Abstract
Warfare among the Marings of New Guinea is reexamined to show that the original analysis suffered from process reification and from the attribution of unwarranted or exaggerated explanatory import to the territorial annexations which were occasional consequences of fighting. Criticisms of the original analysis are shown to be defective also, and an appeal is made, on the one hand, for greater attention to the variability and context-relatedness of purposeful human behavior and, on the other hand, for a recognition that some differences in answers to why-questions are a result of differences in assumptions about what the questions mean.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: 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.
