A community of critics? Thoughts on new knowledge

Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 191-209

  Strathern, Marilyn ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33644843094     PISSN: 13590987     EISSN: 14679655     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9655.2006.00287.x     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Ark Group 2004. Brochure, Annual conference of "Knowledge management for the public sector".
2. AWT (Adviesraad voor het Wetenschaps-en Technologiebeleid) 2003. I + 1 > 2: Promoting multidisciplinary research The Hague: AWT (available on-line: http://www.awt.nl/uploads/files/a54uk.pdf.
3. Barnett, R. 2000. Realizing the university in an age of supercomplexity. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
4. Beer, G. 1983. Darwin's plots: Evolutionary narrative in Darwin, George Eliot and nineteenth-century fiction. London: Routledge.
5. Beer, G. 1996. Open fields: Science in cultural encounter. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
6. Brenneis, D. 2004. A partial view of contemporary anthropology. American Anthropologist 106, 580-8.
7. Cohen-Cole, J. 2003. Thinking about thinking in Cold War America. Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University.
8. Devons, E. & M. Gluckman 1964. Introduction and Conclusion. In Closed systems and open minds: The limits of naïvety in social anthropology (ed.) M Gluckman, 13-19, 158-261. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.
9. DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) 2001a. Report on the arts and humanities in relation to science and technology. London: Council for Science and Technology.
10. DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) 2001b. Quinquennial review of the grant-awarding research councils. London: Office of Science and Technology.
11. du Gay P. 2000. In praise of bureaucracy: Weber, organization, ethics. London: Sage.
12. Edmond, G. 2004. Thick decisions: Expertise, advocacy and resonableness in the Federal Court of Australia. Oceania 74, 190-230.
13. Fournier, V. & R. Munro 2004. Undoing management: Markets, virtual absence and the dissemination of managerial practice. University of Keele. TS.
14. Galison, P. 1996. Computer simulation and the trading zone. In The disunity of science: Boundaries, contexts, and power (eds) P. Galison & D. Stump. Stanford: University Press.
15. Gibbons, M., C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott & M. Trow 1994. The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
16. Gooberman-Hill, R. 2003. How multidisciplinarity is good for anthropologists and anthropology. Anthropology in Action 10: 3, 28-34. [Special Issue: 'Scientific innovations and the anthropological gaze' (ed.) J. Skinner.]
17. Hirsch, E. 2004. Boundaries of creation: The work of credibility in science and ceremony. In Transactions and creations: Property debates and the stimulus of Melanesia (eds) E. Hirsch & M. Strathern, 176-92. Oxford: Berghahn.
18. Hoskin, K. 1995. The viewing self and the world we view: Beyond the perspectival illusion. Organization 2, 141-62.
19. Huxley, T.H. 1906a. [1860]. Darwin on the origin of species, Westminster Review, April 1960. In Man's place in nature and other essays, T.H. Huxley, 299-336. London: J.M. Dent.
20. Huxley, T.H. 1906b. [1863]. The present condition of organic nature, first of six lectures to working men on the phenomena of organic nature. In Man's place in nature and other essays, T.H. Huxley, 168-85. London: J.M. Dent.
21. Ives, W., B. Torrey & C. Gordon 2002. Knowledge sharing is a human behavior. In Knowledge managment: Classic and contemporary works (eds) D. Morey, M. Maybury & B. Thuraisingham, 99-129. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
22. Konrad, M. 2003. Predictive genetic testing and the making of the pre-symptomatic person: Prognostic moralities among Huntington's-affected families. Anthropology and Medicine 10, 23-49.
23. Laidlaw, J. 2002. A free gift makes no friends. In The question of the gift: Essays across disciplines (ed.) M. Osteen, 45-66. London: Routledge.
24. Latimer, J. in press. Commanding materials: (re)legitimating authority in the context of multi-disciplinary work. Sociology 38, 757-75.
25. Leach, J. 2004. Modes of creativity. In Transactions and creations: property debates and the stimulus of Melanesia (eds) E. Hirsch & M. Strathern, 151-75. Oxford: Berghahn.
26. Lederman, R. 2004. Towards an anthropology of disciplinarity. Critical Matrix 15, 60-74.
27. Mc Kinnon, S. 2001. The economies in kinship and the paternity of culture: Origin stories in kinship theory. In Relative values: reconfiguring kinship studies (eds) S. Franklin & S. McKinnon, 277-301. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.
28. McSherry, C. 2001. Who owns academic work? Battling for control of intellectual property. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
29. Mansilla, V.B. & H. Gardner 2003. Assessing interdisciplinary work at the frontier: An empirical exploration of 'symptoms of quality'. Rethinking interdisciplinarity, moderators C. Heintz & G. Origgi (available on-line: http://www.interdisciplines.org).
30. Martin, E. 1992. The end of the body? American Ethnologist 19, 121-40.
31. Miyazaki, H. 2004. The method of hope: Anthropology, philosophy, and Fijian knowledge. Stanford: University Press.
32. Miyazaki, H. & A. Riles 2005. Failure as endpoint. In Global assemblages: Technology, politics, and ethics as anthropological problems (eds) A. Ong & S. Collier, 320-31. New York: Blackwell.
33. Moore, H.L. 1996. The changing nature of anthropological knowledge. In The future of anthropological knowledge (ed.) H.L. Moore, 1-15. London: Routledge.
34. Morey, D., M. Maybury & B. Thuraisingham (eds) 2002. Knowledge management: Classic and contemporary works. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
35. Munro, R. 2004. Just waiting: Endless deferral and the social injustice of 'suspending' participants between bidding and evaluation. In Imaginary boundaries: Social justice across disciplines (ed.) R. Lippens, 51-67. Oxford: Hart.
36. Newell, S., M. Robertson, H. Scarborough & J. Swan 2002. Managing knowledge work. Houdmills: Palgrave.
37. Nowotny, H., P. Scott & M. Gibbons 2001. Re-thinking science: knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity.
38. O'Neill, O. 2002. Autonomy and trust in bioethics. Cambridge: University Press.
39. Osborne, T. 2004. On mediators: Intellectuals and the ideas trade in the knowledge society. Economy and Society 33, 430-47.
40. Parry, J. 1986. The gift, the Indian gift and the 'Indian gift'. Man (N.S.) 21, 456-67.
41. Pearson, N. 1997. The concept of native title at common law. Australian Humanities Review, March (available on-line: http://www.lib.latrobe.edu.au/AHR/archive/Issue-March-1997/pearson.html).
42. Power, M. 1999. The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford: University Press.
43. Power, M. 2004. The risk management of everything: Rethinking the politics of uncertainty. London: Demos.
44. Rabinow, P. 2003. Anthropos today: Reflections on modern equipment. Princeton: University Press.
45. Reinhardt, R. 2002. Knowledge management: Linking theory with practice. In Knowledge management: Classic and contemporary works (eds) D. Morey, M. Maybury & B. Thuraisingham, 187-221. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
46. Rhoten, D. 2003. A multi-method analysis of the social and technical conditions for interdisciplinary collaboration. Hybrid vigor, Final Report. National Science Foundation (cited with permission). (Abstract available on-line: http://www.hybridvigor.net/publications).
47. Riles, A. 2000. The network inside out. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
48. Riles, A. 2003. Law as object. In Legal legacies, current crises: Fiji and Hawaii (eds) S. Merry & D. Brenneis, 187-212. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.
49. Riles, A. 2004. Property as legal knowledge: Means and ends. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 10, 775-95.
50. Selwood, S. 2002. Measuring culture. Spiked culture (available on-line: http://www.spiked-online.com/printable/00000006DBAF.htm).
51. Stocking, G. 1987. Victorian anthropology. New York: Macmillan Inc. and Free Press.
52. Strathern, M. 2004a. Accountability across disciplines. In Commons and borderlands: Working papers on interdisciplinarity, accountability and the flow of knowledge, M. Strathern, 68-86. Wantage: Sean Kingston Publishing.
53. Strathern, M. 2004b. Social property: An interdisciplinary experiment. PoLAR (Political and Legal Anthropology Review) 27, 23-50.
54. Strathern, M. 2005. Robust knowledge and fragile futures. In Global assemblages: Technology, politics, and ethics as anthropological problems (eds) A. Ong & S. Collier, 464-81. New York: Blackwell.
55. Sykes, K. 2005. Arguing with anthropology: An introduction to critical theories of the gift. London: Routledge.
56. Toren, C. 1988. Making the present, revealing the past: The mutability and continuity of tradition as process. Man (N.S.) 23, 696-717.
57. Toren, C. 1999. Mind, materiality and history: Explorations in Fijian ethnography. London: Routledge.
58. Trosset, C. 1999. Student discussion styles. General Anthropology 6, 1, 4-8.
59. Viveiros de Castro, E. 2003. And. After-dinner speech given at 'Anthropology and science', 5th Decennial Conference of the Association of Social Anthropologists Association. Manchester: Manchester Papers in Social Anthropology 7.
60. Weiner, J. 2002. Anthropology, the law and the recognition space. Prepared for session 'Articulating culture: Understanding engagements between indigenous and non-indigenous life-worlds', Australian Anthropological Society conference, Canberra.
61. Wheatley, M. 2002. Introduction: Can knowledge management succeed where other efforts have failed? In Knowledge management: Classic and contemporary works (eds) D. Morey, M. Maybury & B. Thuraisingham, 1-8. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.