Comments on: Savage Minds Around the Web http://savageminds.org/2009/02/01/savage-minds-around-the-web-18/ Notes and Queries in Anthropology — A Group Blog Sat, 26 May 2012 01:35:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Jhangora http://savageminds.org/2009/02/01/savage-minds-around-the-web-18/comment-page-1/#comment-571196 Jhangora Wed, 11 Feb 2009 08:35:59 +0000 http://savageminds.org/?p=1561#comment-571196 I really like ur blog. Congrats! 'Savage Minds' is blog of the month on 'The Apple Eaters'. I really like ur blog. Congrats! ‘Savage Minds’ is blog of the month on ‘The Apple Eaters’.

Report this comment

]]> By: ryan a http://savageminds.org/2009/02/01/savage-minds-around-the-web-18/comment-page-1/#comment-568907 ryan a Thu, 05 Feb 2009 15:51:58 +0000 http://savageminds.org/?p=1561#comment-568907 "John L. Jackson’s blog is latest target of commentators accusing sociocultural anthropology of being neologistic, irrelevant, and unscientific. Jackson’s response: Please!!! I especially liked his raising of legalese as a more obtuse vocabulary by a more socially privileged community." I actually think that the discussion taking place over there is an important one, and it would be nice if anthropologists took a less defensive position and found ways to explain what the discipline is all about. While some of the people who commented were pretty negative about anthropology--or simply unaware of what it is really about--I think that many of the issues that were brought up are very important, especially if the goal is to explore the so called "ends of anthropology." So, in my opinion, characterizing the discussion as being about "hating" is pretty silly. And when Prof. Jackson brought up the issues with "legalese," all he did was sidestep the issue of language/communication in his own discipline. “John L. Jackson’s blog is latest target of commentators accusing sociocultural anthropology of being neologistic, irrelevant, and unscientific. Jackson’s response: Please!!! I especially liked his raising of legalese as a more obtuse vocabulary by a more socially privileged community.”

I actually think that the discussion taking place over there is an important one, and it would be nice if anthropologists took a less defensive position and found ways to explain what the discipline is all about. While some of the people who commented were pretty negative about anthropology–or simply unaware of what it is really about–I think that many of the issues that were brought up are very important, especially if the goal is to explore the so called “ends of anthropology.”

So, in my opinion, characterizing the discussion as being about “hating” is pretty silly.

And when Prof. Jackson brought up the issues with “legalese,” all he did was sidestep the issue of language/communication in his own discipline.

Report this comment

]]>