Comments on: Environmental Anthropologist versus Environmentalist

By: antropologi.info - sosialantropologi nyheter blog

antropologi.info - sosialantropologi nyheter blog — Mon, 08 Aug 2005 11:07:08 +0000

Feminister og urfolksromantikere som forskere: Hvordan holdninger pvirkerer forskningen

I juli har det har vrt en interessant debatt om feministisk forskning. Lar enkelte kjnnsforskere det feministiske standpunktet overstyre forskningsresultatene sine, spurte vitenskapsteoretiker Cathrine Holst. – les mer. (Se ogs Avviser Holsts kriti…

By: Tad McIlwraith

Tad McIlwraith — Fri, 05 Aug 2005 14:22:59 +0000

I think we agree, Nancy. What this discussion has reminded me or demonstrated to me is that like ‘culture’ for the cultural anthropologist, it is hard for the environmental anthropologist not to become passionate about studying the environment.

By: Nancy

Nancy — Fri, 05 Aug 2005 13:49:45 +0000

Thanks for the response Tad. I agree as well that they should not be conflated. I just wanted to add that little bit about “just because they are not the same does not mean that they cannot coexist within the same individual” in the same way that one can be both an anthropologist and an activist and that one’s anthropological may help inform one’s activism.

Cheers.

By: Tad McIlwraith

Tad McIlwraith — Fri, 05 Aug 2005 05:28:38 +0000

Nancy … I agree whole-heartedly with you … and increased sensitivity to the environment is probably a natural (no pun intended) off-shoot of studying the environment in much the same way anthropologists develop emphathy for the people they study. I’m not certain, however, that the two have to be equated. I think you could be an anthropologist of the environment without being an environmentalist. (And you certainly can be an environmentalist without being an anthropologist.) Thanks for your thoughts.

By: Nancy

Nancy — Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:51:20 +0000

Not a student but an interested observer: would you say that the two necessarily need to be mutually exclusive? Does not the study of how a cultural group relates to its physical landscape lead to one being more sensitive to the preservation of said environment?

By: Nomadic Thoughts

Nomadic Thoughts — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 20:22:33 +0000

Week in Review 1(7)

NT Week in Review Vol. I, Issue 7 Apologies for the hastiness of this week’s issue. Links away… From the blogs: Tad at FieldNotes explores the differences between environmental anthropologists and environmentalists. John Hawks reports and opines on …

By: Tad McIlwraith

Tad McIlwraith — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:50:24 +0000

It might go either way … my interest, in your terms, is in culture first and the environment second (or better as a topic of interest within a broader study of culture).

By: Will

Will — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:50:14 +0000

Just had a thought: would the last statement of my previous comment be the other way around? Perhaps it’s a matter of opinion?

By: Tad McIlwraith

Tad McIlwraith — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:27:15 +0000

Thanks, Will, for being much more succinct than I was!

By: Will

Will — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 21:55:49 +0000

Sounds like you summed it up pretty well: an environmentalist is an advocate whereas an anthropologist (doing anthropology) shouldn’t, in theory, be advocating anything other than the objective “reporting” of facts (if such a thing is possible). Additionally, an environmentalist seems to put the environment in the context of human society while an environmental anthropologist puts human society in the context of the environment.