The future of a discipline: Considering the ontological/methodological future of the anthropology of consciousness, part I
Anthropology of Consciousness 21 (1):1-29 (2010)
| Abstract | Calling for an expanded framework of EuroAmerican science's methodology whose perspective acknowledges both quantitative/etic and qualitative/emic orientations is the broad focus of this article. More specifically this article argues that our understanding of shamanic and/or other related states of consciousness has been greatly enhanced through ethnographic methods, yet in their present form these methods fail to provide the means to fully comprehend these states. They fail, or are limited, because this approach is only a “cognitive interpretation” or “metanarrative” of the actual experience and not the experience itself. Consequently this perspective is also limited because the researcher continues to assess his or her data through the lens of their symbolic constructs, thereby preventing them from truly experiencing shamanic and psi/spirit approaches to knowing since the data collection process does not “in and of itself” affect the observer. We, therefore, need expanded ethnographic methods that include within their approaches an understanding of methods and techniques to experientially encounter these states of consciousness—and become transformed by them. Our becoming transformed and then recollecting our ethnoautobiographical experiences is the means toward a new kind of science and its methods of inquiry that this article seeks to encourage | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,653 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesH. Sidky (2009). A Shaman's Cure: The Relationship Between Altered States of Consciousness and Shamanic Healing. Anthropology of Consciousness 20 (2):171-197.
D. Aerts, J. Broekaert & Liane Gabora (2002). Intrinsic Contextuality as the Crux of Consciousness. In Kunio Yasue, Marj Jibu & Tarcisio Della Senta (eds.), No Matter, Never Mind: Proceedings of Toward a Science of Consciousness: Fundamental Approaches (Tokyo '99). John Benjamins.
Overgaard Morten (2008). An Integration of First-Person Methodologies in Cognitive Science. Journal of Consciousness Studies 15 (5):100-120.
Joseph Agassi (1974). The Logic of Scientific Inquiry. Synthese 26 (3-4):498 - 514.
Daniel Callahan (2000). Judging the Future: Whose Fault Will It Be? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (6):677 – 687.
Michel Ferrari & Adrien Pinard (2006). Death and Resurrection of a Disciplined Science of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies 13 (12):75-96.
Ronald J. Pekala & V. K. Kumar (2007). An Empirical-Phenomenological Approach to Quantifying Consciousness and States of Consciousness: With Particular Reference to Understanding the Nature of Hypnosis. In Graham A. Jamieson (ed.), Hypnosis and Conscious States: The Cognitive Neuroscience Perspective. Oxford University Press.
Marc Blainey (2010). Special Section: The Future of a Discipline: Considering the Ontological/Methodological Future of the Anthropology of Consciousness, Part II†. Anthropology of Consciousness 21 (2):113-138.
Rafael G. Locke (2011). The Future of a Discipline: Considering the Ontological/Methodological Future of the Anthropology of Consciousness, Part III. Anthropology of Consciousness 22 (2):106-135.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-03-05Total downloads89 ( #7,872 of 548,984 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,327 of 548,984 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
