| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 人類學研究所 === 87 === Abstract
The participant observation of anthropology presupposes the way anthropologist approach to natives. The problem now turns to those various ways of approach. Which way is a better way? Who gets the authority to claim a way as a better way? Why the Malinowskian participant observation, we have used, constructed by the premise of experimentalism and positivism is the best method so far? The premise of Malinowskian participant observation is listed as follow(Bruyn 1966:1-22):
1、The participant observer shares in the life activities and sentiments of people in
face-to-face relationships.
2、The participant observer is a normal part of the culture and the life of the people
under observation.
3、The role of the participant observer reflects the process of living in society.
These premises determine the content of participant observation, and determine the model relationship between observer and those being observed. But should these premises be unchallengeable truth? Should these premises not be treated just as theoretical products derive from certain schools of western philosophy? What anthropologists claim to used to be free from the stereotypes, hense should this claim not be applied to the fundemental methodology and free the methodology from the long-term domination by certain schools like experimentalism and positivism?
The first part of this thesis attempts to contrast the enthusiasm that anthropologists devoted to ethnographic writings and to methodology. Through this contrast the neglection of the latter will be shown. And then I will take Malinowskian participant observation as an example by tracing its theoretical inheritance back to experimentalism and positivism, in order to prove how such contradictory premises of these two thoughts was inherited meanwhile. For the reason Anthropology has been disturbed by this contradiction.
The second part of this thesis try to construct a different approach of participant observation in terms of phenomenology. In short, this thesis will come to the conclusions that, first to reveal that in the long run anthropology has been permeate through this contradictory resulted from experimentalism and positivism. In search for a logical coherent methodology, I will then try to adopt premises from phenomenology to constitute a new approach. Secondly to elevate fieldwork method to the essentially fundemental status of Anthropology instead of being just an instrument. So that the replacebility of the Malinowskian fieldwork method is proven. And the era of multi-participant observation is coming.
|
|---|
