Abstracts
Abstract
For much of the 20th century, indigenous cosmologies, understood as the totalizing worldviews of delimited social groups, were one of ethnology’s central topics. In the last few decades, however, the concept of cosmology no longer sat well with many ethnologists’ wariness of identifying social wholes as analytic units and with accepting correspondences of social organization with orders of time, space, and color, among others. Recently, Allen Abramson and Martin Holbraad, in their 2014 book Framing Cosmologies, called for a “second wind” of anthropologists’ attention to cosmologies, now including popular understandings of Western science. While endorsing this broadened attention to cosmology and the uses of analyst’s perspectives, I call for remaining attentive to the practical uses of cosmologies by the actors that ethnographers learn from. This entails attending to the social accountabilities and organizational contexts that constrain how people act. I seek to illustrate this by drawing on ethnographies of fishers in south India as well as of astrophysicists in Germany.
Résumé
Pendant une bonne partie du XXe siècle, les cosmologies autochtones, entendues comme les visions totalisantes du monde propre à des groupes sociaux délimités, étaient l’un des objets centraux de l’ethnologie. Cependant, au cours des dernières décennies, le concept de cosmologie n’a pas résisté à la méfiance de nombreux ethnologues devant la caractérisation d’ensembles sociaux comme unités analytiques, et l’idée d’une correspondance entre l’organisation sociale et les ordres du temps, de l’espace et des couleurs, entre autres. Dans leur livre de 2014, Framing Cosmologies, Allen Abramson et Martin Holbraad ont appelé de leurs voeux un « second souffle » dans l’attention des anthropologues aux cosmologies, intégrant désormais les conceptions populaires de la science occidentale. Tout en souscrivant à cette attention accrue portée à la cosmologie et aux utilisations des perspectives des analystes, j’en appelle à rester attentif aux usages pratiques des cosmologies par les acteurs dont les ethnographes tirent des enseignements. Cela implique de prendre en compte les responsabilités sociales et les contextes organisationnels qui limitent le comportement des individus. Je cherche à illustrer cela en puisant dans des ethnographies de pêcheurs du sud de l’Inde, et d’astrophysiciens en Allemagne.
Appendices
Références
- Abramson, Allen and Martin Holbraad (ed.). 2014. Framing Cosmologies: The Anthropology of Worlds. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
- Ashman, Keith. 2001. “Measuring the Hubble constant: Objectivity under the telescope.” In Keith Ashman and P.S. Baringer (eds.). After the Science Wars: 97-116. London: Routledge.
- Barnes, Barry, David Bloor and John Henry. 1996. Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Barth, Fredrik. 1987. Cosmologies in the Making: A Generative Approach to Cultural Variation in Inner New Guinea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- de Coppet, Daniel and André Iteanu (eds.). 1995. Cosmos and Society in Oceania: Their Interrelations or Their Coalescence in Melanesia. Oxford: Berg.
- Critchley, Simon. 2002. On Humour. London: Routledge.
- Descola, Philippe. 2013. Beyond Nature and Culture, translated by Janet Lloyd. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Douglas, Mary. 1970. Natural Symbols: Explorations in Cosmology. London: Barrie & Rockliff.
- Douglas, Mary. 1973. Rules and Meanings: The Anthropology of Everyday Knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
- Douglas, Mary. 1975. Implicit Meanings: Explorations in Anthropology. London: Routledge.
- Douglas, Mary. 1980. Edward Evans-Pritchard. London: Fontana Books.
- Douglas, Mary. 1982. In the Active Voice. London: Routledge.
- Douglas, Mary. 1992. “Rightness of Categories.” In Mary Douglas and David Hull (eds.). How Classification Works: Nelson Goodman among the Social Sciences: 239-271. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
- Durkheim, Émile and Marcel Mauss. 1963 [1903]. Primitive Classification, translated by Rodney Needham. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Evans-Pritchard, Edward E. 1937. Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic among the Azande. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Faber, Sandra M. et al. 2007. “Galaxy Luminosity Functions to z = 1 from DEEP2 and COMBO-17: Implications for Red Galaxy Formation.” Astrophysical Journal 665: 265-294.
- Fardon, Richard. 1999. Mary Douglas: An Intellectual Biography. London: Routledge.
- Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
- Gellner, Ernest. 1975. “Ethnomethodology: The Re-enchantment Industry or the California Way of Subjectivity.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 5: 431-450.
- Handelman, Don. 2008. “Returning to Cosmology: Thoughts on the Positioning of Belief.” Social Analysis 52(1): 181-195.
- Herzfeld, Michael. 2001. Anthropology: Theoretical Practice in Culture and Society. Malden: Blackwell.
- Hoeppe, Götz. 2007. Conversations on the Beach: Fishermen’s Knowledge, Metaphor and Environmental Change in South India. New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books.
- Hoeppe, Götz. 2011. “Extended Vision: Finding Fish Like South Indian Fishermen.” In Marie-Claude Mahias (ed.), Construire les savoirs dans l’action: Apprentissages et enjeux sociaux en Asie du sud: 205-235. Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.
- Hoeppe, Götz. 2014. “Working Data Together: The Accountability and Reflexivity of Digital Astronomical Practice.” Social Studies of Science 44(2): 243-270.
- Hoeppe, Götz. 2018. “Mediating Environments and Objects as Knowledge Infrastructure.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (forthcoming)
- Jefferson, Gail. 2004. “Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction.” In Gene Lerner (ed.). Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation: 13-31. New York: John Benjamins.
- Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1962. The Savage Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Liberman, Kenneth. 2011. “The Reflexive Intelligibility of Affairs: Ethnomethodological Perspectives on Communicating Sense.” Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure 64: 73-99.
- Liberman, Kenneth. 2013. More Studies in Ethnomethodology. Albany: State University of New York Press.
- Maitlis, Sally and Marlys Christianson. 2014. “Sensemaking in Organizations: Taking Stock and Moving Forward.” Academy of Management Annals 8(1): 57-125.
- Needham, Rodney, 1975, “Review of Mary Douglas, Implicit Meanings.” Man (n.s.) 11(1): 127-128.
- Nicola, Andrina, Adam Amara and Alexandre Refregier. 2017. “Integrated Cosmological Probes: Concordance Quantified.” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 10: article 45.
- Ossio, Juan M. 1997. “Cosmologies.” International Social Science Journal 154: 549-562.
- Pollner, Melvin. 1974. “Mundane Reasoning.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 4(1): 35-54.
- Pollner, Melvin. 1987. Mundane Reason: Reality in Everyday and Sociological Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Primack, Joel R. 2005. “Precision Cosmology.” New Astronomy Reviews 49: 25-34.
- Söhnen-Thieme, Renate. 1995. “On the Concept and Function of sathya (“truth”) in Ancient Indian Literature.” In Cezary Galewicz (ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Sanskrit and Related Studies. Cracow Indological Studies: 235-244. Cracow: Enigma Press.
- Spergel, David et al. 2003. “First-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations: Determination of Cosmological Parameters.” Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 148: 175-194.
- Tresch, John. 2005. “Cosmogram.” In: Melik Ohanian and Jean-Christophe Royoux (eds.). Cosmograms: 67-76. New York: Lukas & Sternberg.
- Viveiros de Castro, Eduardo. 1992. From the Enemy’s Point of View: Humanity and Divinity in an Amazonian Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Weick, Karl. 1995. Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Wieder, Lawrence. 1974. Language and Social Reality: The Case of Telling the Convict Code. The Hague: Mouton.