Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Science, Erudition and Relevant Connections

Science, Erudition and Relevant Connections Science, Erudition and Relevant Connections P ASCAL B OYER ¤ Paulo Sousa makes a strong case for applying the best anthropological models of cultural transmission (epidemiological models) to anthropology itself, to the ways in which anthropologists’ choices of topics and methods have changed. Sousa’s model of how kinship got gradually pushed away from its central position in anthropological inquiry is quite persuasive. Here I only propose a slight modiŽ cation of this general model, in the hope of making some of its predictions more speciŽ c. As Sousa points out, scientists’ general statements about their own Ž eld generally consist of interpretative statements that cannot be taken as a straightforward expression of what they actually do. Also, most scientists and academics are generally unaware of (or unconcerned with) the dynamics of authority transmission that organise their own Ž eld, that is, the set of criteria that people actually use when deciding that a given person is a member of a professional guild or community. Authority transmission is important because it has crucial consequences for how Ž elds evolve. ScientiŽ c or more generally academic and scholarly activity is a highly regulated social activity. Each speciŽ c community (generally http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Cognition and Culture Brill

Science, Erudition and Relevant Connections

Journal of Cognition and Culture , Volume 3 (4): 344 – Jan 1, 2003

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/science-erudition-and-relevant-connections-Xn0Uq3PMsh

References (4)

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2003 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1567-7095
eISSN
1568-5373
DOI
10.1163/156853703771818109
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Science, Erudition and Relevant Connections P ASCAL B OYER ¤ Paulo Sousa makes a strong case for applying the best anthropological models of cultural transmission (epidemiological models) to anthropology itself, to the ways in which anthropologists’ choices of topics and methods have changed. Sousa’s model of how kinship got gradually pushed away from its central position in anthropological inquiry is quite persuasive. Here I only propose a slight modiŽ cation of this general model, in the hope of making some of its predictions more speciŽ c. As Sousa points out, scientists’ general statements about their own Ž eld generally consist of interpretative statements that cannot be taken as a straightforward expression of what they actually do. Also, most scientists and academics are generally unaware of (or unconcerned with) the dynamics of authority transmission that organise their own Ž eld, that is, the set of criteria that people actually use when deciding that a given person is a member of a professional guild or community. Authority transmission is important because it has crucial consequences for how Ž elds evolve. ScientiŽ c or more generally academic and scholarly activity is a highly regulated social activity. Each speciŽ c community (generally

Journal

Journal of Cognition and CultureBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2003

There are no references for this article.