Premium
A Reply to Besteman and Gusterson: Swinging the Pendulum
Author(s) -
BUNZL MATTI
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
american anthropologist
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.51
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1548-1433
pISSN - 0002-7294
DOI - 10.1111/j.1548-1433.2008.00010.x
Subject(s) - relevance (law) , argument (complex analysis) , state (computer science) , action (physics) , epistemology , politics , sociology , swing , political action , sociocultural evolution , position (finance) , law , philosophy , political science , anthropology , economics , art , biochemistry , physics , finance , algorithm , quantum mechanics , computer science , visual arts , chemistry
In this rejoinder to Catherine Besteman and Hugh Gusterson, I clarify that my essay “The Quest for Anthropological Relevance: Borgesian Maps and Epistemological Pitfalls” is not primarily a critique of their volume Why America's Top Pundits Are Wrong (2005). Instead, I maintain that it takes issue with the current state of sociocultural anthropology and its inability to communicate with a larger public sphere. In conclusion, I reflect on the historical location of my argument, likening my position to advocacy for a swing in the discipline's epistemological pendulum and finding additional cause for such action in the realities of the current political moment.