Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

Expand Messages
  • tadmci
    There is a really useful roundup of all of the news and blogs discussing this issue from Neuroanthropology. The link is below. Tad
    Message 1 of 16 , Dec 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      There is a really useful roundup of all of the news and blogs discussing this issue from Neuroanthropology. The link is below.

      Tad




      http://blogs.plos.org/neuroanthropology/2010/12/01/anthropology-science-and-public-understanding/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+plos/blogs/neuroanthropology+(Blogs+-+Neuroanthropology)


      --- In SACC-L@yahoogroups.com, Deborah Shepherd <deborah.shepherd@...> wrote:
      >
      > I just read this (it was the latest entry on the matter).
      > http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fetishes-i-dont-get/201012/the-remains-the-aaa
      >
      > Bizarre.
      >
      > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
      > Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 1:09 PM
      > To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
      >
      >
      >
      > Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.
      >
      > I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.
      >
      > No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
      > www.psychologytoday.com
      >
      > You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.
      >
      > Bob
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Lloyd Miller
      Here s an additional reference on this issue, a lengthy article but it summarizes and excerpts comments from a number of other blogs. I m amazed at how many
      Message 2 of 16 , Dec 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Here's an additional reference on this issue, a lengthy article but it summarizes and excerpts comments from a number of other blogs. I'm amazed at how many are weighing in on this topic.

        http://blogs.plos.org/neuroanthropology/2010/12/01/anthropology-science-and-public-understanding/

        Lloyd


        On Dec 1, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Bob Muckle wrote:

        > Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.
        >
        > I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.
        >
        > No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
        > www.psychologytoday.com
        >
        > You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.
        >
        > Bob
        >
        >



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • George Thomas
        I regularly plagiarize - oops, refer to - the book title  magic, science, religion and the scope of rationality , S. J. Tambiah 1990, when discussing
        Message 3 of 16 , Dec 4, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          I regularly plagiarize - oops, refer to - the book title "magic, science, religion and the scope of rationality", S. J. Tambiah 1990, when discussing cosmology in my intro classes.  So it strikes me as a wild misrepresentation of any such discussion for the AAA to so much as APPEAR to disassociate itself from "science."
          Jonathan Marks, in his book "Why I Am Not A Scientist," critiques some of the less savory episodes of anthropology's history -- I was pleased to find that he includes an account of the crazy brouhaha over Ishi's brain and its ... uh ... "curation"..., just as I prepared to talk about it, and while the class was fresh from viewing the movie, "Ishi, The Last Yahi."
          There seems to be some caving in to lame postmodern stances here, with the venue for full discussion of the issues being the loser.
          If scientific theories grow through challenges, new information and "falsification" of hypotheses, of course scientists and whole fields of science should be subject to the same challenges.  I smell a lot of overreaction here.
          George
           
          Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
              Posted by: "Gilliland, Mary" mkgilliland@... sunny_hvar
              Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 11:20 am ((PST))

          Very interesting!  Maybe this is why it is so difficult to get a Physical Anthropologist for the 5-field panel.  Many told me they no longer join the AAA.

          Mary Kay, in Tucson

          From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
          Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:09 PM
          To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists



          Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.

          I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.

          No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
          www.psychologytoday.com

          You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.

          Bob





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Lewine, Mark
          Well, if we accept the construction of blogs as objective and Psychology Today as a scientific opinion leader, I guess we should be upset by the AAA Long Range
          Message 4 of 16 , Dec 6, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Well, if we accept the construction of blogs as objective and Psychology Today as a scientific opinion leader, I guess we should be upset by the AAA Long Range Plan which purportedly removes science from anthropology…I certainly admit that I was upset myself when I read the phrase “No Science Please, We’re Anthropologists”…I assumed before reading the AAA LRP statements and Virginia Dominguez reminder to read and comment on it directly, that anthropology was again being led by the Eastern elite cultural theorists, those dreaded ‘post modernists’… the same folks that once answered my plea at a AAA session on “Teaching Sexual Behavior in Anthro classes” by telling me that “yes, my adult female low-income students struggling with domestic violence, abuse and rape, would become empowered to handle their lives by simply reading Foucault in their sexual anthro or sociology class”. So, I was upset with THE P-M EVIL.

            However, checking on the actual SOURCE of the catchy blog/Psych. Today hot journalistic lead (No Science Please, We’re Anthropologists), I found the following clear reference to an open inclusive context for anthropology’s future that clearly referenced research and included many more ‘fields’ than four or even five! So we have the irony found so often with some of my colleagues and friends who define themselves as solely biological anthro’s or archaeologists: elitist rejection of both integrated anthropology and the AAA, and negative rejection of the cultural field as non-scientific and anti-scientific in theory! Now that we actually have a non-elitist President of the AAA trying to open the doors to an inclusive future anthropology and AAA, we react before checking our sources, without critically reviewing the biases of those initial attacks, and I admit to being one who did both of these quick takes. So, here is an excerpt from Pres. Dominguez and the LRP sources. Please read and be calmed after you scold the bloggers not the blogged:

            From the officers of the AAA to our membership:



            Our AAA long-range plan needed updating in order to address the changing composition of the profession and the needs of the AAA membership. At its November 20 meeting in New Orleans, the Executive Board specified, concretized, and enlarged its operational roadmap for investing the Association’s resources towards a sustainable future. Section leadership was consulted prior to the New Orleans Annual Meeting, and the Executive Board acted. Then immediately after the highly attended 2010 AAA Meetings in New Orleans, some criticisms of the plan were circulated electronically that had not been sent our way prior to the Meetings. Among them were thoughtful responses from several quarters, many queries about hearsay, and some suggestions for improvement or change. These responses, however, were amped up by blog headline editors earlier this week: “Anthropology Without Science,” and “No Science Please. We’re Anthropologists.” We believe that the source of the problem speaks to the power of symbols: we replaced the term “science” in the preface of this planning document by a more specific (and inclusive) list of research domains, while explicitly acknowledging that the Association’s central focus is to promote the production, circulation, and application of anthropological research findings. Each one of us (the four officers of the AAA) may add or comment on the issues separately, but collectively we care about letting the entire association see the document at hand. We know that comments will continue to come our way and we welcome them from our clearly engaged membership.



            Virginia R. Dominguez, President

            Leith Mullings, President-Elect

            Debra L. Martin, Secretary

            Edward Liebow, Treasurer





            From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Anthropmor
            Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:23 PM
            To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists






            Yea gads!
            Mike Pavlik

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Gilliland, Mary <mkgilliland@... <mailto:mkgilliland%40pima.edu> >
            To: SACC-L <SACC-L@yahoogroups.com <mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> >
            Sent: Wed, Dec 1, 2010 1:20 pm
            Subject: RE: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

            Very interesting! Maybe this is why it is so difficult to get a Physical Anthropologist for the 5-field panel. Many told me they no longer join the AAA.

            Mary Kay, in Tucson

            From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com <mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com <mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
            Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:09 PM
            To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com <mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>
            Subject: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

            Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.

            I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.

            No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
            www.psychologytoday.com

            You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.

            Bob

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Lewine, Mark
            Lloyd: just got my copy of the current AN and found your excellent discussion of issues regarding K-14 educational outreach. These issues are central to our
            Message 5 of 16 , Dec 6, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Lloyd: just got my copy of the current AN and found your excellent
              discussion of issues regarding K-14 educational outreach. These issues
              are central to our new AAA Task Force on Education formed by AAA
              President Virginia Dominguez. I am delighted with her open
              communication and commitment to serious outreach...when she attended our
              last SACC conference she told us of her commitment to community colleges
              and promised we would be represented on her new initiatives. So she
              followed up with the new Task Force on Education with a direct pipeline
              to the Executive Board and herself, and appointed me to represent
              community college outreach for the next three years. Lloyd, judging by
              your specific comments on some of the core issues and even a suggestion
              of a "best practice" by the Royal Anthropological Institute in the UK,
              we should look to yourself for the next appointment and keep those ideas
              coming...I need them, along with "best practices" for anthro outreach
              from other SACC'ers...my latest attempt is to find out how we can link
              our anthro curricula to more vocational programs, certificates, and
              degrees in each college, each state, each region, and of course,
              nationally. IDEAS PLEEEEZ TO MARK LEWINE

              Hey Lloyd, who is that young studly guy in the pic on page 43 with the
              last SACC student award winner, Mallory Haas?
            • Deborah Shepherd
              Thank you for the clarification, Mark. It is indeed reassuring. Deborah ________________________________ From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [SACC-L@yahoogroups.com]
              Message 6 of 16 , Dec 6, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Thank you for the clarification, Mark. It is indeed reassuring.

                Deborah

                ________________________________
                From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lewine, Mark [mark.lewine@...]
                Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 3:42 PM
                To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists



                Well, if we accept the construction of blogs as objective and Psychology Today as a scientific opinion leader, I guess we should be upset by the AAA Long Range Plan which purportedly removes science from anthropology�I certainly admit that I was upset myself when I read the phrase �No Science Please, We�re Anthropologists��I assumed before reading the AAA LRP statements and Virginia Dominguez reminder to read and comment on it directly, that anthropology was again being led by the Eastern elite cultural theorists, those dreaded �post modernists�� the same folks that once answered my plea at a AAA session on �Teaching Sexual Behavior in Anthro classes� by telling me that �yes, my adult female low-income students struggling with domestic violence, abuse and rape, would become empowered to handle their lives by simply reading Foucault in their sexual anthro or sociology class�. So, I was upset with THE P-M EVIL.

                However, checking on the actual SOURCE of the catchy blog/Psych. Today hot journalistic lead (No Science Please, We�re Anthropologists), I found the following clear reference to an open inclusive context for anthropology�s future that clearly referenced research and included many more �fields� than four or even five! So we have the irony found so often with some of my colleagues and friends who define themselves as solely biological anthro�s or archaeologists: elitist rejection of both integrated anthropology and the AAA, and negative rejection of the cultural field as non-scientific and anti-scientific in theory! Now that we actually have a non-elitist President of the AAA trying to open the doors to an inclusive future anthropology and AAA, we react before checking our sources, without critically reviewing the biases of those initial attacks, and I admit to being one who did both of these quick takes. So, here is an excerpt from Pres. Dominguez and the LRP sources. Please read and be calmed after you scold the bloggers not the blogged:

                From the officers of the AAA to our membership:



                Our AAA long-range plan needed updating in order to address the changing composition of the profession and the needs of the AAA membership. At its November 20 meeting in New Orleans, the Executive Board specified, concretized, and enlarged its operational roadmap for investing the Association�s resources towards a sustainable future. Section leadership was consulted prior to the New Orleans Annual Meeting, and the Executive Board acted. Then immediately after the highly attended 2010 AAA Meetings in New Orleans, some criticisms of the plan were circulated electronically that had not been sent our way prior to the Meetings. Among them were thoughtful responses from several quarters, many queries about hearsay, and some suggestions for improvement or change. These responses, however, were amped up by blog headline editors earlier this week: �Anthropology Without Science,� and �No Science Please. We�re Anthropologists.� We believe that the source of the problem speaks to the power of symbols: we replaced the term �science� in the preface of this planning document by a more specific (and inclusive) list of research domains, while explicitly acknowledging that the Association�s central focus is to promote the production, circulation, and application of anthropological research findings. Each one of us (the four officers of the AAA) may add or comment on the issues separately, but collectively we care about letting the entire association see the document at hand. We know that comments will continue to come our way and we welcome them from our clearly engaged membership.



                Virginia R. Dominguez, President

                Leith Mullings, President-Elect

                Debra L. Martin, Secretary

                Edward Liebow, Treasurer





                From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Anthropmor
                Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:23 PM
                To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>
                Subject: Re: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists






                Yea gads!
                Mike Pavlik

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Gilliland, Mary <mkgilliland@...<mailto:mkgilliland%40pima.edu> <mailto:mkgilliland%40pima.edu> >
                To: SACC-L <SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> >
                Sent: Wed, Dec 1, 2010 1:20 pm
                Subject: RE: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                Very interesting! Maybe this is why it is so difficult to get a Physical Anthropologist for the 5-field panel. Many told me they no longer join the AAA.

                Mary Kay, in Tucson

                From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
                Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:09 PM
                To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>
                Subject: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.

                I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.

                No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
                www.psychologytoday.com

                You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.

                Bob

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Anthropmor
                Is that the American Experience film? I use that one in class. Mike Pavlik ... From: George Thomas To: sacc-l
                Message 7 of 16 , Dec 7, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  Is that the American Experience film?
                  I use that one in class.
                  Mike Pavlik






                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: George Thomas <broruprecht@...>
                  To: sacc-l <sacc-l@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Sat, Dec 4, 2010 9:49 pm
                  Subject: [SACC-L] Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists




                  I regularly plagiarize - oops, refer to - the book title "magic, science, religion and the scope of rationality", S. J. Tambiah 1990, when discussing cosmology in my intro classes. So it strikes me as a wild misrepresentation of any such discussion for the AAA to so much as APPEAR to disassociate itself from "science."
                  Jonathan Marks, in his book "Why I Am Not A Scientist," critiques some of the less savory episodes of anthropology's history -- I was pleased to find that he includes an account of the crazy brouhaha over Ishi's brain and its ... uh ... "curation"..., just as I prepared to talk about it, and while the class was fresh from viewing the movie, "Ishi, The Last Yahi."
                  There seems to be some caving in to lame postmodern stances here, with the venue for full discussion of the issues being the loser.
                  If scientific theories grow through challenges, new information and "falsification" of hypotheses, of course scientists and whole fields of science should be subject to the same challenges. I smell a lot of overreaction here.
                  George

                  Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                  Posted by: "Gilliland, Mary" mkgilliland@... sunny_hvar
                  Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 11:20 am ((PST))

                  Very interesting! Maybe this is why it is so difficult to get a Physical Anthropologist for the 5-field panel. Many told me they no longer join the AAA.

                  Mary Kay, in Tucson

                  From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
                  Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:09 PM
                  To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                  Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.

                  I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.

                  No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
                  www.psychologytoday.com

                  You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.

                  Bob

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • George Thomas
                  Yes. It s perfect for an intro class in that one can cite examples from it for almost all sections.  It raises questions about self-awareness and how it is
                  Message 8 of 16 , Dec 8, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Yes. It's perfect for an intro class in that one can cite examples from it for almost all sections.  It raises questions about self-awareness and how it is expressed given circumstances that are (fortunately) rare. No one ever quite found the answer to what Ishi would have called himself while the rest of the Yahi were alive.  I see eyes widen as we discuss the movie in classes. (A refreshing change from the usual, with eyes closing and heads nodding....:-)
                    Then there are those interesting little nagging issues surrounding remnant Late Victorian science and Ishi's brain.  Drives the point home, eh wot?
                    George
                     
                    Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                        Posted by: "Anthropmor" anthropmor@...
                        Date: Tue Dec 7, 2010 11:19 am ((PST))


                    Is that the American Experience film?
                      I use that one in class.
                    Mike Pavlik






                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: George Thomas <broruprecht@...>
                    To: sacc-l <sacc-l@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Sat, Dec 4, 2010 9:49 pm
                    Subject: [SACC-L] Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists




                    I regularly plagiarize - oops, refer to - the book title "magic, science, religion and the scope of rationality", S. J. Tambiah 1990, when discussing cosmology in my intro classes.  So it strikes me as a wild misrepresentation of any such discussion for the AAA to so much as APPEAR to disassociate itself from "science."
                    Jonathan Marks, in his book "Why I Am Not A Scientist," critiques some of the less savory episodes of anthropology's history -- I was pleased to find that he includes an account of the crazy brouhaha over Ishi's brain and its ... uh ... "curation"..., just as I prepared to talk about it, and while the class was fresh from viewing the movie, "Ishi, The Last Yahi."
                    There seems to be some caving in to lame postmodern stances here, with the venue for full discussion of the issues being the loser.
                    If scientific theories grow through challenges, new information and "falsification" of hypotheses, of course scientists and whole fields of science should be subject to the same challenges.  I smell a lot of overreaction here.
                    George

                    Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                        Posted by: "Gilliland, Mary" mkgilliland@... sunny_hvar
                        Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 11:20 am ((PST))

                    Very interesting!  Maybe this is why it is so difficult to get a Physical Anthropologist for the 5-field panel.  Many told me they no longer join the AAA.

                    Mary Kay, in Tucson

                    From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
                    Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:09 PM
                    To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                    Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.

                    I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.

                    No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
                    www.psychologytoday.com

                    You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.

                    Bob






                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Deborah Shepherd
                    We have that American Experience program in our library, and I use it for every cultural anthro class, but I can see it being used in physical anthropology as
                    Message 9 of 16 , Dec 8, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      We have that American Experience program in our library, and I use it for every cultural anthro class, but I can see it being used in physical anthropology as well. It prepares the way for discussion of false ideas about race and evolution.

                      Deborah

                      From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of George Thomas
                      Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 8:55 AM
                      To: sacc-l@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [SACC-L] Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists



                      Yes. It's perfect for an intro class in that one can cite examples from it for almost all sections. It raises questions about self-awareness and how it is expressed given circumstances that are (fortunately) rare. No one ever quite found the answer to what Ishi would have called himself while the rest of the Yahi were alive. I see eyes widen as we discuss the movie in classes. (A refreshing change from the usual, with eyes closing and heads nodding....:-)
                      Then there are those interesting little nagging issues surrounding remnant Late Victorian science and Ishi's brain. Drives the point home, eh wot?
                      George

                      Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                      Posted by: "Anthropmor" anthropmor@...<mailto:anthropmor%40AOL.COM>
                      Date: Tue Dec 7, 2010 11:19 am ((PST))

                      Is that the American Experience film?
                      I use that one in class.
                      Mike Pavlik

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: George Thomas <broruprecht@...<mailto:broruprecht%40yahoo.com>>
                      To: sacc-l <sacc-l@yahoogroups.com<mailto:sacc-l%40yahoogroups.com>>
                      Sent: Sat, Dec 4, 2010 9:49 pm
                      Subject: [SACC-L] Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                      I regularly plagiarize - oops, refer to - the book title "magic, science, religion and the scope of rationality", S. J. Tambiah 1990, when discussing cosmology in my intro classes. So it strikes me as a wild misrepresentation of any such discussion for the AAA to so much as APPEAR to disassociate itself from "science."
                      Jonathan Marks, in his book "Why I Am Not A Scientist," critiques some of the less savory episodes of anthropology's history -- I was pleased to find that he includes an account of the crazy brouhaha over Ishi's brain and its ... uh ... "curation"..., just as I prepared to talk about it, and while the class was fresh from viewing the movie, "Ishi, The Last Yahi."
                      There seems to be some caving in to lame postmodern stances here, with the venue for full discussion of the issues being the loser.
                      If scientific theories grow through challenges, new information and "falsification" of hypotheses, of course scientists and whole fields of science should be subject to the same challenges. I smell a lot of overreaction here.
                      George

                      Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                      Posted by: "Gilliland, Mary" mkgilliland@...<mailto:mkgilliland%40pima.edu> sunny_hvar
                      Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 11:20 am ((PST))

                      Very interesting! Maybe this is why it is so difficult to get a Physical Anthropologist for the 5-field panel. Many told me they no longer join the AAA.

                      Mary Kay, in Tucson

                      From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
                      Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:09 PM
                      To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>
                      Subject: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                      Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.

                      I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.

                      No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
                      www.psychologytoday.com

                      You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.

                      Bob

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • George Thomas
                      Completely agree. Bingo.  Precisely why Jonathan Marks expounds on the Ishi autopsy caper so well in Why I Am Not A Scientist.   Ales Hrdlicka (Sp? My Czech
                      Message 10 of 16 , Dec 9, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Completely agree. Bingo.  Precisely why Jonathan Marks expounds on the Ishi autopsy caper so well in "Why I Am Not A Scientist."  Ales Hrdlicka (Sp? My Czech is rusty) may have been a mover/shaker of his time, but the idea that Ishi's brain could languish "unstudied" @ the Smithsonian for a century and drop under the curation radar is absolutely amazing. But I preach to the choir.  I'll erase this remark now..... (not)...
                        G
                         
                        Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                            Posted by: "Deborah Shepherd" deborah.shepherd@... deborah_j_shepherd
                            Date: Wed Dec 8, 2010 12:06 pm ((PST))

                        We have that American Experience program in our library, and I use it for every cultural anthro class, but I can see it being used in physical anthropology as well. It prepares the way for discussion of false ideas about race and evolution.

                        Deborah

                        From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of George Thomas
                        Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 8:55 AM
                        To: sacc-l@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [SACC-L] Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists



                        Yes. It's perfect for an intro class in that one can cite examples from it for almost all sections.  It raises questions about self-awareness and how it is expressed given circumstances that are (fortunately) rare. No one ever quite found the answer to what Ishi would have called himself while the rest of the Yahi were alive.  I see eyes widen as we discuss the movie in classes. (A refreshing change from the usual, with eyes closing and heads nodding....:-)
                        Then there are those interesting little nagging issues surrounding remnant Late Victorian science and Ishi's brain.  Drives the point home, eh wot?
                        George

                        Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                            Posted by: "Anthropmor" anthropmor@...<mailto:anthropmor%40AOL.COM>
                            Date: Tue Dec 7, 2010 11:19 am ((PST))

                        Is that the American Experience film?
                          I use that one in class.
                        Mike Pavlik

                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: George Thomas <broruprecht@...<mailto:broruprecht%40yahoo.com>>
                        To: sacc-l <sacc-l@yahoogroups.com<mailto:sacc-l%40yahoogroups.com>>
                        Sent: Sat, Dec 4, 2010 9:49 pm
                        Subject: [SACC-L] Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                        I regularly plagiarize - oops, refer to - the book title "magic, science, religion and the scope of rationality", S. J. Tambiah 1990, when discussing cosmology in my intro classes.  So it strikes me as a wild misrepresentation of any such discussion for the AAA to so much as APPEAR to disassociate itself from "science."
                        Jonathan Marks, in his book "Why I Am Not A Scientist," critiques some of the less savory episodes of anthropology's history -- I was pleased to find that he includes an account of the crazy brouhaha over Ishi's brain and its ... uh ... "curation"..., just as I prepared to talk about it, and while the class was fresh from viewing the movie, "Ishi, The Last Yahi."
                        There seems to be some caving in to lame postmodern stances here, with the venue for full discussion of the issues being the loser.
                        If scientific theories grow through challenges, new information and "falsification" of hypotheses, of course scientists and whole fields of science should be subject to the same challenges.  I smell a lot of overreaction here.
                        George

                        Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                            Posted by: "Gilliland, Mary" mkgilliland@...<mailto:mkgilliland%40pima.edu> sunny_hvar
                            Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 11:20 am ((PST))

                        Very interesting!  Maybe this is why it is so difficult to get a Physical Anthropologist for the 5-field panel.  Many told me they no longer join the AAA.

                        Mary Kay, in Tucson

                        From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
                        Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:09 PM
                        To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Subject: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                        Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.

                        I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.

                        No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
                        www.psychologytoday.com

                        You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.

                        Bob

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Kaupp, Ann
                        FYI On the repatriation of Ishi to the Yana http://anthropology.si.edu/repatriation/projects/ishi.htm From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                        Message 11 of 16 , Dec 10, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          FYI
                          On the repatriation of Ishi to the Yana
                          http://anthropology.si.edu/repatriation/projects/ishi.htm


                          From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of George Thomas
                          Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 12:40 PM
                          To: sacc-l@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: [SACC-L] Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists



                          Completely agree. Bingo. Precisely why Jonathan Marks expounds on the Ishi autopsy caper so well in "Why I Am Not A Scientist." Ales Hrdlicka (Sp? My Czech is rusty) may have been a mover/shaker of his time, but the idea that Ishi's brain could languish "unstudied" @ the Smithsonian for a century and drop under the curation radar is absolutely amazing. But I preach to the choir. I'll erase this remark now..... (not)...
                          G

                          Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                          Posted by: "Deborah Shepherd" deborah.shepherd@...<mailto:deborah.shepherd%40anokaramsey.edu> deborah_j_shepherd
                          Date: Wed Dec 8, 2010 12:06 pm ((PST))

                          We have that American Experience program in our library, and I use it for every cultural anthro class, but I can see it being used in physical anthropology as well. It prepares the way for discussion of false ideas about race and evolution.

                          Deborah

                          From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of George Thomas
                          Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 8:55 AM
                          To: sacc-l@yahoogroups.com<mailto:sacc-l%40yahoogroups.com>
                          Subject: [SACC-L] Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                          Yes. It's perfect for an intro class in that one can cite examples from it for almost all sections. It raises questions about self-awareness and how it is expressed given circumstances that are (fortunately) rare. No one ever quite found the answer to what Ishi would have called himself while the rest of the Yahi were alive. I see eyes widen as we discuss the movie in classes. (A refreshing change from the usual, with eyes closing and heads nodding....:-)
                          Then there are those interesting little nagging issues surrounding remnant Late Victorian science and Ishi's brain. Drives the point home, eh wot?
                          George

                          Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                          Posted by: "Anthropmor" anthropmor@...<mailto:anthropmor%40AOL.COM><mailto:anthropmor%40AOL.COM>
                          Date: Tue Dec 7, 2010 11:19 am ((PST))

                          Is that the American Experience film?
                          I use that one in class.
                          Mike Pavlik

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: George Thomas <broruprecht@...<mailto:broruprecht%40yahoo.com><mailto:broruprecht%40yahoo.com>>
                          To: sacc-l <sacc-l@yahoogroups.com<mailto:sacc-l%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:sacc-l%40yahoogroups.com>>
                          Sent: Sat, Dec 4, 2010 9:49 pm
                          Subject: [SACC-L] Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                          I regularly plagiarize - oops, refer to - the book title "magic, science, religion and the scope of rationality", S. J. Tambiah 1990, when discussing cosmology in my intro classes. So it strikes me as a wild misrepresentation of any such discussion for the AAA to so much as APPEAR to disassociate itself from "science."
                          Jonathan Marks, in his book "Why I Am Not A Scientist," critiques some of the less savory episodes of anthropology's history -- I was pleased to find that he includes an account of the crazy brouhaha over Ishi's brain and its ... uh ... "curation"..., just as I prepared to talk about it, and while the class was fresh from viewing the movie, "Ishi, The Last Yahi."
                          There seems to be some caving in to lame postmodern stances here, with the venue for full discussion of the issues being the loser.
                          If scientific theories grow through challenges, new information and "falsification" of hypotheses, of course scientists and whole fields of science should be subject to the same challenges. I smell a lot of overreaction here.
                          George

                          Re: No Science Please, We're Anthropologists
                          Posted by: "Gilliland, Mary" mkgilliland@...<mailto:mkgilliland%40pima.edu><mailto:mkgilliland%40pima.edu> sunny_hvar
                          Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 11:20 am ((PST))

                          Very interesting! Maybe this is why it is so difficult to get a Physical Anthropologist for the 5-field panel. Many told me they no longer join the AAA.

                          Mary Kay, in Tucson

                          From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
                          Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:09 PM
                          To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>
                          Subject: [SACC-L] No Science Please, We're Anthropologists

                          Anybody see this? Apparently the AAA wants to disassociate itself with science or something like that.

                          I read about it on a 'Psychology Today' blog. You can get too, by clicking the link. I think.

                          No Science, Please. We're Anthropologists. | Psychology Today
                          www.psychologytoday.com

                          You might have to scroll down on the page a bit to get the link.

                          Bob

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.