense. Therefore, the anti-postmodern frustration present in some relatively recent debates, examples of which we can see in this volume, is neither methodologically nor pragmatically founded. Reflexivity can only be useful, not harmful to the discipline, even from the standpoint of traditional, problem-applicative concepts of method. The only remaining assignment is to reformulate it so it could be applied by methodological traditionalists as well.Miloš MilenkovićUniversity of BelgradearticleAnthropologyGN1-890ENFRSREtnoantropološki Problemi, Vol 1, Iss 2, Pp 157-184 (2016)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN FR SR
topic	Anthropology GN1-890
spellingShingle	Anthropology GN1-890 Miloš Milenković What Anthropological Reflexivity Is/Was All About? A Methodological Formalization
description	In this study, I suggest that reflexivity in anthropology can be viewed as a coordinative definition that helped anthropology survive its three crises – the crisis of ethnographic representation, the crisis of scientific realism, and the crisis of anthropological authority. In addition, reflexivity, in a specific sense, can be taken as a substitute for experiment, a subsititute even better than comparative studies, and can thus help fulfill the long dream of consolidating anthropology on firm scientific grounds (a dream I believe is, though, no longer necessary). This text should be understood as a part of a series of studies that strive towards the methodological formalization of supposedly formalization-resistant concepts of postmodern anthropology. In reality, reflexive anthropology became postmodern science only by admitting to be experimental art, but the question is who would understand and, more importantly, finance and apply this concept? The incorporation of reflexivity into the core of anthropology enabled it to finally achieve the status of science, in the most conservative and general methodological sense. Therefore, the anti-postmodern frustration present in some relatively recent debates, examples of which we can see in this volume, is neither methodologically nor pragmatically founded. Reflexivity can only be useful, not harmful to the discipline, even from the standpoint of traditional, problem-applicative concepts of method. The only remaining assignment is to reformulate it so it could be applied by methodological traditionalists as well.
format	article
author	Miloš Milenković
author_facet	Miloš Milenković
author_sort	Miloš Milenković
title	What Anthropological Reflexivity Is/Was All About? A Methodological Formalization
title_short	What Anthropological Reflexivity Is/Was All About? A Methodological Formalization
title_full	What Anthropological Reflexivity Is/Was All About? A Methodological Formalization
title_fullStr	What Anthropological Reflexivity Is/Was All About? A Methodological Formalization
title_full_unstemmed	What Anthropological Reflexivity Is/Was All About? A Methodological Formalization
title_sort	what anthropological reflexivity is/was all about? a methodological formalization
publisher	University of Belgrade
publishDate	2016
url	https://doaj.org/article/d8774e41d64641e3aaacb2dce18a393f
work_keys_str_mv	AT milosmilenkovic whatanthropologicalreflexivityiswasallaboutamethodologicalformalization
_version_	1718402011361181696

What Anthropological Reflexivity Is/Was All About? A Methodological Formalization

Ejemplares similares