The Development of Ethics in Contemporary Socio-Cultural Anthropology: The Thailand Controversy Examined (original) (raw)
Related papers
As a member of the cohort of anthropologists trained in the immediate post-World War II period, I have become aware that I have moved from being an anthropological field worker to an historian, or, at least, to a curator of historical materials. Like others of my generation, I have amassed a collection of records I have made in the course of my anthropological research. The field notes that I sometimes systematically recorded and at others jotted down on whatever paper I had to hand, the photos that my wife and I took, the tape-recordings I made, the documents relating to our field sites I acquired, and the artifacts I collected now have become traces of times and worlds past. I have been working over the past several years, with the support of the University of Washington Libraries, to create an archival collection of my research materials. In this paper I will discuss some of the issues that have emerged in the process of work on this archiving project, including some technical issues and some that relate to the ethical implications entailed in making materials generated in anthropological fieldwork available for use by others. My main argument is that when ethnographic materials are reconstrued as historical records, their epistemological status is significantly transformed.
Japanese review of cultural anthropology, 2001
YoKo HAyAMJ boundaries, In the final section, I discuss recent strategies to deal with cross-border situations, as well as to make the frontiers themselves the subject of inquiry Throughout the last halfcentur}s the questions brought to the field by Japanese scholars in this area, together with their research results, have been influenced and stimulated by the works of western scholars. As I shall explain below, the shifts in the basic paradigms in anthropological thought, as well as particular frameworks that have arisen from this specific area over the past four decades, are also reflected in Japanese scholarship, although there are also some trends that are peculiarly Japanese. The list of works discussed here is in fact a third of the size of that which I initially prepared, In the case of Thailand in particular I have cut down the list considerablM not so much due to the sheer amount of research produced, but because there are already fairly comprehensive bibliographies available.' On the other hand, I have also tried to include research by scholars currently providing fresh and very much needed information on fields that are newly opening up. While most of the studies are by anthropologists and based on field research, I will also rnention studies from other disciplines which have influencecl work by anthropologists, as well as studies based on fieldwork by scholars in other disciplines which are comparable to those of anthropologists, Despite this, there remain many important works that have not been mentioned due to limitations of space and the enormity of the task. Pioneers: The 1950s and Early 1960s Pest-war research in this area began in the late 1950s. In this period, anthropological work in Japan was influenced either by the kulturhreis school of ethnology or by the studies of social structure in social anthropology Both of these schools had an interest in comparisons with Japanese culture and society Obayashi has written on a wide range of topics, including mythologyl kinship organization (Obayashi 1978), and beliefs, and rituals, from an ethnological perspective based mainly on documentary sources, but also on field surveys (e,g, Obayashi 1964). In 1957, the Japanese Society of Ethnology sent a team of scholars led by Matsumoto on an expedition to Thailand to study the culture of the rice-cultivating peoples of Southeast Asia. The team consisted of an agronomist, a }inguist, an archeologist, a material culture specialist, and three ethnologists, and their reports appeared in special issues of the Japanese cJburnal of Ethnolagy,L' Matsumoto depicted the pre-Hindu-Buddhist cultures of Indochina as a complex of rice-cultivating hi}1 and plain cultures (1959). Iwata, Ayabe, and i Shigeharu Tanabe introduces research on Tai societies in Japanese Anthrepological Research on Tai Ethnic Groups in 7Viai Research 7}"ends in tJdpan (ed. Hashimoto Takashi). State of 71hai Studies in tldpan, (1996). Kitahara and Akagi (eds),includes a section on anthropology which is a bibliographieal survey. A forthcoming issue of Tai Culture is a compilation of works by Japanese scholars, and includes an introduction by Ryoko Nishii which is an overview ofJapanese anthropologieal scholarship on Thai-Tai cultures.
Four Lectures on Ethics: Anthropological Perspectives
Student Anthropologist, 2020
Four Lectures on Ethics: Anthropological Perspectives, written by Michael Lambek, Veena Das, Didier Fassin, and Webb Keane, is a collaboration of essays related to recent developments in the anthropology of ethics. Containing similar themes on ethical relations and interpretations in historical, social, and cultural contexts, the included essays do not represent a single voice for understanding ethics in everyday life. Instead, the authors offer new discoveries of how people render the world intelligible through ethical evaluation and hermeneutical processes. These discoveries present “the ethical” as a framework for further anthropological studies by pointing to how ethics intersects with every facet of human life, and also provide anthropologists with a theoretical heuristic for social analysis.
Ethical Concerns, Dilemmas and Challenges in Practicing Anthropology1
INCAA, 2023
Anthropology has always claimed to be a people’s science. It is a field science as it follows field methodology that facilitates the anthropological researcher to become immersed in the field with the aim to unravel the mysteries and meanings of human behavior within the respective cultural boundaries, which may be different from one’s own culture or the same as that of the researcher with varying degrees. In the process, they have to uphold the value of science on the one hand, even while they have to be mindful of the interests and concerns of the people concerned, on the other. These dual responsibilities create a lot of challenges and dilemmas in the practice of Anthropology. Thus, there has been concerns raised throughout its history of more than a century, with regard to the ethics of fieldwork and in the practice of Anthropology vis-à-vis the interests of the people concerned. The present paper takes a deep look into the issue of ethics involved in Anthropological researches and identifies the ethical concerns, dilemmas and challenges in the practice of Anthropology.
Ethnography and Anthropological Interpretation in the Study of Thailand
The Study of Thailand, ed. by Eliezar Ayal, 1978
This is a state of the field paper that reviews anthropological and selected sociological studies of Thailand. Organized according to the following headings: Introduction; Part I: Ethnographic Accounts of Thai Society (Ethnography in Thailand Prior to World War II; The Beginnings of Post-War Ethnography: The Bang Chan Project; The Fluorescence of Ethnographic Research in Thailand; Ethnography and the Thai Intellectual Tradition); Part II: Interpretations of the Thai Social Order (Towards a Holistic Interpretation of Thai Society; Political Economic Basis of Thai Society; Worldview and the Thai Social Order). The essay aimed at both examining the state of the field of the study of Thai society from an anthropological and/or sociological stance and at offering thoughts on what might be future directions to be pursued.
Thinking about Ethics in Burma Research
Burma's colonial past, its years under military dictatorship, its ongoing ethnic and religious confl icts, and the current shift s in the political landscape all present unique challenges for researchers seeking to behave ethically with their informants, their institutions, each other, and the public sphere. The recent upsurge of interest in Burma presents an opportunity for scholars who study the country to refl ect on the ethical dilemmas they have confronted and to articulate how they have addressed them. It is our hope that this eff ort can help those who specialize in Burma to consider the norms and divergences that exist within our inter-disciplinary scholarly community, and can aid those new to Burma Studies in navigating their research in a more informed manner. In light of the need for such a conversation, The Journal of Burma Studies agreed to publish this special issue. The inspiration for this issue came from a panel discussion Rose organized at the 2012 Burma Studies Conference in DeKalb, Illinois, USA. Elliott Prasse-Freeman and Patrick McCormick both presented earlier versions of the essays included here, and Rose described her diffi culties with using consent forms in her ethnographic research with teachers on the Thai-Burma border (Metro 2014). The audience members, who represented a broad cross-section of the fi eld, raised a number of important issues that bear further exploration, and several tensions emerged that are echoed in these pages. In particular, a debate on the nature of objectivity between a senior and a mid-career scholar, both anthropologists, pointed to a generational paradigm shift toward an engagement with
2007
This essay is a revised version of a talk prepared to reflect the theme of New York Law School's 2006 Faculty Presentation Day-celebrating 50 years of the New York Law School Law Review-by taking Sally Engle Merry's essay, published in the Law Review in 1992, as its starting point. This essay was intended primarily for a student audience and conceived as an introduction to a profound and important area of research to which Professor Merry has major important contributions. She is among the best-known American law and society scholars, has made numerous major contributions to legal anthropology, and is especially well known for her scholarship on the relationship between "legal consciousness" and access to rights. As the author explains in his essay, he believes that Professor Merry's latest work on the globalization of a human rights convention on violence against women can be equally instructive for him and other scholars, as well as for students and their scholarship to come. The author thanks Cory Blitz for his valuable assistance in conducting research for this article.
Anthropology of Thailand and the Study of Social Conflict
in Watthanatham Rai Akhati Chīwit Rai Khwām Runrāēng (Culture free of Prejudice, Life Free of Violence). Bangkok: Princess Maha Chakri Anthropology Centre, Proceedings of the 4th Annual Conference of the Princess Maha Chakri Anthropology Centre, Volume 1, pp. 1-36, 2006
Anthropological Research, Ethics of
International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2015
Anthropology's relationship to ethics in research has been driven by periodic disciplinary controversies, often in close association with the involvement of anthropologists in successive war efforts, primarily in the U.S. Over time disciplinary ethics have increasingly focused on the unique exigencies of ethnography, as a disciplinary-specific method. While professional anthropological organizations developed codes of ethics beginning in the Vietnam era, historically, disciplinary ethical language has been used in two ways: as a basis for internal disciplinary self-policing and as a means to claim public professional standing as a social science. These uses continue to be prevalent today. But anthropology's relationship to its ethics also has been historically dynamic, changing with changes in disciplinary identity, values, and priorities. Less recognized are the ways that disciplinary ethics have been regularly reconstituted in close proximity to the frontiers of the identity of anthropology as a changing project. Anthropology's ethics reflect the discipline's specific history and identity debates, and they are one key index of these changing frontiers. This is most evident with respect to anthropology's ambivalent relationship to: science, the nation-state, and encompassing normative structures.