Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they told.
Louann Miller wrote: > Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The total- > immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- > approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" was > based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants and a gross > failure to cross-check the stories they told.
He'd have thought "well, good thing I published CotG before that happened".
Louann Miller wrote: > Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The total- > immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- > approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" was > based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants and a gross > failure to cross-check the stories they told.
I imagine he'd probably laugh himself silly. He had a great appreciation for human foibles, and who could help liking a bunch of teenage girls who were annoyed at an officious outsider hamhandedly probing into the most intimate parts of their lives? ;-)
My husband is an archaeologist, which in America means he started as an anthropology student and specialized. There are stories that *any* anthropology B.A. who paid any attention at all in his or her cultural anthropology classes can tell of "informants" playing practical jokes on the poor, hapless anthropologist trying to study them. Being able to recognize this when it happens, allowing for it, and learning not to take everything your told or shown at face value is part of the job.
Louann Miller wrote: >> Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The >> total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
>> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- >> approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" >> was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants >> and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they told.
Hardly current. Freeman waited until Mead died and published his screed in 1983. (Manuscript was done in 1978, but Mead was still alive and might have responded.)
Freeman's book was declared by APA to be "poorly written, unscientific, irresponsible and misleading".
Would seem that the consensus is that Freeman was an ideologue bent on curtailing any thought that adolescent sex might be different than the American version of the aupou system.
Besides the obvious dichotomy Freeman ignores between public declarations of morality and actual practice, (viz. Kinsey, any recent republican religio-conservative politico caught with appendages in the nookie jar, etc.) why didn't Freeman consider that the aged girls of Mead's book wouldn't consider it more of a joke to lie to a johhny-come-lately male who obviously wanted 'proof' that even in Samoa his beliefs and ideals held true?
> Louann Miller wrote: > >> Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The > >> total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
> >> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- > >> approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" > >> was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants > >> and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they told.
> Hardly current. Freeman waited until Mead died and published his screed > in > 1983. (Manuscript was done in 1978, but Mead was still alive and might > have > responded.)
> Freeman's book was declared by APA to be "poorly written, unscientific, > irresponsible and misleading".
> Would seem that the consensus is that Freeman was an ideologue bent > on curtailing any thought that adolescent sex might be different than > the American version of the aupou system.
Not unless the consensus has changed radically since 2006. At that time the consensus was mixed. Anthropoligists have an interest in people believing that their findings, which are often based on interviews, are valid. So Freeman's work met a lot of resistance. Also, as you point out, it is awful reading. However, the idea that Mead was systemically lied to and that her conclusions were wrong has become widely held in anthroplogical circles, if not consensus, or at least it was a few years ago.
> On Oct 28, 12:17 pm, "pan" <p...@syix.com> wrote: >> Louann Miller wrote: >>>> Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The >>>> total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
>>>> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- >>>> approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" >>>> was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants >>>> and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they told.
>> Hardly current. Freeman waited until Mead died and published his >> screed in >> 1983. (Manuscript was done in 1978, but Mead was still alive and >> might have >> responded.)
>> Freeman's book was declared by APA to be "poorly written, >> unscientific, irresponsible and misleading".
>> Would seem that the consensus is that Freeman was an ideologue bent >> on curtailing any thought that adolescent sex might be different than >> the American version of the aupou system.
> Not unless the consensus has changed radically since 2006. At that > time the consensus was mixed. Anthropoligists have an interest in > people believing that their findings, which are often based on > interviews, are valid. So Freeman's work met a lot of resistance. > Also, as you point out, it is awful reading. However, the idea that > Mead was systemically lied to and that her conclusions were wrong has > become widely held in anthroplogical circles, if not consensus, or at > least it was a few years ago.
If everything is suspect, then nothing is true.
Isn't this just an example of a soft science subject to doubt because of an irreducible problem of reproducibility?
Maybe the methods used to bring back famous composers in one sf short, or the myriad of AI avatars, etc. could serve to ressurect Meade's teeny bopper gossips. Then anyone could redetermine the validity of whatever conclusions might have been drawn.
> > On Oct 28, 12:17 pm, "pan" <p...@syix.com> wrote: > >> Louann Miller wrote: > >>>> Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The > >>>> total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
> >>>> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- > >>>> approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" > >>>> was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants > >>>> and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they told.
> >> Hardly current. Freeman waited until Mead died and published his > >> screed in > >> 1983. (Manuscript was done in 1978, but Mead was still alive and > >> might have > >> responded.)
> >> Freeman's book was declared by APA to be "poorly written, > >> unscientific, irresponsible and misleading".
> >> Would seem that the consensus is that Freeman was an ideologue bent > >> on curtailing any thought that adolescent sex might be different than > >> the American version of the aupou system.
> > Not unless the consensus has changed radically since 2006. At that > > time the consensus was mixed. Anthropoligists have an interest in > > people believing that their findings, which are often based on > > interviews, are valid. So Freeman's work met a lot of resistance. > > Also, as you point out, it is awful reading. However, the idea that > > Mead was systemically lied to and that her conclusions were wrong has > > become widely held in anthroplogical circles, if not consensus, or at > > least it was a few years ago.
> If everything is suspect, then nothing is true.
> Isn't this just an example of a soft science subject to doubt because > of an irreducible problem of reproducibility?
You said what the consensus is, as if there was one and you knew it. I said that this is not the consensus. I don't know whether it is "just an example of etc" I just know it seems very likely that Freeman had a point. He may have had a point _and_ some axes to grind. You took a position that was a lot more positive than the one you are taking now.
> Maybe the methods used to bring back famous composers in one > sf short, or the myriad of AI avatars, etc. could serve to ressurect > Meade's teeny bopper gossips. Then anyone could redetermine > the validity of whatever conclusions might have been drawn.
> On Oct 28, 4:26 pm, "pan" <p...@syix.com> wrote: >> Will in New Haven wrote:
>>> On Oct 28, 12:17 pm, "pan" <p...@syix.com> wrote: >>>> Louann Miller wrote: >>>>>> Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The >>>>>> total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
>>>>>> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- >>>>>> approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in >>>>>> Samoa" was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) >>>>>> informants and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they >>>>>> told.
>>>> Hardly current. Freeman waited until Mead died and published his >>>> screed in >>>> 1983. (Manuscript was done in 1978, but Mead was still alive and >>>> might have >>>> responded.)
>>>> Freeman's book was declared by APA to be "poorly written, >>>> unscientific, irresponsible and misleading".
>>>> Would seem that the consensus is that Freeman was an ideologue bent >>>> on curtailing any thought that adolescent sex might be different >>>> than the American version of the aupou system.
>>> Not unless the consensus has changed radically since 2006. At that >>> time the consensus was mixed. Anthropoligists have an interest in >>> people believing that their findings, which are often based on >>> interviews, are valid. So Freeman's work met a lot of resistance. >>> Also, as you point out, it is awful reading. However, the idea that >>> Mead was systemically lied to and that her conclusions were wrong >>> has become widely held in anthroplogical circles, if not consensus, >>> or at least it was a few years ago.
>> If everything is suspect, then nothing is true.
>> Isn't this just an example of a soft science subject to doubt because >> of an irreducible problem of reproducibility?
> You said what the consensus is, as if there was one and you knew it. I > said that this is not the consensus. I don't know whether it is "just > an example of etc" I just know it seems very likely that Freeman had a > point. He may have had a point _and_ some axes to grind. You took a > position that was a lot more positive than the one you are taking > now.
It just seems that some disciplines make more sense the less I am asked to take what seems anecdotal as fundamental to a shared and enlarged life of the mind. I mean, any point Freeman can make is the same point anyone who wanted to could make given that there is little to none observer independent data. If Freeman reproduced (virtually?) the situation of Mead's work, then maybe he would be a more interesting read. As is, how do you choose between the crowds each with dogs in the fight?
I suppose there is also, now, a Meadeiana industry.
You want bloodthroat exchanges of opinion? Look into the Shakespeariana arena (ignore those Marlowe dirt biters).
pan - meandering and thinking of American Romantic Novel plot development. Meville, yes !
Catherine Jefferson wrote: > Louann Miller wrote: > > Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The > > total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
> > I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- > > approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" > > was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants > > and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they told.
> I imagine he'd probably laugh himself silly. He had a great > appreciation for human foibles, and who could help liking a bunch of > teenage girls who were annoyed at an officious outsider hamhandedly > probing into the most intimate parts of their lives? ;-)
> My husband is an archaeologist, which in America means he started as > an anthropology student and specialized. There are stories that any > anthropology B.A. who paid any attention at all in his or her > cultural anthropology classes can tell of "informants" playing > practical jokes on the poor, hapless anthropologist trying to study > them. Being able to recognize this when it happens, allowing for it, > and learning not to take everything your told or shown at face value > is part of the job.
The basic traits of humans, found in any culture: language, use of fire, and lying to anthropologists.
-- Dan Goodman Journal at: dsgood.livejournal.com dsgood.dreamwidth.org dsgood.insanejournal.com
>> Louann Miller wrote: >>> Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The >>> total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
>>> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- >>> approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" >>> was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants >>> and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they told. >> I imagine he'd probably laugh himself silly. He had a great >> appreciation for human foibles, and who could help liking a bunch of >> teenage girls who were annoyed at an officious outsider hamhandedly >> probing into the most intimate parts of their lives? ;-)
>> My husband is an archaeologist, which in America means he started as >> an anthropology student and specialized. There are stories that any >> anthropology B.A. who paid any attention at all in his or her >> cultural anthropology classes can tell of "informants" playing >> practical jokes on the poor, hapless anthropologist trying to study >> them. Being able to recognize this when it happens, allowing for it, >> and learning not to take everything your told or shown at face value >> is part of the job.
> The basic traits of humans, found in any culture: language, use of > fire, and lying to anthropologists.
Well, I think you can drop those last two words. But then isn't "lying" inherent in the basic concept of "human language"? :D
-- 7 Years - 2265 Experiments - 10 tons of explosives - 705 Myths Myths - Will - Fall!
> Dan Goodman wrote: > > Catherine Jefferson wrote:
> >> Louann Miller wrote: > >>> Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The > >>> total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
> >>> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- > >>> approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" > >>> was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants > >>> and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they told. > >> I imagine he'd probably laugh himself silly. He had a great > >> appreciation for human foibles, and who could help liking a bunch of > >> teenage girls who were annoyed at an officious outsider hamhandedly > >> probing into the most intimate parts of their lives? ;-)
> >> My husband is an archaeologist, which in America means he started as > >> an anthropology student and specialized. There are stories that any > >> anthropology B.A. who paid any attention at all in his or her > >> cultural anthropology classes can tell of "informants" playing > >> practical jokes on the poor, hapless anthropologist trying to study > >> them. Being able to recognize this when it happens, allowing for it, > >> and learning not to take everything your told or shown at face value > >> is part of the job.
> > The basic traits of humans, found in any culture: language, use of > > fire, and lying to anthropologists.
> Well, I think you can drop those last two words. But then isn't "lying" > inherent in the basic concept of "human language"? :D
I think you _could_ drop the last two words but it would be even more telling to replace them with "to nosy strangers."
:: You mean you pronounced it as "Nee Ann Dirt Hal"? :: Or do you mean the "th", as in "Nee Ann Durth Al?"
: Louann Miller <louan...@yahoo.com> : The second. Nee AN Der Tal is correct pronunciation.
I have a tendency to say the thorn sound. Which is in some ways ironic. Thames, Thompson, Thallheimer's... or for that matter aiui, "thing" (as in the viking meeting, depending ...).
Mike Schilling <mscottschill...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Louann Miller wrote: >> "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in >> news:hccbmp $62...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>>> Louann, who (cringe) prononuced the "h" in Neanderthal while >>>> talking to Lewis Binford.
>>> The "h"? You mean you pronounced it as "Nee Ann Dirt Hal"?
>>> Or do you mean the "th", as in "Nee Ann Durth Al?"
>> The second. Nee AN Der Tal is correct pronunciation.
>> Binford is not quite up there with anyone named Leakey where >> paleoarchaeology is concerned, but he's pretty high-powered.
> > On Oct 28, 12:17 pm, "pan" <p...@syix.com> wrote: > >> Louann Miller wrote: > >>>> Rereading "Citizen of the Galaxy," as I do every few years. The > >>>> total- immersion anthropologist is named Margaret Mader.
> >>>> I wonder what Heinlein would have thought of the current theory- > >>>> approaching-consensus that most of Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" > >>>> was based on practical joking by local (teenaged girl) informants > >>>> and a gross failure to cross-check the stories they told.
> >> Hardly current. Freeman waited until Mead died and published his > >> screed in > >> 1983. (Manuscript was done in 1978, but Mead was still alive and > >> might have > >> responded.)
> >> Freeman's book was declared by APA to be "poorly written, > >> unscientific, irresponsible and misleading".
> >> Would seem that the consensus is that Freeman was an ideologue bent > >> on curtailing any thought that adolescent sex might be different than > >> the American version of the aupou system.
> > Not unless the consensus has changed radically since 2006. At that > > time the consensus was mixed. Anthropoligists have an interest in > > people believing that their findings, which are often based on > > interviews, are valid. So Freeman's work met a lot of resistance. > > Also, as you point out, it is awful reading. However, the idea that > > Mead was systemically lied to and that her conclusions were wrong has > > become widely held in anthroplogical circles, if not consensus, or at > > least it was a few years ago.
> If everything is suspect, then nothing is true.
> Isn't this just an example of a soft science subject to doubt because > of an irreducible problem of reproducibility?
> Maybe the methods used to bring back famous composers in one > sf short, or the myriad of AI avatars, etc. could serve to ressurect > Meade's teeny bopper gossips. Then anyone could redetermine > the validity of whatever conclusions might have been drawn.
Uh-uh. In Frederik Pohl's Heechee-world there's an Albert Einstein AI reconstructed from all public and private records of him, but in Charles Stross's _Accelerando_ the hyper-economic post-human culture of the inner Solar System is suspected of transmitting not only real reconstructed human minds to the physical-human enclave, but fictional people too, as well as plain forgeries.
So you only get back the people that we think they were, and not the actual person.
As for the anthropology, I suppose you can imagine similar inquiries put to modern people, in different parts of the world, and checked against reality. My own prejudice about the sexes points to females, young especially, being much less likely to boast about fictional sexual experiences than males, if it's a question of that - and to an older woman, too. But maybe I'm mistaken.
Anthony Nance wrote: > Mike Schilling <mscottschill...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Louann Miller wrote: >>> "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in >>> news:hccbmp $62...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>>>> Louann, who (cringe) prononuced the "h" in Neanderthal while >>>>> talking to Lewis Binford.
>>>> The "h"? You mean you pronounced it as "Nee Ann Dirt Hal"?
>>>> Or do you mean the "th", as in "Nee Ann Durth Al?"
>>> The second. Nee AN Der Tal is correct pronunciation.
>>> Binford is not quite up there with anyone named Leakey where >>> paleoarchaeology is concerned, but he's pretty high-powered.
Will in New Haven <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>I think you _could_ drop the last two words but it would be even more >telling to replace them with "to nosy strangers."
You think that "lying to her dad" isn't universal? -- apart from one noisy guy up in Canada, no-one wants a three-cylinder tissue box on bicycle tires.
> My husband is an archaeologist, which in America means he started as an > anthropology student and specialized. There are stories that *any*
Was that also the case in Indiana Jones' time?
> anthropology B.A. who paid any attention at all in his or her cultural > anthropology classes can tell of "informants" playing practical jokes on > the poor, hapless anthropologist trying to study them. Being able to > recognize this when it happens, allowing for it, and learning not to > take everything your told or shown at face value is part of the job.
Wayne Throop wrote: > I have a tendency to say the thorn sound. Which is in some ways ironic. > Thames, Thompson, Thallheimer's... or for that matter aiui, "thing" > (as in the viking meeting, depending ...).
I have no idea how "thing" is supposed to be pronounced in English. In Danish it's "ting".
> As for the anthropology, I suppose you can imagine similar inquiries > put to modern people, in different parts of the world, and checked > against reality. My own prejudice about the sexes points to females, > young especially, being much less likely to boast about fictional > sexual experiences than males, if it's a question of that - and to an > older woman, too. But maybe I'm mistaken.
There is that.
But there is also, in many people. a tendency to try guess what the other person wants to hear, and then saying that to her (or him). (And there may om some anthropoligists, as well as in other people, be a tendency to subtly clue the interview subject in, on what kinds of answers one is most interested in hearing.)
Also I sometimes have a sneaking suspicion that not all cultures have the strong sense of objective truthfulness that exists in ours. Or possibly a more generous assumption is that other cultures may have different traditions regarding in which contexts it is all right to lie (i.e. make up stuff).
In article <4aee1d05$0$282$14726...@news.sunsite.dk>, Peter Knutsen <pe...@sagatafl.invalid> wrote:
>Wayne Throop wrote: >> I have a tendency to say the thorn sound. Which is in some ways ironic. >> Thames, Thompson, Thallheimer's... or for that matter aiui, "thing" >> (as in the viking meeting, depending ...).
>I have no idea how "thing" is supposed to be pronounced in English. In >Danish it's "ting".
English "thing", meaning object, is pronounced with a voiceless "soft" theta, that is, a spirant produced by letting the air escape between the tongue-tip and the upper lip.
Norse "thing" meaning a council is pronounced the same way by those English-speakers who don't realize that it's supposed to be pronounced "ting."
-- Dorothy J. Heydt Vallejo, California djheydt at hotmail dot com Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the hotmail edress. Kithrup is getting too damn much spam, even with the sysop's filters.
In article <KsGGvn....@kithrup.com>, djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) said:
> English "thing", meaning object, is pronounced with a voiceless > "soft" theta, that is, a spirant produced by letting the air > escape between the tongue-tip and the upper lip.
> Norse "thing" meaning a council is pronounced the same way by > those English-speakers who don't realize that it's supposed to be > pronounced "ting."
|
