The Explanatory Power of the Concept of Embodiment in Anthropology

Authors

  • Nina Kulenović Department and Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade, Serbia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v16i2.1

Keywords:

embodiment, anthropology, explanation, explanatory power

Abstract

As part of the author's cumulative research on the types of explanation, the structure of explanation and the explanatory capacity of key concepts in sociocultural anthropology, this paper looks at the concept of embodiment. The relevance of reappraising the explanatory power of this concept is manifold, above all on the interpretive, conceptual and paradigmatic level. Research suggests that the concept of embodiment – although very popular, commonly used in very influential scholarly monographs and academic papers, and even proposed as the cornerstone of a "new paradigm for anthropology" – has a very limited explanatory capacity. It seems that its use in no way contributes to anthropological argumentation on the level of explanation – neither cumulatively nor in terms of recontextualisation. Namely, it turns out that by deleting the word "embodiment" from the analyzed arguments nothing would be lost, and that the anthropological explanatory apparatus developed within the anthropology of the body, the anthropology of gender and the anthropology of kinship – whose use precedes contemporary popular uses of the concept of embodiment – does not have a smaller scope in terms of explanatory power.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abu-Lughod, Lila. 1991. „Writing against Culture”. In Recapturing Anthropology, edited by Richard G. Fox, 137–162. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

Bošković, Aleksandar. 2017. „Individualizam u antropologiji”. U Individualizam, uredili Suzana Ignjatović i Aleksandar Bošković, 4-25. Beograd: Institut društvenih nauka.

Brightman, Robert. 1995. „Forget Culture: Replacement, Transcendence, Relexification“. Cultural Anthropology 10(4): 509–546. https://doi.org/10.1525/can.1995.10.4.02a00030

Bruun, Henrik and Langlais, Richard. 2003. „On Embodied Nature of Action“. Acta Sociologica 46(1): 31-49.

Burling, Robbins. 1964. „Cognition and Componential Analysis: God’s Truth or Hocus Pocus?,“ American Anthropologist 66 (1): 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1964.66.1.02a00020

Butler, Judith. 1986. „Sex and Gender in Simone de Beauvoir’s Second Sex“. Yale French Studies 72: 35-49. https://doi.org/10.2307/2930225

Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge.

Collier, Fishburne Jane and Junko Sylvia Yananagisako. Gender and Kinship: Essays Toward a Unified Analysis. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Csordas, Thomas J. 1990. „Embodiment as a Paradigm for Anthropology“. Ethos 18(1): 5-47. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-08286-2_3

Csordas, Thomas J. 1999a. „Embodied Reason“ In Perspectives on Embodiment: The Intersections of Nature and Culture, edited by Gail Weiss and Honi Fern Haber, 143-164. New York: Routledge.

Csordas, Thomas J, 1999b. „Body’s Career in Anthropology“. In Anthropological Theory Today, edited by Henrietta L. Moore, 172-205. Cambridge:

Csordas, Thomas J. 2011. „Cultural Phenomenology“. U Companion to the Anthropology of the Body and Embodiment, edited by Frances E. Mascia-Lees, 137-157. Wiley-Blackwell.

D’Andrade, Roy. 1995. The Development of Cognitive Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Desjarlais, Robert and C. Jason Throop. 2011. „Phenomenological Approaches in Anthropology“. Annual Review of Anthropology (40): 87-102.

Douglas, Mary. 1966. Purity and Danger. London: Routledge.

Douglas, Mary. 1970. Natural Symbols.New York: Vintage.

Foucault, Michel. 1978. The History of Sexuality: Vol. I, An Introduction, New York: Pantheon Books.

Frake, Chales. 1964. „Notes on Queries in Ethnography“. American Anthropologist 66(3): 132– 145. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1964.66.3.02a00860

Geertz, Clifford. 1966. „Religion as a Cultural System“. In M. Banton (ed.), Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion, 1–46. New York: Praeger.

Godelije, Moris i Panof, Mišel. 2003. „Stvaranje tela“. Kultura 105/106: 27-43.

Geertz, Clifford. 1973. Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Harris, Marvin. 1968. The Rise of Anthropological Theory. London: Routlegde.

Hol, Edvard. 1976. Nemi jezik. Beograd: XX vek.

Hymes, Dell H. 1972. Reinventing Anthropology. New York: Pantheon Books.

Ignjatović, Suzana. 2017. „Povezanost metodološkog, kulturnog i političkom individualizma u društvenim naukama“. U Individualizam, uredili Suzana Ignjatović i Aleksandar Bošković, 26-47. Beograd: Institut društvenih nauka.

Ignjatović, Suzana i Aleksandar Bošković. 2018. „O mogućnostima naučnog objašnjenja zasnovanog na metodološkom individualizmu u antropologiji“. Etnoantropološki problemi. 13(1): 14-40. https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v13i1.1

Ivanović, Zorica i Šarčević, Predrag. 2003. „O statusu tela u antropologiji“. Kultura 105-106: 9-24.

Ivanović, Zorica. 2003. „Pogovor u Antropologija žene i pitanje rodnih odnosa u izmenjenom diskursu antropologije“. U Antropologija žene uredile Žarana Papić i Lydia Sklevicky, 382-435. Beograd: XX vek.

Jackson, Michael. 1983. „Knowlede of the Body“. Man 18(2): 327-345.

Jackson, Michael. 2002. „Familiar and Foreign Bodies“. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 8(2): 333-346. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.00006

Jarvie, I. C. 1964. „Explanation in Social Science“. The British Journal of the Philosophy of Science 15(57): 62–72.

Jarvie, I. C. 1976. „On the Limits of Symbolic Interpretation in Anthropology“. Current Anthropology 17(4): 687– 701.

Jarvie, I. C. 1983. „Rationality and Relativism“. The British Journal of Sociology 34(1): 44–60.

Johnson, Mark L. 1999. „Embodied Reason“, In Perspectives on Embodiment: The Intersections of Nature and Culture, edited by Gail Weiss and Honi Fern Haber, 81-102. New York: Routledge.

Kapferer, Bruce. 2007. „Anthropology and the Dialectic of Enlightenment: A Discourse on the Definition and Ideals of a Threatened Discipline“. The Australian Journal of Anthropology 18(1): 72-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-9310.2007.tb00078.x

Kovačević, Ivan. 2006. „Individualna antropologija ili antropolog kao lični guslar“. Etnoantropološki problemi 1(1): 18-34. https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v1i1.1

Kovačević, Ivan. 2008. „Postkulturni udarac u Vernikeovu zonu“. Antropologija 5: 56-64.

Kulenović, Nina. 2014. „Metodološki individualizam nasuprot metodološkom holizmu. Istorijska pozadina, relevantnost i implikacije (nerešive?) rasprave u sporu oko eksplanatornog kapaciteta i naučnog statusa sociokulturne antropologije“. Etnoantropološki problemi 9(2): 310-333. https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v9i2.3

Kulenović, Nina. 2015. „Da li je antropologija ʽnaučnaʼ ili ʽistorijska ʼdisciplina?: pouke iz povesti rane američke antropologije.“ Antropologija 15(2): 47-85.

Kulenović, Nina. 2016. Objašnjenje u antropologiji: istorijski kontekst, (Biblioteka Etnoantropološki problemi, Monografije, knj. 4). Beograd: Filozofski fakultet, Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju, Centar za antropologiju javnih i praktičnih politika: Dosije studio.

Kulenović, Nina. 2017. Objašnjenje u antropologiji: polemike (Biblioteka Etnoantropološki problemi, Monografije, knj. 5). Beograd: Univerzitet, Filozofski fakultet, Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju, Centar za antropologiju javnih i praktičnih politika: Dosije studio.

Kulenović, Nina. 2019. „Koncept kulture između prosvetiteljstva i kontraprosvetiteljstva.“ Etnoantropološki problemi 14(1): 137-167. https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v14i1.6

Little, Daniel. 1991. Varieties of Social Explanation. San Francisco: Westview Press.

Lock, Margaret.1993. „Cultivating the Body“. Annual Review of Anthropology 22; 133-155. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.22.100193.001025

Mascia-Lees, Frances. 2016. „The Body and Embodiment in the History of Feminist Anthropology; An Idiosyncratic Excursion through Binaries“. In Mapping Feminist Anthropology In the Twenty-First Century, edited by Ellen Lewin and Leni M. Silverstein,146-167. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

Masquelier, Adeline. 1997. „Embodiment and Experience: The Existential Ground of Culture and Self“. Ethnologist 24(4): 940-941. https://doi.org/10.1525/ae.1997.24.4.940

Meynell, Letitia. 2009. „Introduction: Minding bodies“. In Embodiment and Agency, 1-25, edited by Sue Campbell, Letitia Meynell and Susan Sherwin. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

Milenković, Miloš. 2003. Problem etnografski stvarnog. Beograd: Srpski genealoški centar.

Milenković, Miloš. 2006. „Šta je (bila) antropološka refleksivnost? Metodološka formalizacija“. Etnoantropološki problemi 1(2): 157-184. https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v1i2.9

Milenković, Miloš. 2014. Antropologija multikulturalizma: Od politike identiteta ka očuvanju kulturnog nasleđa. Beograd: Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju Filozofskog fakulteta i Srpski genealoški centar.

Mos, Marsel. [1934]1983. Sociologija i antropologija. Beograd: XX vek.

Obeyesekere, Gananath. 1990. The Work of Culture. Chicago: Chicago Univerity Press.

Ortner, Sherry B. 1984. „Theory in Anthropology since the Sixties“. Comparative Studies in Society and History 26(1): 126-166. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500010811

Papić, Žarana i Sklevicky Lydia (ur.). 2003. Antropologija žene. Beograd: XX vek.

Reyna. S. P. 1994. „Literary Anthropology and the Case against Science“. Man 29(3): 555– 581.

Scheper-Hughes, Nancy and Lock, Margaret. 1987. „The Mindful Body: A Prolegomenon to Future Work In Medical Anthropology“. Medical Anthropology Quaterly 1(1): 6-41. https://doi.org/10.1525/maq.1987.1.1.02a00020

Shankman, Paul. 1984. „The Thick and the Thin: On the Interpretive Theorietical Program of Clifford Geertz“. Current Anthropology 25(3): 261–280.

Simonsen, Kirsten. 2005. „Bodies, Sensations, Space and Time: Contribution from Henri Lefebvre“. Geografiska Annaler 87(1): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0435-3684.2005.00174.x

Sinđelić, Svetozar. 2010. „Kantovski obrt u savremenoj filozofoiji nauke“. Theoria 3: 5– 36.

Spasić, Ivana. 2005. „Prevoditi i pisati sociologiju“. Mostovi 131-132: 168-178.

Srdić, Anđa. 2008. „Telo i telesnost u antropološkoj perspektivi“. GEM 72: 93-105.

Strathern, Andrew J. and Pamela J. Stewart. 2011. „Personhood“. In Frances E. Mascia-Lees (ed.), A Companion to the Anthropology of the Body and Embodiment, 388-403. Willey-Blackwell.

Strauss, Claudia and Quinn, Naomi. 1997. A cognitive theory of cultural meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Turner, Terence. 1990. „On Structure and Entropy: Theoretical Pastiche and the Contradictions of Structuralism“. Current Anthropology 31(5): 563-568.

Turner, Terence. 1994. „Bodies and anti-bodies: flesh and fetish in contemporary social theory“. In T.J. Csordas (ed.), Embodiment and Experience, 27-47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Turner, Terence. 1995. „Social Body and Embodied Subject“. Cultural Anthropology 10(2): 143-170. https://doi.org/10.1525/can.1995.10.2.02a00010

Turner, Terence. 2011. „Bodiliness“. In A Companion to the Anthropology of the Body and Embodiment, edited by Frances E. Mascia-Lees, 102-119. Willey-Blackwell.

Tyler, Stephen A. 1969. „Introduction“. In Cognitive Anthropology, edited by Stephen A. Tyler, 1–25. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Van Wolputte, Steven. 2004. „Hang on to Your Self: Of Bodies, Embodiment, and Selves“. Annaual Review of Anthropology 33: 251-269. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143749

Wallace, Anthony F. C.. and John Atkins. 1960. „The Meaning of Kinship Terms“. American Anthropologist. 62(1): 58– 80. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1960.62.1.02a00040

Wallace, Anthony F. C. 1965. „The Problem of Psychological Validity of Componential Analysis“. American Anthropologist 67(5): 22– 248. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1965.67.5.02a00800.

Žikić, Bojan. 2002. Antropologija gesta. Beograd: Srpski genealoški centar.

Žikić, Bojan. 2008. „Kako složiti babe, žabe i električne gitare: uvod u kognitivnu antropologiju“. Antropologija 6: 114-136.

Downloads

Published

2021-06-21

How to Cite

Kulenović, Nina. 2021. “The Explanatory Power of the Concept of Embodiment in Anthropology”. Etnoantropološki Problemi Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 16 (2):325–351. https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v16i2.1.

Issue

Vol. 16 No. 2 (2021): Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology

Section

Scientific Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Nina Kulenović

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>