Decryption, Demystification, Learning, Liberating
This is the first draft of me trying to explain the importance of something for anthropologists that they can practically do.
I realize that it probably doesn’t seem to relate to what it is about.
I will provide the answer at the bottom so you get the benefit of reading it without it being explicit first. Please comment with suggestions, though I will release something clearer and more colourful soon.
Students and Teachers of anthropology tend to take the ethics of their research methods very seriously? They tend to be very reflexive in questioning themselves, their methods and even the technologies that are a part of their research? They ask questions about whether non-human entities have agency? They consider the problematic effect of current academia’s reproductive hierarchy on their research? They try to break away from a one-dimensional understanding by discovering and weaving together the social, physical, temporal, and emotional aspects of humanity?
They appreciate human variety?
What if anthropologists are doing most of their anthropology using a methodology, technology, non-human entity, that is actively a part of a colonialist elitist culture, part of creating a cultural and physical hegemony, and suffocates variety on a glocal scale.
What if anthropologists are doing most of their anthropology using a methodology, technology, non-human entity, that is based on collaboration, increasing variety, is environmentally adaptive, human sensitive, and part of a movement to free-up parts of society.
Anthropologists try to demystify aspects of what makes up being a human. In some senses they decrypt the mysterious, whether this mystery be what it means to be human, what a certain genetic pattern or cultural practice is about, or whether it is a mystery through deliberate alienation or promotion of ignorance.
In this process anthropologists can learn and bring learning that enriches our understanding and appreciation of humankind. It can liberate us from being shrouded in ignorance and allow us to act in a more meaningful and sensitive way. It can liberate us to hack our own existence and create a variety of paths to living it.
If you are an anthropologist then you would engage with technologies and communities that share more similar ideals,
and actively bring them into being?
If you are an anthropologist then would you ignore such a possibility?
To make crucial change does not necessarily mean instant complete differentiation, but it at lest means that in coming decisions an effort to implement parts of what is being changed into.
Remember, all human practices, activities, and technologies are embedded together within the relationships we share across space and time.
What I am talking about is how the majority of peoples use Apple-Macs and Microsoft Windows, rather than trying the ethical computing alternatives. And how the majority of people are probably mystified and unaware of what this means for themselves and much of the rest of humanity.