<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent resource for learning how to analyze arguments
Review: This book is "about the epistemological foundations of anthropological theory, or the essential nature and ultimate source of anthropological knowledge." It is not "a history of anthropological thought... a catalogue of paradigms... a prospectus for a particular theoretical perspective... or a treatise on research methodology". (p.xiii) Lett's goal is to detail the process of rational inquiry. He is using interpretive anthropology to illustrate his points since he feels it often violates basic principles of rational inquiry. Lett admits he will be using more extreme examples from interpretive anthropology, and not accurately representing it. In the opening chapter, Lett discusses the science vs. non-science debate in anthropology, briefly discussing the origins and goals of interpretive approaches, accusing it of producing irrational arguments. The strength of the book lies in chapters 2 (The Nature of Knowledge) and 3 (The Scientific Approach to Knowledge). In chapter two, Lett discusses the differences between analytical and sythetic propositions, subjective and objective statements, and falsifiability. In chapter 3, Lett presents a detailed definition of science, and outlines methods in which to analyze and evaluate arguments. The remainder (and weaker portion) of the book is devoted to a citique of interpretive anthropology's contributions, and the future of anthropology as a discipline. This is an excellent manual for learning how to construct and evaluate arguments. However, my two problems with the book are: (1) Lett's insistence on evaluating the truth claims of religious beliefs, that science can and should be used to test the claims of religious beliefs. Rather than focus on the function of religion, Lett believes that anthropologists should evaluate religious beliefs in terms of their accuracy. He seems to have a partisan ax to grind, exemplified when disproving the statement "God exists" (p.53), violating his own logical principles that he just outlined. (2) Lett's use of the most rediculous (i.e. Sasquatch example that is constantly used) and extreme examples of interpretive anthropology is weak. Although he himself admits he misrepresents the field in his examples, a more balanced approach could have been taken. It is easy to prove the illogical argumentation of an individual maintaining that Bigfoot is alive and well, running through the Pacific Northwest. Overall, Lett is a clear and concise writer, and has produced a highly readable and useful volume for the study of scientific reasoning in anthropology. Other similar books: Reclaiming a Scientific Anthropology by Lawrence Kuznar
Rating:
Summary: Excellent resource for learning how to analyze arguments
Review: This book is "about the epistemological foundations of anthropological theory, or the essential nature and ultimate source of anthropological knowledge." It is not "a history of anthropological thought... a catalogue of paradigms... a prospectus for a particular theoretical perspective... or a treatise on research methodology". (p.xiii) Lett's goal is to detail the process of rational inquiry. He is using interpretive anthropology to illustrate his points since he feels it often violates basic principles of rational inquiry. Lett admits he will be using more extreme examples from interpretive anthropology, and not accurately representing it. In the opening chapter, Lett discusses the science vs. non-science debate in anthropology, briefly discussing the origins and goals of interpretive approaches, accusing it of producing irrational arguments. The strength of the book lies in chapters 2 (The Nature of Knowledge) and 3 (The Scientific Approach to Knowledge). In chapter two, Lett discusses the differences between analytical and sythetic propositions, subjective and objective statements, and falsifiability. In chapter 3, Lett presents a detailed definition of science, and outlines methods in which to analyze and evaluate arguments. The remainder (and weaker portion) of the book is devoted to a citique of interpretive anthropology's contributions, and the future of anthropology as a discipline. This is an excellent manual for learning how to construct and evaluate arguments. However, my two problems with the book are: (1) Lett's insistence on evaluating the truth claims of religious beliefs, that science can and should be used to test the claims of religious beliefs. Rather than focus on the function of religion, Lett believes that anthropologists should evaluate religious beliefs in terms of their accuracy. He seems to have a partisan ax to grind, exemplified when disproving the statement "God exists" (p.53), violating his own logical principles that he just outlined. (2) Lett's use of the most rediculous (i.e. Sasquatch example that is constantly used) and extreme examples of interpretive anthropology is weak. Although he himself admits he misrepresents the field in his examples, a more balanced approach could have been taken. It is easy to prove the illogical argumentation of an individual maintaining that Bigfoot is alive and well, running through the Pacific Northwest. Overall, Lett is a clear and concise writer, and has produced a highly readable and useful volume for the study of scientific reasoning in anthropology. Other similar books: Reclaiming a Scientific Anthropology by Lawrence Kuznar
<< 1 >>
| 
