This paper reports the text of the intervention pronounced by Claude Lévi-Strauss for the 60th anniversary of Unesco in 2006. Lévi-Strauss recalls the intersections between his activity in the field of anthropology and ethnology and Unesco since its foundation, and the role Unesco can play nowadays in the preservation of cultural diversity and biodiversity.

El objeto de este artículo es mostrar las similitudes que existen entre el estructuralismo metateórico sneedeano y la que considero es la propuesta teórica más desarrollada del estructuralismo francés, la teoría antropológica de Claude Lévi-Strauss, en particular, su teoría de los sistemas elementales de parentesco. Aunque entre el estructuralismo francés de Lévi-Strauss y el estructuralismo metateórico sneedeano sólo existe, como diría Wittgenstein, un “aire de familia”, sin embargo, quiero mostrar que gracias al trabajo algebraico de André Weil (...) y, en particular, a su clarificación de la noción de estructura, existe un “puente” entre la propuesta teórica de Lévi-Strauss y la metateórica del estructuralismo inaugurada por J. D. Sneed en 1971 con la publicación de su libro The logical structure of mathematical physics. (shrink)

Při výběru z teorií, které bychom mohli aplikovat na problém, jímž se zabýváme, je pro nás účinnost jejich použití jedním z nejdůležitějších kritérií. Jinými slovy, naše hodnocení teorií se odvíjí o jejich schopnosti řešit problémy. V tomto eseji nejprve ukáži, jaké druhy problémů jsou pro sociální vědy klíčové, a s pomocí strukturalistické kritiky funkcionalismu nabídnu ilustrace těchto problémů. Budu přitom tvrdit, že Lévi-Straussovy přísliby spojené s jeho metodou nebyly nikdy naplněny a že je strukturální antropologie neuspokojivá.

Lévi-Strauss's centennial is an opportunity to show his inextricable connections with the evolution of 20th-century thought and what these promise for 21st-century anthropology. He has mapped the philosophical parameters for a renewed ethnography which opens innovative approaches to history, agency, culture and society. The anthropological understanding of history, for instance, is enriched by methodical application of his mytho-logical analysis, in particular his claim that myths are `machines for the suppression of time'. Lévi-Strauss's thought has led to the development (...) of new and invigorated forms of structural analysis, exemplified by the way that his concept of canonical expression has provided the foundation for the sophisticated application of transformational analysis and formalization. (shrink)

Resumen: El presente artículo intenta explorar en dos tiempos de indagación del método estructural de Claude Lévi-Strauss. El primero de ellos se ubica en torno de los criterios epistemológicos y metodológicos que cifran el análisis del parentesco y del mito. El segundo tiempo pretende indagar en el alcance de estos criterios para definir la categoría de sujeto y de pensamiento al interior de la antropología estructural. Finalmente, una ilustración de estos problemas es elaborada mediante el tratamiento que el (...) método estructural asigna a la teoría psicoanalítica.: This article attempts an exploration in two inquiry stages of Claude Lévi-Strauss structural method. The first stage will be focused on the epistemological and methodological criteria that encrypt the analysis of kinship and myth. The second stage intends to investigate the scope of these criteria to define the category of subject and thought within the structural anthropology. Finally, an illustration of these problems is elaborated through the treatment that the structural method assigns to psychoanalytic theory. (shrink)

Depuis le célèbre article de Merleau-Ponty, « De Mauss à Claude Lévi-Strauss », la manière dont on évalue le rapport entre ces deux auteurs détermine ou exprime autant d’interprétations historiques du structuralisme et de choix théoriques ou philosophiques quant aux sciences sociales. Cette filiation se voulait une critique: être fidèle à la découverte de Mauss, celle du caractère central de la réciprocité dans la vie sociale, imposait de dépasser la sociologie vers une sémiologie générale. Cet article s’efforce de (...) montrer qu’il ne s’agit pas là, contrairement à l’interprétation subtile qu’en fit Merleau-Ponty, de faire de la réalité sociale un système de points de vue substituables ou de mouvements corrélés de sub-jectivation, mais de montrer que ce sont les « valeurs » qui, du fait de leur nature, de leur ontologie, doivent nécessairement circuler entre plusieurs points de vue exclusifs et complémentaires. Il revisite la célèbre critique de Lévi-Strauss à Mauss sur l’explication de l’obligation de donner par une « force des choses », et replace l’apport de l’anthropologie structurale dans la philosophie de l’esprit contemporaine, là où elle se confronte aux questions ouvertes par la physique sur l’ontologie des objets quantiques. (shrink)

We cannot simply observe that Emile Durkheim, Claude Lévi-Strauss, and Pierre Bourdieu all received philosophical training and subsequently asserted, in surprisingly similar terms, that escaping from philosophy or breaking away from philosophical modes of thought was a necessary condition for any research in the human and social sciences, without considering whether there might be a direct relationship between the sociological ethos and a particular attitude towards philosophy. The "rupture" with philosophyis never complete: the sociologists' conception of sociology is, (...) on the contrary, heavily influenced by the negative image they have of philosophy, which they always invoke as something to be avoided or a specter that must be exorcised. The sociological perception of philosophy thus constitutes a system of oppositions, a set of likes and dislikes deeply ingrained in the minds of practitioners in the human and social sciences, and which, so to speak, form the very foundation of the discipline and its definition of its identity. By reconstructing it, this article proposes a sociological analysis of the genesis, structure, and function of the sociological unconscious. (shrink)

At issue in this study is a question as old as it is presently pertinent: Do individuals form the social or does the social form individuals? Like Socrates, Lévi-Strauss gives ontological priority to society. And his reasons, like those of Socrates, are weighted with ethical concern. But the concern of Levi-Strauss is not "Know thyself." For, by dissolving subjectivity into structures of the collective unconscious, he eliminates the self. Indeed, toward the end of this work, Shalvey likens the entire (...) enterprise of Levi-Strauss to that of Nietzsche. Not content, however, to announce the death of God, he proclaims the death of Man. (shrink)

The ambition and proposal for data modeling of myths presented in this paper is to link contemporary technical affordances to some canonical projects developed in structural anthropology. To articulate the theoretical promise and innovation of this proposal, we present a discrete-event system specification modeling and simulation approach in order to perform a generative analysis and a dynamic visualization of selected narratives, aimed at validating and revitalizing the transformational and morphodynamic theory and methodology proposed by Claude Lévi-Strauss in his (...) structural analysis of myth. After an analysis of Lévi-Strauss’s transformational methodology, we describe in detail how discrete-event system specification models are implemented and developed in the framework of a DEVSimPy software environment. The validation of the method involves a discrete-event system specification simulation based on the extension of discrete-event system specification models dedicated to provide a dynamic Google Earth visualization of the selected myth. Future work around the discrete-event system specification formalism in anthropology is described as well as future applications regarding the impact of computational models to new contemporary anthropological domains. (shrink)

In a wide-ranging 2007 study of Claude Lévi-Strauss's aesthetic thought, Boris Wiseman demonstrates not only its centrality within his oeuvre but also the importance of Levi-Strauss for contemporary aesthetic enquiry. Reconstructing the internal logic of Lévi-Strauss's thinking on aesthetics, and showing how anthropological and aesthetic ideas intertwine at the most elemental levels in the elaboration of his system of thought, Wiseman demonstrates that Lévi-Strauss's aesthetic theory forms an integral part of his approach to Amerindian masks, body (...) decoration and mythology. He reveals the significance of Lévi-Strauss's anthropological analysis of an 'untamed' mode of thinking at work in totemism, classification and myth-making for his conception of art and aesthetic experience. In this way, structural anthropology is shown to lead to ethnoaesthetics. Lévi-Strauss, Anthropology and Aesthetics adopts a broad-ranging approach that combines the different perspectives of anthropology, philosophy, aesthetic theory and literary criticism into an unusual and imaginative whole. (shrink)

Résumé Claude Lévi-Strauss a souvent souligné l’importance que revêtait pour lui la découverte précoce du marxisme dont l’inspiration l’aurait ensuite constamment accompagné dans son travail d’anthropologue. Cette affirmation est devenue un leitmotiv des travaux consacrés à Lévi-Strauss, sans que personne ne se soit soucié d’en vérifier le bien-fondé. De nombreux indices attestent pourtant que Lévi-Strauss s’est livré à une mystification autobiographique. Afin d’en saisir la signification, l’article se propose de reconstituer le contexte du milieu intellectuel parisien (...) des années 1950, lorsque cette mystification a vu le jour, et d’expliquer les raisons qui ont poussé Lévi-Strauss à entretenir cette fiction encore une trentaine d’années plus tard. Le but de cet argument est de montrer que la ruse autobiographique habilement mise en scène, loin de n’être qu’un obstacle herméneutique, peut également devenir une ressource qui aide à lever le voile sur des pans oubliés de l’histoire. (shrink)

Claude Lévi-Strauss is aware of his affinity with the thrust of the Gestalt school. He suggests that he only adds the discipline of sociology or anthropology to those guided by the concept of Gestalt. The structure is made of several elements, none of which can undergo a change without effecting changes in all other elements. Yet one additional aspect has to be emphasized, that of possible prediction applied to a structure. The presence of the properties comprised in a (...) structure makes it possible, according to him, to predict how the model will react if one or more of its elements are submitted to certain modifications. (shrink)

According to the author, the most important lesson of Claude Lévi-Strauss at the epistemological level is the interpretation of anthropology as a transversal knowledge: its innovative definition of structure goes in this direction. The failure of its structuralism is however due to a strong and intolerable reduction of the wealth of aspects and dimensions of the ethnographic experience and the purpose to predispose a frame of limited possibilities (closed system). The author proposes to rehabilitate the thesis of anthropology (...) as a transversal (cross-cultural) knowledge resorting to Wittgenstein’s idea of family resemblances: a flexible approach (open system) that fits the needs and characteristics of anthropological research. (shrink)

This article reframes our understanding of French structural anthropology by considering the work of André Leroi-Gourhan alongside that of Claude Lévi-Strauss. These two anthropologists worked at opposite poles of the discipline, Lévi-Strauss studying cultural objects, like myths and kinship relations; Leroi-Gourhan looking at material artifacts, such as stone tools, bones, arrowheads, and cave paintings. In spite of their difference in focus, these thinkers shared a similar approach to the interpretation of their sources: Each individual object was meaningful (...) only as part of a larger whole. For Lévi-Strauss, structuralism was designed to unlock features of the human mind; for Leroi-Gourhan, to uncover the material processes that underlay human life. Again, in spite of their difference in orientation, both structuralisms produced similar theories of human society. Whether ‘primitive’ or ‘advanced’, all societies functioned the same way: Their institutions worked harmoniously, beyond the intentions of any individual actors, to preserve the stability of the group. This eliminated the basis for thinking one society was superior to another. Finally, the article argues that both Lévi-Strauss and Leroi-Gourhan believed that structural anthropology could found a ‘new humanism’, and thereby rescue modernity from moral degeneration. This ‘new humanism’ could not only produce a universal description of human nature, but also help rethink French colonialism, broker new geopolitical alliances, and prevent the erasure of world cultures. Structural anthropology thus imagined a tight relationship between its social-scientific work and its political-moral mission. (shrink)

In one of the working notes from the Visible and the Invisible, Merleau-Ponty expresses the intention of resuming his critique of Lévi-Strauss ‘s notion of Gestatung in a future version of the text. The recent publication of the notes from the course at College de France (1954-55), and particularly the first of them regarding “L ‘institution dans ľhistoire personelle et publique”, allows a more thorough understanding of that otherwise rather obscure reference. In this paper, we track Merleau-Ponty’s critique of (...) the anthropologist’s theory of history in the courses on institution as well as in other texts of the sarne period (and particularly relevant is the reference to Les aventures de la dialectique). The French philosopher pursues a conceptual path that may move beyond the radical relativism professed by the Lévi-Strauss, which is nothing but a supplement of natural objectivism, and aims at a “ relativization of the relative”. We thus see how Merleau-Ponty focuses this question on the notion of “historical” and “social” perception, suggesting a “ perceptive” reading of the categories proposed by Lévi-Strauss. We believe that this particular phase of the merleau-pontyan reflection on history is a step of the greater importance in the theoretical path towards the ontological inquiries of his last works. (shrink)

The methodology of Latin American economic structuralism has been generally interpreted as an implicit extension of classic French structuralism of Claude Lévi-Strauss and others, without careful examination of the methodological pronouncements of Latin American economists and social scientists. The present paper provides a detailed treatment of how Latin American structuralist methodology was formed between the 1950s and 1970s, with emphasis on Celso Furtado's views. Furtado was influenced by both C. Lévi-Strauss's and F. Braudel's apparently incompatible approaches to (...) structure and history. Furtado's suggested combination of structure and history was based on the use of economic models to interpret successive historical structures, plus the development of the notion of creativity as a link between structures and processes. It differed in some important aspects from the ‘historical-structural method’ usually associated with other Latin American authors such as Sunkel, and Cardoso and Faletto, built on ex.. (shrink)

In this paper the affiliation of Lévi-Strauss with the functional structuralism of Trubetzkoy and Jakobson is defined as “explicit linguistics” and the consonance with the works of Franz Boas is also thrown into relief. As “implicit linguistics” is defined his accurate attention to lexical facts, in the case of questions of nomenclature and in particular of the terminology of kinship. As this regards, Lévi-Strauss perfectly captures not only the differences between linguistic systems and anthropological systems, but also their (...) respective integration. In this way he comes to surmount the model itself of the functional structuralism of a certain linguistics which is too predictive. Finally, in homage to the great scholar, two examples are proposed of the integration of linguistics “without adjectives” and anthropology “without adjectives” in relation to the etymology of gr. anthropos, seen from the point of view of a specific sociolinguistic hierarchy and within the frame of the Indo-Mediterranea area, and of the Indo-European name of the woman of marriageable age (gr. gyné) seen in the perspective of the innovative conditions of exogamous marriage. (shrink)

El presente artículo intenta explorar en dos tiempos de indagación del método estructural de Claude Lévi-Strauss. El primero de ellos se ubica en torno de los criterios epistemológicos y metodológicos que cifran el análisis del parentesco y del mito. El segundo tiempo pretende indagar en el alcance de estos criterios para definir la categoría de sujeto y de pensamiento al interior de la antropología estructural. Finalmente, una ilustración de estos problemas es elaborada mediante el tratamiento que el método (...) estructural asigna a la teoría psicoanalítica. (shrink)

Resumo: Paul Ricoeur propõe uma filosofia do símbolo, que se encontra no limiar da inserção da hermenêutica em sua filosofia. Decisiva para esta fase, foi a interpelação de outras disciplinas que se constituíram por meio da análise da linguagem simbólica, entre as quais se encontra a antropologia estrutural de Lévi-Strauss. Dessa forma, definimos os termos mais específicos do diálogo estabelecido entre Paul Ricoeur e Claude Lévi-Strauss sobre a análise da linguagem simbólica do mito. Esta pesquisa nos auxiliou (...) a compreender melhor a fase de abertura da hermenêutica ricoeuriana e suas aproximações e afastamentos com o estruturalismo lévi-straussiano, tão difundido em nosso campo acadêmico. Palavras-chave: Hermenêutica; Estruturalismo; Símbolo. Convergent divergence: the dialogue between Paul Ricoeur and Claude Lévi-Strauss Abstract: Paul Ricoeur proposes a philosophy of the symbol, which is on the threshold of the insertion of hermeneutics in his philosophy. Decisive for this phase, was to put forward the question to other disciplines that played an essential role in the analysis of symbolic language, among which is the structural anthropology of Lévi-Strauss. Thus, the terms - more specific to the dialogue established between Paul Ricoeur and Claude Lévi-Strauss on the analysis of the symbolic language of myth - were defined. Finally, this research provides a better understanding of the opening phase of the Ricoeur’s hermeneutics as well as its alignments and divergences with the structuralism of Lévi-Strauss so widespread in the academic field. Keywords: Hermeneutics; Structuralism; Symbol. Divergencia convergente: el diálogo entre Paul Ricoeur y Claude Lévi-Strauss Resumen: Paul Ricoeur propone una filosofía del símbolo, que se encuentra en el umbral de la inserción de la hermenéutica en su filosofía. Decisivo para esta fase fue la interpelación de otras disciplinas que se constituyeron a partir del análisis del lenguaje simbólico, entre las que se encuentra la antropología estructural de Lévi-Strauss. Definimos así los términos específicos del diálogo establecido entre Paul Ricoeur y Claude Lévi-Strauss sobre el análisis del lenguaje simbólico del mito. Esta investigación nos ayudó a comprender mejor la fase de apertura de la hermenéutica ricoeuriana y sus aproximaciones y alejamientos del estructuralismo lévi-straussiano, tan difundido en nuestro campo académico. Palabras clave: Hermenéutica; Estructuralismo; Símbolo. Data de registro: 04/10/2022 Data de aceite: 01/02/2023. (shrink)

The things themselves, which only the limited brains of men and animals believe fixed and stationary, have no real existence at all. They are the flashing and sparks of drawn swords, the glow of victory in the conflict of opposing qualities. SummaryThe conflicts between the eristentialism of Jean‐Paul Sartre and the structuralism of Claude Lévi‐Strauss present a privileged site for illuminating larger conflicts in the human studies as a whole. The present paper argues that a method for addressing (...) and perhaps resolving thes conflicts can be drawn from the respective logics of existentialism and structuralism. The essay begins by discussing the dialectical social theory of lean‐Paul Sartre and then, after treating Lévi‐Strauss's theory of structure, goes on to argue that dialectical thought generates structures, and that structuralism invites a dialectical method of construction. While an integration of methods along these lines does not constitute an integrated social theory, it can remove an important obstacle to the development of such theory. (shrink)