Deset antiteza jednom postizmu u antropologiji

Abstract

This paper challenges the conception that postmodernism can only be described in postmodernist terms. I claim that theory of ethnography was never part of general anthropological methodology. Furthermore - despite numerous efforts - it never was nor will be a theory at all, but only a discussion of techniques of data collection. Once we formulate the problem, find a location in time and space in which it can best betested, and confront our hypotheses with either corroborating or falsifying facts, we will be able to abandon the idea - that was being grounded both in American anthropology and Serbian ethnology for centuries - that science begins with collecting facts. Gathering around the already weakened anthropological center would enable us to comprehend the disciplinary damage from wasting very limited human resources. Therefore, I plead for the concentration around the core of anthropology, which is already so vast that it barely allows our discipline.

Teza da se o postmodernizmu može pisati samo postmoder-nističkim jezikom je netačna.'Teorija'' etnografije nije nikada ni spadala u opštu antropološku metodologiju, i, što je manje važno, nikada nije bila teorija, a neće ni biti ma koliko se mnogi trudili, već samo rasprava o tehnikama prikupljanja podataka. Kada se formuliše problem i potraži lokacija u vremenu i prostoru na kojoj se on najbolje očitava i hipoteze suoče sa činjenicama koje je potvrđuju ili obaraju, napušta se u američkoj antropologiji i srpskoj etnologiji vekovima uvreženo shvatanje da nauka počinje sakupljanjem činjenica.Zbijanje redova oko ionako veoma raznovrsnog antropološkog jezgra ukazuje na disciplinarnu štetu od rasipanje veoma ograničenih ljudskih resursa i pledira za koncentrisanje oko antropološkog jezgra, koje je toliko da jedva omogućava disciplinarnu prepoznatljivost.