Critique, risqué: A comment on Didier Fassin

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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAnthropological theory Vol. 17; no. 2; pp. 274 - 278
Main Author Holbraad, Martin
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London, England SAGE Publications 01.06.2017
Sage Publications Ltd
Subjects
Anthropology
Criticism
Ethnography
Infrastructure
Kant, Immanuel (1724-1804)
Ontology
Power
Redefinition
Reflexivity
Truth
critique
reflexivity
ontology
post-truth
Kant
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary: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.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1463-4996
1741-2641
DOI:10.1177/1463499617709881