Participating Observation Law
Early human scholars according to the "Barbarians" or "Primitive" social and cultural materials, the archives, travelers, and The missionary description, the theoretical construction of "An Le Chair". However, in the past century, the "Participatory Observing Law" founded by the British Functional Master Malinovsky has always been the most important way to emphasize the humanology field, which is a revolution in the humanological field. As a typical method system of human learning, it can be a brief summary from the following aspects.
Early anthropology In order to serve the Western Qiangqiang's needs of colonial rule in the world, it has been based on "barbarism", "异 culture", etc. Therefore, the field work is always unfolded in a foreign state. After World War II, the world's political economy has emerged, and humanologists have no convenient to enter the country of "illegitimate culture", and with the horing of globalization, the difference between heteroplast and local is shrinking, the Western countries themselves The contradiction is increasingly obvious, which has prompted the European and American anthropology research to begin the localization process.
The traditional anthropology is based on "isotonic" as a research object, so it is different from the local people relative to the subject. After the Second World War, the Western scholars turned their eyes from the original heterochemical, so there was a bureau in the 1960s. A tendency to believe that the inner people are not suitable for humanity research. When people discarding their social common sense and values of their own society, they can have a method of observing the social common sense and values of their own society, and thoroughly observe the location of the study object. Another tendency to think that the proceeds and the inner people have their own defects, so they advocate both. Fei Xiaotong believes that the proceeds of the bureau have the issue of "can't enter", and the people in the bureau have the drawbacks of "not coming". Therefore, whether it is the foreigner or a bureau, they are subject to their own cultural background, they are unlikely to judge that it is so objective. Jiang Li Yun believes that field workers should first have the identity of the Bureau, with the same and understanding of cultural psychology, but it is best to have an experience of outsiders for a long time to cultivate sufficient sensitivity and objectivity. Lin Dun, American anthropologist, advocated cultivating local scholars to master the research methods of anthropology and encouraged their local culture.
Zhi's community research in the "big" has always been an important perspective of anthropology research. However, humanologists have turned to complex large-scale social research by simple and closed small social research, many people have been a representation of small community research. If it is a homogeneous small society, a village study is very persuasive for the grasp of the overall structure of the society, but in such a large-scale complex society, the community research theory is not perfect. Small communities are just part of greater complex society, and the community is consciously unconsciously affected from all levels of network. Therefore, in the community research, many anthropologists always put field materials in a broader vision, which has produced high theoretical levels and explanatory. In fact, human scholars have studied a specific culture through a solid field, and then explore the general characteristics of human culture from the comparative study of these cultures. Despite some people questioning the representation of the field of field of small communities, as a "unique study of human beings", there is no approach to credibility and research.
The human scholars need to have a research assumption before entering the field, which has been the problem of humanity controversy. Some scholars believe that the basic logical structure of field surveys is that after the findings have issued the problems or phenomena to be studied, they will collect various qualitative materials by participating in observation, collecting various qualitative materials. After preliminary analysis and summarization of the data, further observation and further summarization, through multiple cycles, gradually reaching the theoretical summation, summation, and explanation of phenomena and processes. However, some scholars believe that the predecessibility conditions of anthropological observation are observed forms and structural problems, and the issue of issues are often starting from theoretical presets. In fact, people's observations of things are always a purposeful, and they always have a certain sense of consciousness. Otherwise, the humanology field survey is like an ants that have not touched the angle, and hit everywhere. However, research presets are not research conclusions, and it is impossible to evolve into a preset of demonstration and selectively collect materials in the field. The study is preset in the field or has been confirmed, or the falsification, or further specific, and clarify.
Traditional anthropology field works in the West and non-Western, traditional and modern, urban and rural, customs and rationality, etc., and think that there is a traditional country And customs, all modern is rational and city. This two-point concept determines that field work uses a "civilization" and "barbarism" research path to place Western society in the central position. However, the multinational cultural exchanges and cooperation in the world, the development of science and technology, the flow of population has greatly shortened the distance between field workers and research objects. These facts overturned the concept of tradition and change in the West, customs and rational opposition. In fact, in field work, anthropologists and research objects are equal, they are all cultural expressioners.
1, "long" and "short"
generally believes that the cycle of humanology field surveys is standard in one year. If the survey is shorter than one year, it is impossible to understand the research objects. However, short-term investigations of "a few next few", because of the close combination of fields and books, avoiding simple behavioral investigation, and saving funds, and thus is increasingly favored and respected by researchers.
2, the location of "Birth" and "Cooked"
Most humanity field investigations are mostly studying the culture, which is mostly "student" as an investigation point. In general, if you study the culture you often see from the beginning, you must find out the rules of deep cultural operation, it is often not easy, and it is easy to make a mistake, "I want to" ignore some important things. However, there are many unfavorable factors in the survey point, and there are many unfavorable factors. If you need to enter the field, there is a language, cultural disorder, and so on. And "cooked" is not necessarily not a good survey point, and many human scholars have to go home to do field surveys, which can not only save funds, but also quickly enter the "fields" community with special relationships.
3, observed "into" and "out"
Some scholars believe that in the anthropological field survey, there are mainly four degrees of observation: the observation of the overseas situation, This is more objective, the separation is also high, but the degree of entry into the field is the lowest; the participation of the observer is involved in the field, but the degree of participation is moderate, only the observer's identity, maintained at the same time Objective position, this participation is the most difficult to do; the participant's observation, the observer has been deeply involved, but there are still some observations, a little objective; full participants, a lot of complete subjective participation Only the subjective value judgment can be formed. During the investigation, whether to participate, what extent, what extent is observed is an important issue that participates in the observation.
Traditional nationalizes, that is, the realism of national Zhifang is very emphasized in the "Objective" and "Science" in the description of "illegitimate culture", in order to express their "scientific", Its books often use "locals" perspectives to use the host research method as much as possible. When they saw someone to do something, they didn't say "I saw someone to do something", but said "someone did something." This creates two contradictory effects: On the one hand, the authors let their works show a certain "scientific", and on the other hand, the readers don't know the knowledge of human scholars in field work and their methods of knowledge. Contact. Since the 1960s, a major change in anthropology, especially in the writing of nationalizes, reflecting the traditional nationality established by Markov, so there is a trend of nation to make new experiments for nationality. . The basic characteristics of this trend are three: First, human scholars and their field operations are the focus and intersection of nationalizational experiments; the second is to have a conscious organization and artistic research on text; third, the researchers are cultural Translators, interpretation of cultural events.
4, depth interview and questionnaire survey of organic combined with the questionnaire
In addition to participating in the observation, in addition to participating in the observation, another important part is a deep interview. Some problems are difficult to observe directly, only through deep interviews can come out. This depth access method is highly valid, that is, a material that is very satisfactory is highly required for the question. However, its reliability is not necessarily high, that is, each time the result is not necessarily the same, and it is not necessarily repeated. Compared to humanological depth interviews, it is a questionnaire survey in sociological sense. The questionnaire survey is high, it is repetitive, and its greatest dilemma is sometimes suspicious, that is, the result is not necessarily satisfactory.
Generally, scientific pursuit of general rules, humanistic pursuit of cases. Anthology is a research and cultural freight. In this sense, anthropology is a science. However, the research object of humanology field surveys is human, researchers are also human, research objects have various emotional factors, and they will vary depending on the interpretation of cultural. Therefore, in addition to pursuing cultural general, the humanology field survey should also be appreciated from the individual's position to understand the humanities. Early anthropology is based on scientificness. After that, people began to expose the scientificity of field surveys. The intention of the American anthropologist Guilz is the pursuit of humanometrics.
Academic and application disputes are a long-term presence of a human social science field. Lieqi and Fei Xiaotong are not unique to the academic and appraisal. Lieqi pays attention to theoretical construction, his opposition to the combination of academic and applications, believes that human beings are revealing or explore the superiority of ethnic groups (race / nation). He believes that the knowledge gained by in-depth and meticulous local research is suitable for any human society's investigation. Fei Xiaotong advocates the combination of the two and advocates the type of anthropology based on practice, and criticizing the pure academic research of Lise.