Reflexividad y contexto en el quehacer antropológico.
Reflexividad y contexto en el quehacer antropológico.
Authors
Durán Pérez, Teresa
Carrasco Henríquez, Noelia
Berho Castillo, Marcelo
Carrasco Henríquez, Noelia
Berho Castillo, Marcelo
Authors
Date
2012-12-17
Datos de publicación:
Keywords
Antropología interactiva - Antropología
Collections
Abstract
Los cambios sustantivos que se han generado en la disciplina parecen responder a una
matriz más o menos similar: los antropólogos toman conciencia de los límites de las teorías
que manejan o aplican respecto de determinadas características socioculturales del
contexto en el que trabajan. Ante tales desafíos intelectuales tienden a formular propuestas que consideran diferentes a las convencionales en uso, siendo los pares quienes legitiman los aportes que tales propuestas puedan representar, en el campo teórico y/o metodológico.
En este artículo se presenta de un modo sucinto una experiencia de re-enfoque de la
antropología formal y particularmente del quehacer antropológico en un contexto dado,
un contexto en el cual el antropólogo no es un visitante sino que es estratégicamente,
convocado por la sociedad local. La base metodológica de esta experiencia es la
reflexividad generada en los últimos diez años a partir de la práctica sistemática de una
etnografía reflexiva en el marco de una teoría postestructuralista. Las problemáticas
centrales se expresan en interrogantes tales como: ¿cómo se reproduce la antropología
en contextos distintos a los originarios?, ¿en qué medida estos contextos condicionan a
la antropología?, y ¿en qué medida el antropólogo re-direcciona los cambios de su
quehacer?
The recent substantive transformations in the discipline of anthropology seem to respond to a similar impulse: that anthropologists are becoming increasingly conscious of the Iimits of theories when applied to the socio-cultural specificity of the local contexts in which they work. Faced with such intellectual quandaries, anthropologists tend to formulate alternative proposals whose theoretical and / or methodological legitimacy only their peers are deemed capable of judging. This article will present an attempt to refocus the tasks of faced by formal anthropology in a particular local context in which the anthropologist is not a visitor but is strategically invited by the local population. The methodological base of this experience is found in the reflections spawned by ten years of the systematic application of a reflexive ethnography, situated within post-structural theory. The central problems addressed are expressed in questions such as: how do you reproduce anthropology in contexts distinct from their original ones, to what degree do such contexts influence anthropology, and to what extent does the anthropologist redirect the development of his / her work?.
The recent substantive transformations in the discipline of anthropology seem to respond to a similar impulse: that anthropologists are becoming increasingly conscious of the Iimits of theories when applied to the socio-cultural specificity of the local contexts in which they work. Faced with such intellectual quandaries, anthropologists tend to formulate alternative proposals whose theoretical and / or methodological legitimacy only their peers are deemed capable of judging. This article will present an attempt to refocus the tasks of faced by formal anthropology in a particular local context in which the anthropologist is not a visitor but is strategically invited by the local population. The methodological base of this experience is found in the reflections spawned by ten years of the systematic application of a reflexive ethnography, situated within post-structural theory. The central problems addressed are expressed in questions such as: how do you reproduce anthropology in contexts distinct from their original ones, to what degree do such contexts influence anthropology, and to what extent does the anthropologist redirect the development of his / her work?.