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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Anthropological theory 2004-03, Vol.4 (1), p.71-88
1. Verfasser: Moore, Henrietta L.
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