Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Why kinship is progeneratively constrained: Extending anthropology.Robert A. Wilson - 2022 - Synthese 200 (2):1-20.
    The conceptualisation of kinship and its study remain contested within anthropology. This paper draws on recent cognitive science, developmental cognitive psychology, and the philosophy of science to offer a novel argument for a view of kinship as progeneratively or reproductively constrained. I shall argue that kinship involves a form of extended cognition that incorporates progenerative facts, going on to show how the resulting articulation of kinship’s progenerative nature can be readily expressed by an influential conception of kinds, the homeostatic property (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Kinmaking, Progeneration, and Ethnography.Robert A. Wilson - 2022 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 91 (C):77-85.
    Philosophers of biology and biologists themselves for the most part assume that the concept of kin is progenerative: what makes two individuals kin is a direct or indirect function of reproduction. Derivatively, kinship might likewise be presumed to be progenerative in nature. Yet a prominent view of kinship in contemporary cultural anthropology is a kind of constructivism or performativism that rejects such progenerativist views. This paper critically examines an influential line of thinking used to critique progenerativism and support performativism that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Kinship Past, Kinship Present: Bio-Essentialism in the Study of Kinship.Robert A. Wilson - 2016 - American Anthropologist 118 (3).
    In this article, I reconsider bio-essentialism in the study of kinship, centering on David Schneider’s influential critique that concluded that kinship was “a non-subject” (1972:51). Schneider’s critique is often taken to have shown the limitations of and problems with past views of kinship based on biology, genealogy, and reproduction, a critique that subsequently led those reworking kinship as relatedness in the new kinship studies to view their enterprise as divorced from such bio-essentialist studies. Beginning with an alternative narrative connecting kinship (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Descent systems and ideal language.Rodney Needham - 1960 - Philosophy of Science 27 (1):96-101.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Nature and society in social anthropology.Ernest Gellner - 1963 - Philosophy of Science 30 (3):236-251.
    This article is concerned to argue that the social sciences and notably social anthropology, must necessarily be concerned with the physical environment of the societies investigated (which includes the biological nature of its members), and not only with the social reality which is at the centre of their concern. This is argued with special reference to fields such as kinship and politics, and to social relationships such as paternity or feuding. The article is concerned to refute arguments put forward in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Physical and social kinship.J. A. Barnes - 1961 - Philosophy of Science 28 (3):296-299.
    Although this note is prompted by the recent exchange between Gellner [2], [3] and Needham [4], I shall ignore the issues raised by Gellner's specification for an ideal language. I am concerned here only with Needham's statement that ‘biology is one matter and descent is quite another, of a different order’ which, it will be remembered, Gellner treats as Needham's first error. I write under a sense of obligation, for I discussed this matter with Gellner in 1955 while he was (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations