Global Anxieties: Concept-Metaphors and Pre-Theoretical Commitments in Anthropology
This article begins by interrogating the problem of the global and the local in anthropology, and asks how their interconnections might be theorized. When anthropologists call for an examination of the global in concrete terms, they often fail to appreciate the place of ‘concept-metaphors’ whose pur...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Anthropological theory 2004-03, Vol.4 (1), p.71-88 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 88 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 71 |
container_title | Anthropological theory |
container_volume | 4 |
creator | Moore, Henrietta L. |
description | This article begins by interrogating the problem of the global and the local in anthropology, and asks how their interconnections might be theorized. When anthropologists call for an examination of the global in concrete terms, they often fail to appreciate the place of ‘concept-metaphors’ whose purpose is to maintain ambiguity and a productive tension between universal claims and specific historical contexts. ‘The global’ is just such a concept-metaphor, a space of theoretical abstraction and processes, experiences and connections in the world, important not only to social scientists but now part of most people’s imagined and experienced worlds. In this article, I examine pre-theoretical commitments common in anthropology that emphasize ‘the local’ via participant-observation, which becomes elided with ethnography. I suggest that anthropology begin to ‘methodologize’ the relation between the global and the local by reviewing several approaches to these problems. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1463499604040848 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60492857</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1463499604040848</sage_id><sourcerecordid>37877114</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c211t-a516675b55aa40fdca0b5bddb92256e21533330f99b84a2695223a1f5693cbaa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1LAzEQxYMoWKvg0aMnb9FMvnMsRatQ8KLnMNnNypbtbk12Qf97U9qTIM4cZuD93sAbQm6A3QMY8wBSC-mcZrK0lfaEzMBIoFxLOC17kelePycXOW8YA8OtmZHrVTcE7G4X_VcbxzbmS3LWYJfj1XHOyfvT49vyma5fVy_LxZpWHGCkqEBro4JSiJI1dYUsqFDXwXGudOSgRCnWOBesRK6d4lwgNEo7UQVEMSd3h7u7NHxOMY9-2-Yqdh32cZiyL0Ect8r8CwpjjQGQBWQHsEpDzik2fpfaLaZvD8zvf-R__6hY6MGS8SP6zTClvmT-m_8BLdVjFw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>37877114</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Global Anxieties: Concept-Metaphors and Pre-Theoretical Commitments in Anthropology</title><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Moore, Henrietta L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Moore, Henrietta L.</creatorcontrib><description>This article begins by interrogating the problem of the global and the local in anthropology, and asks how their interconnections might be theorized. When anthropologists call for an examination of the global in concrete terms, they often fail to appreciate the place of ‘concept-metaphors’ whose purpose is to maintain ambiguity and a productive tension between universal claims and specific historical contexts. ‘The global’ is just such a concept-metaphor, a space of theoretical abstraction and processes, experiences and connections in the world, important not only to social scientists but now part of most people’s imagined and experienced worlds. In this article, I examine pre-theoretical commitments common in anthropology that emphasize ‘the local’ via participant-observation, which becomes elided with ethnography. I suggest that anthropology begin to ‘methodologize’ the relation between the global and the local by reviewing several approaches to these problems.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1463-4996</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-2641</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1463499604040848</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Anthropological theory ; Anthropology ; Ethnography ; Global Local Relationship ; Globalization ; Local communities ; Metaphor ; Social construction ; Social theory ; Theoretical Problems</subject><ispartof>Anthropological theory, 2004-03, Vol.4 (1), p.71-88</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c211t-a516675b55aa40fdca0b5bddb92256e21533330f99b84a2695223a1f5693cbaa3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1463499604040848$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1463499604040848$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,33752,43597,43598</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Moore, Henrietta L.</creatorcontrib><title>Global Anxieties: Concept-Metaphors and Pre-Theoretical Commitments in Anthropology</title><title>Anthropological theory</title><description>This article begins by interrogating the problem of the global and the local in anthropology, and asks how their interconnections might be theorized. When anthropologists call for an examination of the global in concrete terms, they often fail to appreciate the place of ‘concept-metaphors’ whose purpose is to maintain ambiguity and a productive tension between universal claims and specific historical contexts. ‘The global’ is just such a concept-metaphor, a space of theoretical abstraction and processes, experiences and connections in the world, important not only to social scientists but now part of most people’s imagined and experienced worlds. In this article, I examine pre-theoretical commitments common in anthropology that emphasize ‘the local’ via participant-observation, which becomes elided with ethnography. I suggest that anthropology begin to ‘methodologize’ the relation between the global and the local by reviewing several approaches to these problems.</description><subject>Anthropological theory</subject><subject>Anthropology</subject><subject>Ethnography</subject><subject>Global Local Relationship</subject><subject>Globalization</subject><subject>Local communities</subject><subject>Metaphor</subject><subject>Social construction</subject><subject>Social theory</subject><subject>Theoretical Problems</subject><issn>1463-4996</issn><issn>1741-2641</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkM1LAzEQxYMoWKvg0aMnb9FMvnMsRatQ8KLnMNnNypbtbk12Qf97U9qTIM4cZuD93sAbQm6A3QMY8wBSC-mcZrK0lfaEzMBIoFxLOC17kelePycXOW8YA8OtmZHrVTcE7G4X_VcbxzbmS3LWYJfj1XHOyfvT49vyma5fVy_LxZpWHGCkqEBro4JSiJI1dYUsqFDXwXGudOSgRCnWOBesRK6d4lwgNEo7UQVEMSd3h7u7NHxOMY9-2-Yqdh32cZiyL0Ect8r8CwpjjQGQBWQHsEpDzik2fpfaLaZvD8zvf-R__6hY6MGS8SP6zTClvmT-m_8BLdVjFw</recordid><startdate>200403</startdate><enddate>200403</enddate><creator>Moore, Henrietta L.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200403</creationdate><title>Global Anxieties</title><author>Moore, Henrietta L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c211t-a516675b55aa40fdca0b5bddb92256e21533330f99b84a2695223a1f5693cbaa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Anthropological theory</topic><topic>Anthropology</topic><topic>Ethnography</topic><topic>Global Local Relationship</topic><topic>Globalization</topic><topic>Local communities</topic><topic>Metaphor</topic><topic>Social construction</topic><topic>Social theory</topic><topic>Theoretical Problems</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Moore, Henrietta L.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Anthropological theory</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Moore, Henrietta L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Global Anxieties: Concept-Metaphors and Pre-Theoretical Commitments in Anthropology</atitle><jtitle>Anthropological theory</jtitle><date>2004-03</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>71</spage><epage>88</epage><pages>71-88</pages><issn>1463-4996</issn><eissn>1741-2641</eissn><abstract>This article begins by interrogating the problem of the global and the local in anthropology, and asks how their interconnections might be theorized. When anthropologists call for an examination of the global in concrete terms, they often fail to appreciate the place of ‘concept-metaphors’ whose purpose is to maintain ambiguity and a productive tension between universal claims and specific historical contexts. ‘The global’ is just such a concept-metaphor, a space of theoretical abstraction and processes, experiences and connections in the world, important not only to social scientists but now part of most people’s imagined and experienced worlds. In this article, I examine pre-theoretical commitments common in anthropology that emphasize ‘the local’ via participant-observation, which becomes elided with ethnography. I suggest that anthropology begin to ‘methodologize’ the relation between the global and the local by reviewing several approaches to these problems.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/1463499604040848</doi><tpages>18</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1463-4996 |
ispartof | Anthropological theory, 2004-03, Vol.4 (1), p.71-88 |
issn | 1463-4996 1741-2641 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60492857 |
source | SAGE Complete; Sociological Abstracts |
subjects | Anthropological theory Anthropology Ethnography Global Local Relationship Globalization Local communities Metaphor Social construction Social theory Theoretical Problems |
title | Global Anxieties: Concept-Metaphors and Pre-Theoretical Commitments in Anthropology |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-19T02%3A04%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Global%20Anxieties:%20Concept-Metaphors%20and%20Pre-Theoretical%20Commitments%20in%20Anthropology&rft.jtitle=Anthropological%20theory&rft.au=Moore,%20Henrietta%20L.&rft.date=2004-03&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=71&rft.epage=88&rft.pages=71-88&rft.issn=1463-4996&rft.eissn=1741-2641&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1463499604040848&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E37877114%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=37877114&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1463499604040848&rfr_iscdi=true |