Economic Anthropology: An Undisciplined Discipline
Science is built up of facts, as a house is built of stones; but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house. We do not see things as they way they are; we see them as they way WE are.
Chapter 1 Controversy and social science The formalist – substantivist debate Economic anthropology after the great debate Conclusion?
Controversy and social science 這一段中最最關鍵的「一個字」？ “controversy”!!! 為什麼要談「controversy」？ Anthropology, like the other social sciences, is in a state of constant change and fermentation, and our definitions of relevant facts, our preoccupations, and our questions and answers change all the time Controversy is not an aberration in science; it is the substance of it. 看待學術史上辯論時，應該持有的態度是什麼？ “Controversy”和“economic anthropology”有什麼關係？ 促成“economic anthropology”形成一門領域的第一場辯論是什麼？
故事‧要從1950年代說起… 1950年代之前的經濟人類學 特色？ 與經濟學家爭論的焦點？ 經濟學家的立場？ ethnocentric, importance of culture, the diversity of economic systems 經濟學家的立場？
↑Karl Polanyi: Trade and Market in the Early Empires
論戰的序幕 祖師爺爺是誰？ 爭論的焦點？ 似曾相似：relativist vs. universalist 公說公有理‧婆說婆有理‧到底誰比較有道理？
The substantive position 實質論派的立場 Karl Polanyi 這個人 一個引起人類學家注意的經濟（史）學家 Key concept formal vs. substantive reciprocity, redistribution, exchange relativism and evolutionism unit of analysis The society as a whole
The formalists strike back 形式論派的反擊 60年代社會科學的思潮 Descriptive → modern/comparative/rule-generating ‘SCIENCE’ Culture explains everything? Key concept what’s wrong with the substantivist? 普世的準則 unit of analysis Individuals, economic behavior: decision-making and choice 弱點 Substantivist 就此服輸？
Postmortem 爭論之後… The economy is a type of human activity, embeded in different social institutions in different kinds of societies. The economic rationality of the maximising individual was to be found in all societies, in all kinds of behaviour. 1‧2‧3‧4‧5 1‧2‧3‧4 所以……
追根究底 一場失去焦點的辯論 辯論的意義 窄化的假設 出發點：Society ←→ Individuals Debating human nature 辯論的意義 觸及了深刻的、重要的、普遍的關於「人」的問題 提出更多、更寬廣的人類學問題
誰是贏家？ 判準？ 都贏？ 都輸？