Warning Concerning Copyright Restrictions

The Copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other
reproductions of copyright material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are
authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or
reproduction not be "used for any purposes other than private study, scholarship, or research." If a user makes a
request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable
for copyright infringement.
Further information concerning copyrights may be found on the Morris Library website at:
www.lib.siu.edu/ereserves-copyright
The following pages, scanned by the Morris Library Reserves staff, reflect the original quality of the pages
submitted by the instructor of the given course to the Reserves desk.

Decolonizing Anthropology
Moving Further Toward an Anthropology for Liberation

Edited by
Faye V. Harrison

LIBRA

Association of Black Anthropologists

American Anthropological Association
Washington, D.C.

30 I, () r
'])-,' 2'
"",J

II
Copyright 1991 by the American A tl
I'
All rights reserved
c
n nopo ogleal Association
Printed in the United States of America
ISBN 0-913167-45-2

lj

~"

'6
TABLE of CONTENTS

Acknowledgments and Dedication

iv

Contributors

Anthropology as an Agent of Transformation:

Introductory Comments and Queries
Faye V. Harrison

Man and Nature, White and Other

Michael L. Blakey

15

Colonized Anthropology: Cargo-Cult Discourse

Pem Davidson Buck

24

On Ethnography in an Intertextual Situation:

Reading Nurrativcs or Dcconstructing Discourse?
Glenn H. Jordan

42

Undoing Fieldwork: Personal, Political, Theoretical

and Methodological Implications
. Deborah D'Amico-Samuels

68

Ethnography as Politics
Faye V. Harrison
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Decolonizing anthropology' mavin f 1

liberation I edited by Faye
H _g urt ler toward an anthropology for
I I d b' .
. arnson, p. em
ne u es IbhographicaI references
'
ISBN 0-913167-45-2
.
1. Ethnology-Philosoph 2 M
.
anthropology. 4. Anthro ol~' ic~1 e a~xlst anthr?pology. 3. Applied
Association of Black Anrhro~ologi~~lCSiIr AHarn~on, Faye Venetia. II.
Association.
s,
. mencan Anthropological
GN345.D43
1991
301'.01-dc20
91-27659
CIP

88

Confronting the Ethics of Ethnography: Lessons from

Fieldwork in Central America
Philippe Bourgois

110

"They Exploited Us But We Didn't Feel It": Hegemony,

Ethnic Militancy, and the Miskitu-Sandinista Conflict
Charles R. Hale

127

Anthropology and Lihe1'8tion

Edmund T. Gordon

149

Militarism and Accumulation as Cargo Cult

Angela Gilliam

168

Edmund ~'. Gordon received his Ph.D. from Stanford'

fIeldwork In Belize ,and Nicaragua and is interest d' In 1981 .. He has conducted extensive
class, counter-hegemonic struggle H h d e III ~conomlc development, ethnicity and
with Nicaragua's Center for Rese~rch :nda~ one apph~d research and development work
He has published in numerous Cent
?cu~entatlDn on the Atlantic Coast (CIDCA)
D~velopment Study Unit pUblicati~:1 ~,~;:~a~ Journal;,:;n~ in a 1~87 CIDCA-Stockhol~
Nlcaragua. Since 1989 he has been ' . t
roups a . t Je Natwn-State: The Case of
of Texas, Austin.
an aSSlS ant professor In anthropology at the University
Charles R. Hale earned a Ph D .
extensive applied research in N . m anthropology from Stanford in 1989. He has don
.'
Icaragua under the auspic
f tb C
e
D
.
.es 0
e enter for Research and
ocumentatlDn on the Atlantic Co t d'
published on ethnic consdousness a~n~nU a~socJation ,:ith OXF.AM-Ameri,ca. He has
ege~ony, ll1terethmc relations and class
structure, and ethnicity and the stat . S,
and the Nation-State. He also ha~ In {Can hlltlSta. Nicaragua, Mosquitia, and Ethnic Grounr..o
con '
,
a lort c01mng book
th M' .
Y"
SClOusness. He IS an assistant prof
f
on e
IskItU's contradictory
Davis.
essor 0 anthropology at the University of California
. ,

1;

d".

FllY~ V. Harrison is the current president of the As ','

~ceIVed a Ph.D. from Stanford University in 1982 s~~at~on of Black Anthropologists. She
, reat Bntam and Jamaica on grassroots
"
.
~ ~s done ethnographic research in

International-level factors
H
k hPOhtIcs and Its lllterplay with the state and w'th
A h
.
er wor
as been
bl' h d .
.
I
III ropology, TransAfrica Forum, Social I< I'
pu . IS e III such journals as Urban
Indian Guide; and in the anthologl'e P us Ice: and NIeuwe West-Indische Gids/New Wiest
mUm
s, erspectlve! in U.S M. .
"O"u "omen and the Polilics 0" ~..
S'
.. arxlSt Amhropolopv and Third
I't I d
.
,remllllsm.
he has b
"
<V
po Ilca e ucatlOn and in building cO'I't'
een actIve III community-based
.t
"
allOns among worn '
,
~acls organtzatlOns. She experiments
'th
' ,
en s, peace, sohdarity, and antiIll,formed drama. She is currently an asso~~t wn~mg and performing anthropologically
ot Tennessee-Knoxville.
e pro essor of anthropology at the University
"
Glenn H. JO~dan holds a master's de ree from
doctoral candIdate in anthropology at th~ Universit Stanf~rd . UlllvefSlty, and is currently a
years, he has been engaged in col1aborativ I I ' Yof IllInOIs-Urbana. For the past several
Cardiff Butetown neighborhood where the ~~t~l;,;ersed authoriti' oriented fieldwork in the
m the 1940s. He is a founder and director of the ClaIr Drak~ dId hIS dissertation research
p~st he served as editor and secreta -treasure
utetown HIStory and Arts Project. In the
HIS SchOlarly interests include intell~tual histor of th~ ~ssoc~atlDn of Black Anthropologists.
cntI,ca SOCIal theory, discourse and power
dommatlOn and resistance, and social tr
m0!10graph on St. Clair Drake's intellectu~n~oor~atl~n. He has written articles and ~
senes of occasional and working pa
d
ntnbutlOlls to anthropology and edited two
SOciology and cultural studies at the l~~~ec~:~~e:f ~a~~:, Black experience. He teaches

7'

ANTHROPOLOGY AS AN AGENT OF TRANSFORMATION:

INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS AND QUERIES
Faye V. Harrison

Moving Further Toward an Anthropology for Liberation:

An Agenda from the Periphery behind the Veill
With the turn of the century rapidly approaching, anthropologists committed to
applying knowledge to action and struggle must re-assess the state of the discipline. Since
the late 1960s, critiques of anthropology's collusion with and complicity in colonial and
imperialist domination and proposals for more socially and politically responsible
disciplinary ag<;nda have been numerous (e.g., Go~gh1968, Hymes 1969, Lewis 1973, Asad
1975, and Huizer and Mannheim 1979). In spite of varying attempts at revision and reform,anthropology remains overwhelmingly a Western intellectual-- and id,,-ological-- project that
is embedded in relations of power which favor- class sections and historical blocs belonging
to or with allegiances to the world's White minority. While these global relations no longer
adhere to classical colQnial principles or-forms;-{ll-e-fretain, nonetheless, theJ?~sic substance
of colonial control. Hence, the contemporary world system i~I!~Q~o.19I).Jal-i'n its structure anddynamic. When anthropologists fail to recognize anthropologlc,ll inquiry as an historicallyspecific set of discourses "which the West deploys in order to make sense of, define, and
figure out and render intelligible how a world ordered by [Western] capitalism works"
(Magubane and Faris 1985:93, 101), their contributions are all the more vulnerable to heing
complicit if not in fact collusive with the prevailing forces of neocolonial domination.
Magubane and Faris (1985) take the strong position that l'!lthr~p()logy._a"_,,urrently
constituted must cease to exist. For cross-cultural knowledge to advance 1i"uman -emancil)'aiTCm,--~fctivist--iiiteneciualsmiist move beyond what many Marxists and other
progressives have contributed (see Gordon in this volume). It is not enough to rethink
.anthropological insights in light of an historicized political economy (e.g., Wolf 1982).
J De.sPite good intentions, radical anthropology "remains part of what people in the Third
World consider suspect-- as an invention of their enemy" (Magubane and Faris 1985:92).
-Whereas most of anthropology's critics have sought a reinvention by expunging the most
obvious bourgeois and colonial elements, and then rethinking and reordering what remains,
Magubane and Faris argue that a genuine science of humankind based upon premises of
freedom and equality cannot emerge unj?ilt~_antllr()p<:lIQgy__l,-orR QLtI1~_ !~li(l!!alistand
JiiJeral intyllectual tr-"<li!ignJo..del!.t(9Y"d. j
-Can an aiitlientic anthropology emerge from the critical intellectual traditions and
counter-hegemonic struggles of Third World peoples? Can -a genuine study of humankind
\ arise from dialogues, debates, arid recondl1ations amongst various non-Western and Western
intellectuals-- both those with formal credentials and those with other socially meaningful
and appreciated qualifications? Is genuine dialogue and reconciliation' possible, and, if so,

.Ifl
\, II
vi

--

under, what, co.ndition.s? How can anthropological knowledge advance the interests of the
uncertainty, marked, on the
mternatIOnal level, by the coolIng of th~ Cold War, serious dilemmas and setbacks in sociaHst
development,,, the eSC,a,lati?ll of conflict in the Persian Gulf and the emergence of a "New

Race, Gender, and Class Inequalities at the Heart of the World System

~or1d S ,maJonty dunng this ,Period of ongoing crisis and

World. ?rder led

mlh.t~nly

The contemporary sociocultural terrain of the world system is one that is shaped,

colored, and violently distorted by what Haviland (1990) designates as a for~ of gl~bal
apartheid. He targets this internati~nalized Whit.e su~re~acy as one of the world s pn.nclpal
problems. Arguing that South Mnca and the sltua~lo~ m the world at large are stnkmgly
similar, he explains that on the glob"Ul1y"l_aparthmd IS

by the U.s., growing ecological/environmental problems, the

~,mpOSltI~n~! de~umamzmg and,recolonizing structural adjustment policies upon debt-ridden

developmg natIons, and the heIghtening of North-South contradictions; and, on the national
t? civil rights, hostile reactions to multiculturalism,
displacement, a widening gap between the rich and the
rest, ~nd the intensIfIcatIon of state repression in ghetto and barrio communities?
QuestIons such as these should be taken to heart by anthropologists preparing themselves
for the global challenges ~nd ~ris~s of the 21st century.
On,e of this v~Iume s objectIves is to reassess and, hopefully, transcend the limitations
of the radical and c~ltical anth~opology th.".t has emerged from the debates and experiments
of the past two decades. CntIques of cntIques and provocative syntheses will provide the
gro~nd.for ~appI~g a path or pat~s to an anthropo~ogy designed to promote equality- and
JustIce~mductng ~o.cJal transformatIOn. The perspectIves expressed in the following chapters
are tho~e of activISt anthr?pol.ogists. com~itted to. and engaged in struggles against racist
o~press1On, gender mequahty, clas. s. ..dlspantIes, and mternatiojl patterns of exploitation and
!ldlfference" rQotedJargely ilL cflpitalist _worId development. '.
.. According ,~o Ulin (1991), pOlitlcafeconomyimd postmodernism along with "the
feml~lst traJe~tory a~e currently competing to define lithe critical anthropological project."
An aim ~f thIS book I~ to place a~other claim onto the site of anthropological debate and
COl!~_estatIon. The, traJe~tory that l~ .advanced here is informed in considerable measure by
tful'lfltelkctyal, eXlstenlI"l, and poht",al experiences of Third World,peQples and theicallies.

le~el, by backlash and threats

demdustnalIzat~on a~d ec?nomlc

In,

~ther

words,

thl~

volume seeks to challenge anthropologists to take

~-

a de facto structure...which combines socioeconomic and racial antagonsims

and in which (1) a minority of whites occupies the pole of aftluence, while a
majority composed of other races occupies the pole .of poverty; (2). social
integration of the two groups is made extremely difficult by barners of
complexion, economic position, political boundaries, and other factors; (3)

economic development of the two groups is interdependent; and (4) the

affluent white minority possesses a disproportionately large share of the world

society's polticial, economic, and military power (1990:457-458).

Whether in South Africa, Papua New Guinea (see Buck's chapter), or on the global level,
under conditions of apartheid racial exploitation is inextricably interwined with patterns of
class formation that arise in situations and contexts of colonial/imperialist expansion and
domination-- where land alienation, coerced labor exaction, and repressive state power are

key features of the social formation (cf. Mag~bane 1979). ':Iavil~nd.insists th~,t the world
system of apartheid engenders structural VIOlence which IS bUilt mto and. exerted by
situations" such as world hunger, over~population, pollution, and cultures of dIscontent. In
other words, he traces the source of humanity's major contemporary problems back to

m~~e seri~~sly the

enduring race/class ine~a.l(jies.,--.-.--..,_ .

cnt~ques, ~onstructIons, and theoretical deliberations of scholars belonging to neglected,

penpher~llzed, or erased traditions that have long confronted and challenged colonial and
~~wer and economic relations.
The major impetus for
trarsformatlOn and for theo~zzng about it must come out of the experiences and struggles of
neoco]omaI, structures of

Third World peoples m Afnca, ASIa and the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean and

t~e beast,'! n~mely the lIin!~rnaI colonies" within the so-cal1ed First World,
. The trajectory ou.t1~ned here is a synthetic one that draws upon four major streams:
(1) a neo~MafXIst polItIcal economy, (2) experiments in interpretive and reflexi e
ethnographiC analysis, (3) a feminism which underscores the impact race and class have up~n
"the belly of

gender, and (4) traditions of radical Black and (other) Third World scholarship which
acknowledge the interplay between race and other forms of invidious difference, notably

clas~ a~d gen~er,

cap,It,ahsm,

For anth:opology to be able lito theorize the sociocultural terrain" of late

It must, as Ulm and others argue, reconciJe the tensions between Marxist

polItICal econo~y and interpretive/te~t.ualist approaches. An authentic study of humankind

must also recon":!.le te~slons benveen cntlcal Western and Third World intellectual traditions (cf.
Joh~son 1988). This collectIOn results from a project with its beginnings in an invited

seSSIOn that, orgam~ed and ,encoura~ed such reconciliations among female and male
anthropologIsts of dIverse raetal, ethmc, class, and national backgrounds,

"~~--Paradnxicany;-despite

. .

...

the pervasiveness of racIahzed structures of mequa,h~, neIther

mainstream nor radical/critical anthropology has contributed a wealth of Illslght and

\"1 knowledge to our '\ll)dersta~.~Lng "f _.racism'!n? .the so~io.'!lturaL"Qlj,!tnKti.Q1Ulf rad~L

i d~ences Jru:e D'Amico-Samuels' chapter). W.hile ant~ropology IS m the pOSItIon to benefit

vJ and mature from feminist th~ories of kinship (e.g., Collier and YanaglSako 1987), the state
!

(e.g., Sacks 1974, Silverbl~tt 1987, Gailey 1987), politics (e.~., Bookm~n and Morg~n 1988),
economic life (e.g., Bossen 1989; Lamphere 1987), and SOCIal mequahty (e.g., Collier 1988,
Caulfield 1981), tQ<: anthropology ofrace is a relatively underdeveloped and sore.lY neglected

,dom~i_n. Anthropology's preoccupati?n ,with redressing eth~oce~t!ism does not .exoner~te

it from' neglecting to confront, both

III

Illtellectual and sOCiopolitical terms,

r~clsm/Wblte

,supremacy as a major ideological and institutionalized ~or~e, in today's r ~orld~ ..... The
connotations of a racialized Other --its most extreme and mVldlOus form bemg the Black
Other -- have been and, unfortunately, still remain underpinnings of many anthropological

assumptions and perspectives (Pandian 1985; Blakey's chapter).

.
The emphasis within the discipline on cultu~aldIffer~nces h~~ diverted neede,d,
attention away from differenCe. constructed ultlffiately from the polItICal and economic
"processes that have given rise to the dominant pattern of II world de:elo~m:nt. C~ass,
gender, racial, and ethnic differences cannot be reduced to cultural dIverSIty, espeCIally

when the latter is often a smokescreen behind which power disparities and economic
polarizations lie unaddressed or inadequately treated. As Rollwagen (1988:153-154) and
Wolf (1982:387) note in their treatments of the world system, the very concept of culture,
which has been so central to sociocultural anthropology, must be reconstructed, and culture
theory must "take account of larger [contexts and wider fields of force]" (Wolf 1982:387).
Moreover, a critical theory of culture must be freed from the Social Darwinist implications

intellectual response largely by Western White males to the challenges to W~stem ~ege~ony
and White supremacy in a world marked by the ascendanc~ of postcololllal natIonah~~s.,
Japanese capitalism and feminism (ef, West 1988 and Hardlllg 1987). There are femlmst
critics who go so fa; as to argue that postmodernism is "fundamentally a sexist [and, one

could add racisl] response that attempts to preserve the legitimacy of androcentric [am:!
Eurocent:ic] claims in the face of contrary evid~nce" (Masci~-Lees et aJ. 1989:15), Ironically,
postmodernist literary experiments that essenttally undermme the ?ntologlcal status of the
subject have risen in academic popularity when WOl!!eJ1 and Third ~orl? thLons~s are
hallenging the universality and hegemony ofWest~m aml.androce?tflc vt~w~, ThIS. h~s

of many evolutionist postulates concerning human cultural variation.

The centrality of race is finally being recognized by some feminist scholars (e.g., Sacks
1989, Morgen 1988, Moore 1988) who, over the past two decades, have matured from three
phases of feminist anthropology (Moore 1988). The third phase (following one devoted to
the study of women and. ano~her focused on gender) is concerned with ~fop_S_~~~~!~.!lJL
11 ~amenes_s_and_ understandmg_d_]fferef!.ces~- understanding, for .example-, -how- race and_.class--shape ~nd divide gender identity and experii;mce (see D'Amico-Samuels' and Harrison's

i'i
,I

':1

, :i
:!

'/1

,chapters), Recent studies point to the integral parts both genderization and racialization
play in the consolidation of ruling class hegemony in state societies (e.g" Silverblatt 1987 and
1988, Greenberg 1980) and in the international division of labor (Nash and Fernandez-Kelly
1983; Leacock, Safa et al. 1986). Anthropologists have reached a point where they can
, ,- potentially formulate theoretical explanations that place the race/gender/class intersection
at the very center of such phenomena as economic development, social change, and the

I,/
\

politics of domination, resistance, and contestation.3

If anthropologists are to contribute to the study of race and its intersections with

gender, class, and ethnicity, then they would benefit from revisiting and critically building
upon a body of knowledge produced by anthropologists who were generally forced to work
and struggle in an intellectual periphery (see Harrison 1988). The results of Allison Davis'
collaborative scholarship, e,g" Children of Bondage (1940) and Deep South (1941), SI. Clair
Drake and Horace Cayton's classic Black Metropolis (1945), and Drake's two volume tour
de force, Black Folk Here and There (1987, 1991) are just examples of classic works that have
yet to receive their deserved attention and appreciation within anthropology. (See Harrison
[1988] for further discussion on the peripheralization of Davis' and Drake's activist

scholarship and critique of racism.)

What's 'Postmodernism' Gotla Do With It?

According to its enthusiasts, postmodernism has moved onto anthropology's "cutting

edge" and has the potential to liberate the discipline from its dysfunctional
modernist/positivist/realist legacy (Turner 1987:72), In the social sciences modernism is
characterized by the positivist/realist model of science, which in anthropology legitimates the
authority of the outsider/Western researcher in the study of non-Western cultures.
According to this model, the production of knowledge takes place outside the realm of
values and politics and under conditions of unbiased objectivity (Jordan n,d,). This posture
Serves to mask and authenticate the underlying logic, value orientation, and ideology of a
Eurocentric intellectual supremacy (see Joseph et aJ. 1990 and Amin 1989).
Postmodernism is a general epistemological orientation influenced by poststructuralism, hermeneutics, and neo-Marxism.

It can be argued that it represents an

. :,~,virave implications for the legitima~ a~thonty of counter-hegemOnIc contnbu Ions WIthIn
:;

~he domain of established academIa.

Although the postmodernist turn's critique of positivism and realist writing is certamly
a significant contribution, its other features are seriously p~oblematic. Jo~~an (n,d.) ~oints
out a number of serious 1imitations: the extreme relatiVism and skep~Icism (cf. FIscher
1986:194) which invalidate radical critique from the ranks of the poh:lcally, engaged (~f.
Mascia-Lees et aJ. 1989); the reaction against scientific do?,atism that ~ves flse to a demal

of the validity and reliability of theoretical explanaMn, (ef. Ffledman 1987~; the
appropriation and neutralization of the conc~pts ~f cont~adlct~on, power, and aut~oflty (cf.
di Leonardo 1989); the conceptualization of dIalogIC relat~onshlps as text~alstr~tegles rather
than as concrete collaborations (e.g., co-authorshIp and co-edItorship) between
ethnographers and informants; IIdispersal of authority!! as .a narr~tive techmque or ~~le
rather than as a means of empowering informants (e.~., by Impa~mg. rese.arch and ~f1tmg
skills to them); the privileging of the force of rhetonc over mstItutlo~ahzed ~el~tlons ~f
power (di Leonardo 1989); the absence of attention to racism and class m~quahty III po~ttc
treatments of authority and power; and a notion of cultural critique that IS largely hmited

to giving privileged Americans the benefits of c.r?ss-cultu!al kn?~le?ge. Jordan con~ludes

that postmodernism privileges poetics over pohttcs, and Its pohttcs IS ~hat of academta and
not of the world at large. (See his chapter in this volume.) As Fabl~n (1983), notes, the
dilemmas postmodernism poses cannot be resolved by te~tual a~d, eplstet;J0logtcal means;
they can only be resolved through political struggle. A genumely cnttc~l/r~dlcal anthropolo~
must "go beyond the relativizing of narratives to chalknge the explOltattv~ and h~g~~on~c
social practices and social formations among our co-subjects of anthropologtcal tnqutry (Uhn
1991:81).

A decolonizing and <lecolonized anthropology can tndeed

f' f
ene It. rom.an

tlexperimental moment,!! but one directed toward the empowerment of Its studIed

populations. Jordan's fieldwork (see his chapter here) demons~ates how, cOl.tcrete
collaborative relationships can serve to disperse ethnographic authonty III the dIrectIOn of
the traditional "objects" of study. Jordan's research (as well as the analyses that all the, other
contributors present) demonstrates how cultural critiq~e .~s politicized deconstruction of
various hegemonic ideologies and discourses can be a sIgmfI~ant. an~ necessary compon~nt
of broader struggles for equality, social and economIC JustIce, and far-reachmg
democratization.
.
.

Also at issue is the dissemination of ethnographic representations to WIder audIences

that include the ordinary folk anthropologists typically study. Experimental ethnographies
5

are generally geared to the cultural and intellectual tastes of educated Western readers.
Anthropologists need to experiment with a wider repertoire of communicative strategies,
techniques, and media in order to address more --but not necessari1y all-- of their work to
lay readers. It also must be recognized that the published text is not the most accessible,
appealing, and effective mediim for communicating with some, if not many, of the audiences
that anthropologists need to reach. Ethnography can also be presented through such media
as video, film, and drama (se.e Harrison 1990a and D'Arnico-Samuels' chapter). When
ethnography is in written form, it must be straight-forward and clear if a broad cross-section
of readers is to be engaged. Bettylou Valentine's approach to ethnographic writing entailed
extensive inputs and co-editing insights from her African-American inner-city informants.
The resultant ethnography on ghetto life styles (1978) did not, however, compromise its
intellectual contribution.
It is important to recognize that artistry, creative experimentation, and discipJinary
boundary blurring, which are so very prominent in postmodernist anthropology are not
pe~uJiarly "postmodern.1I Zora Neale Hurston and Katherine Dunham are just two ~xamples
?f ~ntellectuals who, through ~he use of literary art and dance theatre, took anthropological
mSlghts and knowledge to WIder audiences beginning more than five decades ago-- long
before postmodernism,postcoloniaIism,postindustrialism, or post- anything was in vogue. (See
Aschenbrenner [1989] and Mikell [1989] for intellectual biographies of these peripheralized
anthropologists.)

The Politics of Canon Setting

Harrison (1988) and Lutz (1990) have exposed trends within anthropology which have
effectively peripheralized or erased significant contributions made by peoples of color and
women from the canon. These trends have served to reproduce andro- and Buro-centric
biases in the assumptions, concepts, and theories at the core of the discipline. Although
anth,ropology i~ preoccupied with human cultural diversity, multiple cultural perspectives-partICularly ThIrd World/non-Westernt'minority" perspectives-- have been distanced from
sites of cross-cultural theory-validation (cf. Blakey 1988:4; cf. Hsu 1973; see D'ArnicoSamuels' ch~pter). The underlying assumption seems to be that cultural, epistemological,
and theoretIcal perspectives outside of the Eurocentric canon are less adequate, less
"universal," and less "scientific" --in other words, inferior; and both modernist and
postmodernist approaches have placed "native" theorizing on tenuous ground.
These hidden but deeply ingrained presuppositions are not unrelated to the
conservative biases reflected in the multiculturalism/cultural diversity debates being waged
throughout the U.S. Conservatives are inclined to believe that cultural literacy is necessarily
based on aSSimilating the IIfacts and truths" associated with the Western intellectual tradition,
Consequently, when universities and school systems "accommodate" multiculturalist curricular
changes, academic "standards" are lowered and the "politically correct" "propagandal1 of
speci~l interest ~roups is "forced" upon the majority (cf. Moses 1990). The historical
expenences and mtellectual contributions of "minorities" and women are relegated to the
status of ~pedal interes!.tr~~~,.~n~llre not viewed as deserving of scholarly validation outside
of the establlSlretIl!fUdyof social problems" or the authorized curricular menu of expendable
6

"add and stir" electives. Institutionalized anthropology is not untouched by these. s~n~im~nts.

i~A socially responsible and genuinely critical anthropology sh?uld challeng? thl~ ImqUlto~s

-reaction, and; furthermore, ~et a positive example by promotmg cu1tural diverSIty where It
-counts, at its very core,
,
.
tl
Jon~s has pointed out how "native anthropologists have hIstOrically been relegated
to the ranks of overqualified fieldwork a~sista!1ts. He has stated that

ef(""--""'" __"' __

o.o.o_oo.

the native anthropologist is seen ... not as a professional who wil1 con?u~t
research and develop theories and generalizations, but a~ a person ;thO IS m
a position to collect information in his own cu1ture to which an outSIder does
not have access (1970 [1988]:31).
A decolonize.d. an. t.h. r.o. po.logy/equires the c:le'yJ'lQI'.m~nt()C'th~~~~.o~!~do;n."non,w.,estern",.
rece ts and ~~~u.mptj,Q!1[: (Ibid.); however, tlthere is as. yet no.~et of theoretIc~1 ~pnclu$l.onR
~enerliiea from the point~f view of native anthropologl~ts" (~bld.:30). ~ questIon that m~st
be raised is this: when natives of the various cultures den~ed hIStOry and mtellectual aut~onty
do indeed theorize, are those theori"!'.J!igi!im~led? Are they even acknQwle~ged ashlgh.er- o
order explanation~?;';utz' analysis cog~ntly demons~rates t~at ~ven when a .slz~ble quantity
of women adhere to the publish or pensh rules, theu contnbutlons to the .lIterature ca~ be
and, in effect} ~r~ b.eJJ1g._!?ra~c~~" In her:;::i erasures, ~esult when contrlbutI?~s are not CIted
nor included in literature overviews
An addItional means of partIal era~ure or
peripheralization occurs, however, wh n works ~re cited for rea~ons other .than thel~ actual
tlleoretical import. This tltracking" process dlve~ts an~, restncts attentIon. to mmor.~!
secondary points concerning "interesting ethnographic data or n?rrow geogr.aphlcally-spec~flc
topics. While the latter are not at all insignificant, :he authonty to explam and generalIze
beyond the specificity of limited field data (and, m the ~ase. of Bla~k scholars, ~eyond
knowledge/mastery of the "Black condition':I."~IS the bottom lIne m effectIvely mfluencmg the
direction and scope of inquiry)."....s there a 'gla~s c~ilinglt .in a~ademia comparable to what
women and people of color have encountered In big ~us.me~s ..~'-.
.
Ul.t.im.7.ly<canonSettiriiriS a process em?edded In m..ilil!!J!2!!~l!ze<!.rel!lij9!1s. Q[power
,El!,Jcj."m.!!hQtit): Research and scholarship Itd~s]g.ne~ to contnbute to the empower~ent of
disempowere groups [require] appropnate Insltt."tlOnal b~ses, a~d these can be bUIlt only
in part [if even that much] from existing foundations WIthIn, for mstance, such establIshe.d
institutions as schools, colleges and universities" (Harrison 1990b: 10). Count~r-hegemomc
analysts must be concerned with '~~iftil!g.!!1~",en~er of authorlty.oo~.!'_(L!~lltll1Jl.JlfYc'Mfmm
\those .. .institutions which our people do not contr?l tomore ~emo~rat~cally.st~l1ct~re.d bas,es
which embody the interests and prioritie,s of ordmary.. .folk m theIr dIverSIty (Ibld .. ll).
l~~
Native anthropologies (Jones 1970) and meaningful reconciliations between Western
and non-Western theories and epistemologie,s/(Johnson 1988) are contmgent upon a
sociopolitical climate and institutional alignment~ that ~Ilow f?r and suppo~t. the
democratization of intellectual and theoretical a~thonty/ Outs~d~ of thiS context of polItlca.lly
engaged authority dispersal, radical anthropological scholarship IS vulner~ble to the v~ganes
of trends and vogues which influence the ways that critical and potentIally emanclpatory
knowledge is neutralized and appropriat~d (see Gordon's chapter).
7

Perspectives on DecoJoJiizing Anthropology

From the Contributors

This volume explores the epistemological, methodological, political, and ethical
parameters of~mde of anthropological inquiry ge~r-"d toward social. t[an~forma!!QlL'mcJ_ _
hurna!} Ii~tu h Building upon earlier critiques,fthis collection offers critical perspectives
'
O'ini:fiT11i=Opo]o as colonial discourse (Buck), the invidious biodeterministic implications of
hegemonic museological categories and representations (Blakey), cultural critique and
politicizei:l discourse deconstruction (Jordan), ethical hierarchies and tensions between
professionalism and higher moral and political values (Bourgois), reflexivity and ethnographic
politics (Harrison), the constraints of hegemony upon popular consciousness and struggle
(Hale an~ G~rdon), and mille~arian underpinnings of U.S. militarism (Gilliam).
D An1Jco~SamueIs, Harnson, BourgOis and Gordon offer perspectives on various ways
tha~ . anthro~ologists-- as "organic intell~~tuals" or othelWise-- ~~Lngage th~m~~y~~__
._p-()IItIcally wIth_Jb~ pe~ples and commumtIeS that host ethnog!~pl:!i.cjllves.!iglltlo/l. __The
Importance of demystIf'ying hegemonic ideOlogies Ifnd- priiducinglco-producing forms of
knowledge. th~t c~n be ?seful and potentially liberating for the world's dispossessed and
oppressed IS hIghlIghted m several chapters, particularly in those by Buck Jordan Harrison
Gord.on, Hale, and Gi1liam.
Bourgoi.s, Gordon, and Hale offer insightful ~nalyses of
conflIcts and st~uggles around ~~__ ~lghts ,violatio.ns, militant ethnic self-determination,
F?urthW~rld Ideology, k1gl()-I1<;llemo~y, and revolutioriiiry-poIil!cs--iif-Nicaragua and
elsewhere III Central Amenca. I/' - --Blak~y and D'~ico-Samuels underscore the racist underpinnings of many
anthropologtcal perspectIves and concerns, from the conventions associated with exhibiting
the peopl~s and ~ultures of Sub-Saharan Africa in museums to 'postmodernism's
preoccupatIons ~nd mtertextual biases. The insidiousness of racism is especially underscored
when Bl~key dlscus~es the problem of the racially oppressed consenting to biological
de~ermmlst assumptlOns about "race," and when D~Amico-Samuels briefly mentions her
pam~ul estrangement .from her family because of ber commitment to racial equality.
Hamson. ~xplores th.e Impact race combined with gender and class have upon self-identity
and _~oht1cal conSCIOusness, and how the latter: inform and influence ethnographic
expenence.
Gilliam's crit~q~e of U.S. militarism is premised upon a "parallelH analysis that
employs concepts ongmally constructed for studying the exoticized Other. Drawing in part
upon Buck's compe11ing deconstruction of the "cargo-cult" construct Gilliam elucidates the
re~~vance o~ this "mi11en~rian!l notion for understanding the logi~ and workings of the
ffilh!ar;-capltal accum~lat1on complex. She connects global racism, capital accumulation,
Ch~IstI~n. fundamentalIsm, and the hegemonic definition of masculinity with the U.S.'s
mlht~rtstIc responses to geopolitical conflicts and struggles for egalitarianism in Grenada, the
PersIan Gulf, and elsewhere.
The reification of Otherness is problematized by a number of chapters, but D'AmicoSamuels, Harnson, and Gordon are especially forthright in their assertions concerning the
concept of "the field" and the relations of affinity, kinship, and solidarity that anthropologists
may have WIth the peoples among whom they work. On a whole, these chapters question

whvther:(l;I1~hropology can continue to be preoccupied with constructions and. re~resentations

of Othernes's'if the discipline is to undergo a thorough process of decolomzatIOn.

~ -Contrary to the extreme versions of the "ethnography as fiction" approach, the
analyses presented here do not exp~ess th.e "epistemic skepti~is~ ... and e~l.~natory
agnosticism or nihilism" (West 1991:XXI) that IS strongly refle~ted In dec~nstructIVe trends
today. Among the anthropologists represented here, theoretIcal explanatIons are sought to
be acted upon in creative, socially responsible, human-centered ways.
The Intended Significance of this Colleclion
..
This collection aims to go beyond antecedent cntIques, proposals, and agenda by
dvancing an analytical comprehensiveness generally lacking in most of the earlier
~ontributions. Analyses presented here confront the major sources of Itdiffere.nce,", i~equal~ty,
nd structural and symbolic violence in the world today. Race and class dIspantIes, WhICh
:nthropologists are too prone to neglect Of ignore, are j~jned w~th ge?der to assume their
rightful place at the center of political as well as theore~l~al delIberatlO~.
This book amplifies the central role of polItIcally responSIble Third World
ll
intellectuals.
While earlier critiques have dealt with "native anthropologists ~nd. the
significance of their prospective contributions, thi~ volum~ attempts to pr~ss thIS l~s~e
further. In a world in which de facto apartheId prevaIls, and where blOdetermmIst
presuppositions are extant in popular beliefs and in. ttscient~fictt research on race. an?
intelligence, the disciplinary role and potentialleader~hlp o~ :hUd World anthropologIsts IS
a thorny but imperative issue. The varieties of Marxist pohtlcal. economy! ~ostmodermsm,
and feminism that Ulin (1991) identifies as the major contenders In determ~mng the contours
and content of lithe critical anthropological project" are overly Eurocentnc and, except for
feminist anthropology, androcentric. How can an authentically ~ritical anthropology
equipped to identify and help solve the world's problet;ts b.e d?mmated by. eve.n well
intentioned and truly radical representatives of the world s mmonty? Authonty. dIsp~r~al
cannot be limited to textualist experiments in representing Others when the prevaIlmg
political climate and epistemological tenor calls into question the very legitimacy of the
explanations and resolutions that historically defined Oth~rs offer.
.. .
The papers here also suggest that for meanIngful dmlogue and reconCIlIatIOn to take
place across boundaries of culture and nationality, race, ~lass, and gender, m~~h more than
logically-sounding talk is required. The political.autho~Ity structure and polItIcal econ~my
of profeSSional anthropology must be seriously dealt WIth and changed before condItIons
can exist for the kinds of principled debates and syntheses that can generate human-~entered
inquiry. Only on such an altered terrain can Western. an? n~n-W~stern anthropologIsts truly
work together as partners with equalized access to mstltutIOnahzed resources and power.,
Finally, this book underscores anthropologists' responsibi!i~. to ~truggle n.ot only for
the enhancement of Third World intellectuals and the poiItICIzatlOn of FIrst World
researchers but also for the empowerment of those most alienated from and dispossessed
of their rights to democratized power and the material benefits of economic jU,stice. The
perspectives offered here challenge the received dichotomy between "pure" and "applied"
science or that between social science and advocacy which the proponents of nvalue~freen
researJh assume. Knowledge-production and praxis are inseparable. T?e conceptual
.-~"--.--

..

s~paration built into the received tradition has seIVed to shroud the role Western research
and scholarship have actually played in rationalizing and providing useful information or
tlintelligence!l for sociopolitical control and economic development-- at national and
international levels.
The views expressed in this volume do not exhaust the ideas which can contribute to
the subversion, decolonization, and transformation of anthropological inquiry. However, the
papers included here effectively contribute to the book's principal goal: to encourage more

anthropologists to accept the challenge of working to free the study of humankind from the
prevailing forces of global inequality and dehumanization and to locate it firmly in the
complex struggle for genuine transformation.
Notes

Acknowledgments. Many thanks are due to Willie Baber, Angela Gilliam, and Arthur Spears
for theIr generous and helpful comments on an earlier version of this essay, and to Pem
Buck, Deborah D'Amico-Samuels, Edmund ItTed ti Gordon, Yvonne Jones, Glenn Jordan,
Yolanda Moses, Donald Nonini, Hehln Page, and others for the insightful conversations that

stimulated my thinking about anthropology's possibilities for making a real difference. This
essay is dedicated to the legacy of Eduardo Chivambo Mondlane, the founder and first
pr~side~t of the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO). A sociologist also
tramed m anthropology, Mondlane was on the faculty of Syracuse University's anthropology
department during the 1960s. His activism and scholarShip (e.g., 1969) reflected his concern
with racial and national' oppressions, the liberation struggle, and education's role in
reproducing colonial orders. In 1969 Mondlane was assassinated in Dar es Salaam.
1. This is an allusion to W.E.B. Du Bois' prolific contributions on lithe color linell and the

"veil" of separation (Harrison 1990c).

Nations-- for "non-aligned" Third World scholarship (personal communication from Angela
Gilliam; Gilliam 1985).
References Cited
Amin, Samir

1989 Eurocentrism. New York: Monthly Review Press.

A,ad, Talal, ed.
1975 Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter. London: Ithaca Press.
Aschenbrenner, Joyce

. ,

1989 Katherine Dunham. In Women Anthropologists: Selected BIOgraphies.

Ute Gacs et aI., eds. pp. 80-87. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Blakey, Michael
1988 A Comment on Representation. Notes from the ABA 14(2):2-4.
Bookman, Ann and Sandra Morgen, eds.
.,
..
1988 Womena and the Politics of Empowerment. PhdadelphIa: Temple Umverslty
Press.
Bossen, Laurel

1989 Women and Economic Institutions. In Economic Anthropology. Stuart Plattner,

ed. pp. 318-350.
Caulfield, Mina Davis
. , .
1981 Equality, Sex, and Mode of Production. In SOCIal Inequabty: Comparatlve and .
Development Approaches. Gerald D. Berreman, ed. pp. 201-219. New York: AcademiC
Press.
Collier, Jane

1988 Marriage and Inequality in Classless Societies. Stanford: Stanford University

Press.

2. This emphasis on the critical traditions within both Western and Third World intellectual
trajectories is made in recognition that neither Western nor any non-Western scholarship is
~omogene~us or monolithic.
There are oppositional paradigms within Western

mtellectuahsm that can potentially make an important contribution to an authentically

transformative anthropology.
3. Ih her role as a discussant for the 1990 AAA session entitled, "Other Appropriations:
Whe? Symbolic Violence Becomes Symbolic Capital," Brackette Williams pointed out that
dommatIon and resIstance are not opposite processes or phenomena, as is often implied.

The problem of contestation has been neglected.

4. Before the U.S. withdrew its support in 1985, UNESCO represented an important site
for the production of innovative and internationalist knowledge. That scholarship challenged
the unequal distribution of the world's material and ideological resources as wen as the

theo~e.tical justifications for global. disparities. The U.S. withdrawal --under the Reagan

admmlstratIon-- sabotaged a major mternatlOnal source of institutional support --the United

10

Collier Jane F. and Sylvia J. Yanagisako, ed.

1987' Gender and Kinship: Essays Toward a Unified Analysis. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.

Davis, Allison and John Dollard

.
1940 Children of Bondage: The Personality of Negro Youth m the Urban South.
Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.

Davis, Allison, Burleigh B. Gardner, and Mary R. Gardner

1941 Deep South: A Social Anthropological Study of Caste and Class. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
di Leonardo, Micaela

1989 Malinowski's Nephews. The Nation, March 13, pp. 350-351.

Drake, St. Clair
1987 Black Folk Here and There: An Essay in History and Anthropology, Volume I.
Los Angeles: Center for Mro-American Studies, University of California-Los
Angeles.
1990 Black Folk Here and There: An Essay in History and Anthropology, Volume II.
Los Angeles: CAAS, UCLA.
11

Dr~ke,

St. Clair and Horace Cayton

Huizer, Gerrit and Bruce Mannheim, eds.

1945 Black Metropolis: A Study of Negro Life in a Northern City New York: Harcourt
Brace & World, Inc.
Fabian, Johannes

"

1983 Ti'."e and the Other: How Anthropology Makes its Object. New York: Columb,'a
Umverslty Press.

Fischer, Michael M. J.
1986 Ethnicity and the Post Modern Arts of Memo Ii W"
ntmg
and Politics of Ethnography. James Clifford and Gry. n E
Culture: The Poetics
Berkeley: University of California Press
eorge . Marcus, eds. pp. 194-233.
Friedman, Jonathan
.
1987 Be~o~d Otherness: The Spectacularization of Anthrop I

Galley, Chnstme W.

oogy. Telos 71:161-170.

h
1987 From Kinship to Kingship' Gend H'
. Islands. Austin: University of T~xas p;;ss.lerarc y and State Formation in the Tongan
GIlham, Angela
1985 The Reagan Administration Confronts the Third World
Quarter:90-94.
. Freedomways, Second
Gough, Kathleen
1968 Anthropology: Child of Imperialism. Monthly Review 19(11):12-27.
Greenberg, Stanley
1980 Race and State in Capitalist De I
C
Yale University Press.
ve opment: omparative Perspectives. New Haven:
Harding, Sandra
1987 Introduction: Is There a Feminist Method? l F ..
H.arding, ed. pp. 1-14. Bloomington: Indiana un7ver~~tym;m and Methodology. Sandra
Harnson, Faye V.
ress.
1988 Introduction' An African D'
P
.
Folks in Cities He;e and There: C~::;~~a erspecnve for Urb?n Anthropology. Black
issue of Urban Anthropology and St~di~.r~:t~~~ of DommatlOn and Response. Special
Development 17(2-3):111-141.
u ural Systems and World Economic
1990a "Three Women One Struggle'" Anthr
I
Transforming Anthro~ology 1(1)'1-9'
opo ogy, Performance, and Pedagogy.
1990b From the Pr 'd t T
. '.
1990 Th D
. eSl en. ransformmg Anthropology 1(1):10-11
c
e u BOlsJan Legacy in Anth
I
P
.
aper prNesented at the 89th Annual
Meeting of the American Anthropolo;~!a~

':1' .

New Orleans, Louisiana.

SOclatlOTI.

ovember 27-December 2.

Haviland, William A.

1~~~. Cultural Anthropology. Sixth Edition. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
Hsu, Francis
1973 Prejudice and its Intellectual Effects in American Anth
I
Am'
Anthropologist 75:1-19.
ropo ogy.
encan

1979 The Politics of Anthropology: From Colonialism and Sexism Toward a View from
Below. The Hague: Mouton Publishers.
Hymes, Dell, ed.
1979 Reinventing Anthropology. New York: Vintage Books.

Johnson, Norris Brock

198 Image and Archetype: Male and Female as Metaphor in the Thought of Carl G.
Jung and Ogotmmeli of the Dogon. Dialectical Anthropology 13:45-62.
Jones, Delmas
1970 Towards a Native Anthropology. Human Organization 29(4):251-259. Reprinted in
Anthropology for the Nineties. Johnetta B. Cole, ed. pp. 30-41. New York: The Free
Press.
Jordan, Glenn

n.d. Beyond the New Cultural Anthropology: Subjects, Objects and the Politics of
Representation. Unpublished manuscript.

Joseph, George Gheverghese et a!.

1990 Eurocentrism in the Social Sciences. Race & Class 31(4):1-26.
Lamphere, Louise

1987 From Working Daughters to Working Mothers: Immigrant Women in a New

England Industrial Community. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Leacock, Eleanor, Helen I. Safa, and Contributors
1986 Women's Work: Development and the Division of Labor by Gender. South Hadley,
MA: Bergin & Garvey Publishers, Inc.
Lewis, Diane K.

1973

Ethnologist 17(4):611-627.
Magubane, Bernard M.
1979 The Political Economy of Race and Class in South Africa. New York: Monthly
Review Press.

Magubane, Bernard M. and James C. Faris

1985 On the Political Relevance of Anthropology. Dialectical Anthropology 9:91-104.
Mascia-Lees, Frances et a1.

1989 The Postmodernist Turn in Anthropology: Cautions from a Feminist Perspective.

Signs 15(1):7-33.
Mikell, Gwendolyn
1989 Zora Neale Hurston. In Women' Anthropologists: Selected Biographies. Ute Gacs
et a!., eds. pp. 160-166. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Mondlane, Eduardo
1969 The Struggle for Mozambique. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, Ltd.
Reprinted in 1983 by Zed Press (London).
Moore, Henrietta

1988
12

Anthropology and Colonialism. Current Anthropology 14(5):581-597.

Lutz, Catherine
1990 The Erasure of Women's Writing in Sociocultural Anthropology. American

Feminism and Anthropology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

13

Morgen, Sandra
1988 The Dream of Diversity, the Dilemma of Difference: Race and Class Contradictions
in a Feminist Health Clinic. In Anthropology for the Nineties. Johnnetta B. Cole, ed.
pp.370-380. New York: The Free Press.
Moses, Yolanda T.
1990 The Challenge of Diversity: Anthropological Perspectives on University Culture.
Education and Urban Society 22(4):402-412.
Nash, June and Maria Patricia Fernandez-Kelly, ed.
1983 Women, Men, and the International Division of Labor. Albany: State University
of New York Press.
Pandian, Jacob
1985 Anthropology and the Western Tradition: Toward an Authentic Anthropology.
Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Rollwagen, Jack
1988 New Directions in Urban Anthropology. In Urban Life: Readings in Urban
Anthropology. George Gmelch and Walter P. Zenner, eds. pp. 149-160.
Sacks, Karen
1974 Engels Revisited: Women, the Organization of Production, and Private Property.
In Women, Culture, and Society. Michelle Z. Rosaldo and Louise Lamphere, eds. pp.
207-222. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
1989 Towards a Unified Theory of Class, Race, and Gender. American Ethnologist
16(3):534-550.
.
Silverblatt, Irene

1987 Moon, Sun, and Witches: Gender Ideologies and Class in Inca and Colonial Peru.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
1988 Women in States. In Annual Review of Anthropology 17:427.460.
Turner, Victor
1987 The Anthropology of Performance. New York: PN Publications, Performing
Arts Journal, Inc.
Ulin, Robert C.
1991 Critical Anthropology Twenty Years Later: Modernism and Postmodernism in
Anthropology. Critique of Anthropology 11(1):63-89.
Valentine, Betty Lou
1978 Hustling and Other Hard Work: Life Styles in the Ghetto. New York: The Free
Press.
West, Cornel
1988 Postmodernism and Black America. Z Magazine, June, pp.27-29.
1991 The Ethical Dimensions of Marxist Thought. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Wolf, Eric
1982 Europe and the People Without History. Berkeley: University of California
Press.

MAN AND NATURE, WIllTE AND OTHER

Michael L. Blakey

There are few concepts in Western thought more vital than that of nature.
Considering the "natural" from the perspective of theology, as lithe state of man unredeemed
by grace,'1 it represents a large chunk of our universe. Yet nat~re .ref~rs to the underlying
drive of behavior' that which is normal and acceptable; and whIch IS gIven to govern much
of our behavior ~s natural law. In realistic art it is the essence of empirical fact; the real
world. We define the natural as the real, objective universe, lias distinguished from the
spiritual, intellectual, or imaginary world." I believe that Ales Hrdlick.a (n.d.), the principal
founder of physical anthropology in the United States, was refemng to the presumed
association between nature and objective reality early in this century, when he wrote that. ..
Pure impersonal science... has nothing to do either with safeguarding the
human society, or with the directing of human progress. It is, however, next
to nature and in some respects even above nature ...
Cartesian reductionism in scientific theory makes of nature the most fundamental and
comprehensive cause of our secular motivatio~s. David Hume i? A Treat~e Of. Human
Nature (1739) had already set the epistemologIcal sta~e for red~cmg the bastc dnves and
logic of humankind to a set of underlying natural prmclples. UltImately: however, the ~dea
that nature is the objective universe seems to have been confounded, III that nature ztseif
(which mayor may not be "objective") and natur~l science theory (that is .intended to
discover natural relationships) have been confused With one another. Natural SCIence theory
is cultural, thereby having no greater claim to objectivity than any other body of theory.
There are other connotations of the natural in the Anglophone West. Nature denotes
the pre-cultural, primitive, uncultivated or uncivilized in. humankind. It is defined as
independent of social law. As it is used to.~refer to th~ subjects of the natu~al sClen~es and
natural history, nature is emphatically sub-human; amma~ plant, and phySIcal. It IS what
remains when the peculiar qualities of sapiens the sentient, cultural, and technological are
omitted.
. .
In its most pejorative, "naturall1 describes the fool and idiot. At its most pleaslllg It
denotes the normal, acceptable, or unpretentious. The white keys on the piano; the removal
of sharps and flats.

14
15