some notes on post-modernism (pomo) in anthropology and
other social-historical sciences, constructing social theories, graph
method, and theorizing of culture
> From: Juan Luis Chulilla <epaminon@ergos.es>
> All of you are lucky if you aren't
> anthropologist. My discipline is immersed, since some years ago, in a
> bizarre wave of thinking which is called "postmodernism".
Robert Carneiro, an author of an outstanding circumscription theory
of origin of a state, passed me in Wash.DC his paper:
Godzilla Meets New Age Anthropology: Facing the Post-Modernist
Challenge to a Science of Culture //Europaea, 1995, vol 1, N 1
where he severely criticises pomo comparing it with Black Plague.
Tyler, Rosenau, Geertz are main victims of Carneiro's criticisms.
Carneiro is an evolutionary optimist in this issue (as far as pomo
cannot deliever a single solid scientific result in anthropology it
will be thrown out sooner or later). But remembering A.G.Frank's
complaint some months ago concerning discussion on Braudel and pomo
triumphal march through Western Un-s, i think that one should have
some anxiety of possible spread of Black Plague among all social
sciences and paradigms including WS-approach.
isn't it a high time to consolidate forces of objective rational
sciences in social-historical area?
from my viewpoint the best way of counter-attack would be not at
all a criticism of pomo (let it die itself naturally) but more
intensive movement in constucting, testing, synthesizing, exhange of
social theories among several paradigms (f.e. ws-approach,
geopolitics, historical sociology, w-history, (macro)sociology,
sociology, anthropology, hist.geography, hist.environm. studies,
hist.demography, etc.)
for some weeks i am under impression of Arthur Stinchcomb's book
'Constructing Social Theories', i like very much Stinchcomb's strict
logical (hypothetico-deductive) approach combined with full-scale
comprehension of complexity, multi-aspectness, historism, etc etc of
social reality.
I wonder if his approach was apllied by someone in
WS-theory? Take for example how strongly Stincomb deals with graphs
(he managed to present even Marxian core theory as a clear functional
graph),
(BTW, dear Chris and Tom, why not to try to treat your promising
iterative model (in Rise&Demise,1997) by Stinchcomb's instruments?)
concerning this thread - worlviews - i think that it woild be an
unexusable crime to leave culture, ideology, and worldviews to pomo
hands. these fields must be involved into rational. theoretical
scope, and we have good starting points (besides mentioned by Chris):
take f.e. Weber-Collins' version of legitimacy theory, or
Malinowski-Stinchcombs' version of functionality of rituals,
religions, etc
best,
Nikolai
******************************************************
Nikolai S. Rozov, PhD, Dr.Sc. Professor of Philosophy
E-MAIL: rozov@nsu.ru FAX: 7-3832-397101
ADDRESS: Philosophy Dept. Novosibirsk State University
630090, Novosibirsk, Pirogova 2, RUSSIA
Moderator of the mailing list PHILOFHI (PHILosophy OF HIstory and
theoretical history). URL=
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~dew7e/anthronet/subscribe/philofhi.htm
*********************************************************************