米德·弗里曼·萨摩亚——兼论人类学田野调查与民族志写作

Mead·Freeman·Samoa:with a Discussion on Anthropological Fieldwork and Ethnographic Writing

"米德—弗里曼之争"是人类学史上最为激烈的论战之一,对人类学学科甚至所有"软科学"的反思性思维的培育和启动作出了重要的贡献。文章回顾了学科史上的"米德—弗里曼之争",概括了论战涉及的几个焦点问题,并在此基础上对人类学田野调查和民族志的内在特性、人类学知识的客观性、人类学学科的科学性以及人类学研究中的理论假设等问题进行了比较深入的反思,力图超越"论战"表象而发掘更深层次的理论意义。

As one of the most heated controversies in the history of anthropology, ＂Mead-Freeman controversy＂ contributed much to the reflective thought of the subject （ or even of all ＂soft sciences＂ ）. Taking Freeman＇ s critique towards Mead＇ s paradigmatic study of Samoa in Margaret Mead and Samoa as entry points, this paper gives a brief review of the Mead-Freeman controversy and of the focal issues involved, and then reflects on matters such as inherent characteristics of anthropological fieldwork and ethnography, objectivity of anthropological knowledge, scientific nature of anthropology as a discipline and theoretical assumptions in anthropological research. Namely, the paper aims at exploring deeper theoretical implications beyond the＂ debate＂ itself.