An advanced introduction to the new philosophical anthropology and an understanding of the most contemporary developments in it.

In this conversation, Brazilian anthropologist, philosopher, and political activist Eduardo Viveiros de Castro offers an overview of his thinking, both past and present. After explaining why initially he argued that ontology should be a topic of anthropologists, he discusses his more recent conclusion that indigenous thought should be regarded instead as metaphysical. It is not that la pensée sauvage has an implicit ontology discoverable by the human sciences but, rather, that indigenous people themselves think about metaphysical issues as such. He (...) explains the origins of this position in the ethnographic fieldwork that he undertook in the 1980s with the Awareté of northwestern Brazil and in his and the anthropologist Philippe Descola's parallel engagements with the structuralism of Claude Lévi-Strauss. Finally, Viveiros de Castro addresses the political stakes of ascribing metaphysics to alien and marginal peoples, clarifying what he means by the “permanent decolonization of thought.”. (shrink)

The iconoclastic Brazilian anthropologist and theoretician Eduardo Viveiros de Castro, well known in his discipline for helping initiate its “ontological turn,” offers a vision of anthropology as “the practice of the permanent decolonization of thought.” After showing that Amazonian and other Amerindian groups inhabit a radically different conceptual universe than ours—in which nature and culture, human and nonhuman, subject and object are conceived in terms that reverse our own—he presents the case for anthropology as the study of such “other” metaphysical (...) schemes, and as the corresponding critique of the concepts imposed on them by the human sciences. Along the way, he spells out the consequences of this anthropology for thinking in general via a major reassessment of the work of Claude Lévi-Strauss, arguments for the continued relevance of Deleuze and Guattari, dialogues with the work of Philippe Descola, Bruno Latour, and Marilyn Strathern, and inventive treatments of problems of ontology, translation, and transformation. Bold, unexpected, and profound, _Cannibal Metaphysics_ is one of the chief works marking anthropology’s current return to the theoretical center stage. (shrink)

Are techniques of the body always of the body, and in what sense are they techniques? A response to Yuk Hui’s The Question Concerning Technology in China, this essay takes the techniques of traditi...

This article is an ethnographic account of the speculative thought of Jane Roberts, a spirit medium or “channel,” important in New Age religion for the books that she dictated at the behest of a personality named “Seth.” At first, she tried to understand her strange subjectivity in psychiatric terms, then went on to elaborate metaphysical concepts to account for it. The author argues that understanding Roberts's concepts in social historical terms risks obscuring their meaning and that comparing them with the (...) related concepts of a credentialed philosopher, in this case Gilles Deleuze, is a more effective way of approaching them. The latter sort of interpretation entails another risk, however, which is that concepts like those of Roberts may get taken for mere illustrations of the arguments made by academic philosophers, whereas marginal thinking of Roberts's kind can form sophisticated bodies of thought on their own. Roberts developed concepts of consciousness and the person that exceed, in ways that this article specifies, anything that Deleuze's work can say about them and thus cast his own arguments in an unanticipated light. This essay's main point is that uncredentialed, marginal thinkers like Roberts should be considered proper objects of both anthropological and philosophical study and should be taken seriously for what they can teach us. (shrink)

This introduction to “Anthropological Philosophy: Symposium on an Unanticipated Conceptual Practice” comprises a brief history of attitudes among anthropologists toward the philosophical field of ontology, and attitudes among professional philosophers toward the kinds of alien and marginal thinking with which anthropology is concerned. After the narrative reaches what has been called the “ontological turn” in anthropology, which is generally assumed to represent the current moment in relations between the disciplines, the author discloses the recent emergence of an unexpected cultural practice: (...) a hybrid of anthropology and philosophy that takes metaphysics, as distinct from ontology, as both its object and its method. The distinction between metaphysics and ontology is crucial to this new “intellectual space” because, while ontology is an unconscious possession of any people, metaphysics is a demanding speculative discipline whose becoming an object of anthropology suggests that indigenous peoples consciously deal with questions about what is real and what is not in ways so impressive and sophisticated that they can be compared with the efforts of credentialed philosophers. In this emergent conceptual practice, moreover, the work of academic philosophers is open to elaboration and correction in response to the findings of tribal and Western marginal thinkers. Among the developers of anthropological philosophy are said to be the Brazilian anthropologist Eduardo Viveiros de Castro, the French philosopher Patrice Maniglier, and the other contributors to this symposium, whose articles the author goes on, in this context, to describe and assess. (shrink)

_Elaborates the author’s conception of plasticity by proposing a new way of thinking through Heidegger’s writings on change._.

_Elaborates the author’s conception of plasticity by proposing a new way of thinking through Heidegger’s writings on change._.