Abstract
In response to Didier Fassin’s penetrating argument about the enduring role of critique in anthropology, the present comment suggests that the most powerful critical moment for anthropology may derive from its encounter with ethnographical materials that have the power reflexively to reconfigure its analytical infrastructure. But if this is the case, then critique itself, as a part of anthropology’s analytical infrastructure, must also be subject to the same critical operation, open to experimental redefinition as and when its encounters with ethnography make a difference to it. In the current atmosphere of ‘post-truth’, this might be one of the most politically consequent risks anthropology needs to take with itself.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.