Three ontological turnings, Martin Holbraad

The purpose of this talk is to clarify some of the basic premises of the so-called ‘ontological turn’ in recent anthropological theory. Presenting briefly two examples of ethnographic analysis that demonstrate some of the basic characteristics of this approach, I suggest that the ontological turn must be understood as a strictly methodological proposal, and above all as a technique of anthropological description. Thus understood, the ontological turn involves deepening and radicalizing three features that have always been present in mainstream anthropological research, namely reflexivity, conceptualization and experimentation.
Martin Holbraad is Professor of Social Anthropology at UCL. His main field research is in Cuba, where he focuses on Afro-Cuban religions and revolutionary politics. He is the author of Truth in Motion: The Recursive Anthropology of Cuban Divination (Chicago, 2012), co-editor of Thinking Through Things: Theorising Artefacts Ethnographically (Routledge, 2007) and Framing Cosmologies: The Anthropology of Worlds (Manchester, 2014), and co-author of The Ontological Turn: An Anthropological Exposition (Cambridge, 2016). At present he directs a 5-year ERC-funded research project on the anthropology of revolutionary politics.
Spotkanie odbyło się 2.12.2015w ramach projektu „Antropologia dziś - otwarte seminaria naukowe” finansowanego ze środków Ministerstwa Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego. Projekt jest realizowany przez Stowarzyszenie „Pracownia Etnograficzna” im. Witolda Dynowskiego we współpracy z Instytutem Etnologii i Antropologii Kulturowej UW.

[@billguschwan4112]

32:50 “ to be grasped by the natives point of view” is sandhyabhasa or “having in view language “ aka twilight language

[@lautaroamore3597]

Why important stuff always have such shitty audio quality

[@geoffreydawson5430]

Why not study up? For example, from a political/religious point of view. The contemporary world is currently split by a Protestant world view (Weber) and a now secularized simplification of Buddhist Mindfulness for self regulation (Foucault). Take the political upheaval Jordan Peterson has created through his pronoun critique of left wing politics. As a result we have a tribal mentality amongst many men with a few woman attaching themselves with his, I argue, heavily influenced, to the point of dogmatic, Christian analogy of Jungian's shadow side. Now compare this with the newly introduced secular mindfulness as a form of public pacification for a neoliberal political/economic structure. My connection of this split to that of the 'Ontological Turn' is in the need of the individual, through mindfulness practices, to look within and their connections to present awareness to the all inclusive connectivity with existence, instead of an other worldly external belief in a God. This, I argue, has many implications at a policy level in the make up of societies. Just where does power lie? And what does this do to those institutions reliant on Christian worldviews. In defense, secular mindfulness trainers will proclaim mindfulness is a universal human sense of being and thus those with other religions can merge their beliefs. But, again I argue, from the point of view of an Ontological Turn, the ontology of Mindfulness from its truly Buddhist foundations has vast complexities and nuances than those simply provided through contemporary psychology. Instead of simplifying contemporary mindfulness as Protestant Buddhism, rather we should be reflecting on the shift back to a more interconnective relationship with a grounded this worldly acceptance of reality, rather than the Protestant driven forms of colonialism which stripped many cultures of their this worldly relationship with existence.

[@MineCraftQhead]

Jisis