It May Be In The Cultural Particularities

I Was Trained In The '50s As A New Critic. I Remember What Literature Was Like Before The New Critics, When People Stood Up And Talked About Shelley's Soul And Such Things

My Instincts Are Always Against People Who Want To Fasten Some Sort Of Hegemony Onto Things

Understanding A People's Culture Exposes Their Normalness Without Reducing Their Particularity...it Renders Them Accessible: Setting Them In The Frame Of Their Own Banalities, It Dissolves Their Opacity.

Younger Anthropologists Have The Notion That Anthropology Is Too Diverse. The Number Of Things Done Under The Name Of Anthropology Is Just Infinite; You Can Do Anything And Call It Anthropology

I Agree With Chomsky In Almost Nothing. When It Comes To Innate Structures And So On, I'm Very Skeptical