Yanomamo paper
As I pointed out, this will be much different that the other papers: you have more time to do it, and it involves independent research. Start with reading this very detailed account of what people call the “Darkness in El Dorado” controversy.
https://content.ucpress.edu/chapters/10219.ch01.pdf (Links to an external site.)
This should give you a good grounding in the basic argument. Next, do some research. Perhaps just choose one or two persons (like Leslie Sponsel or Patrick Tierney) and understand their arguments. It is easy to find discussions online of these arguments. TWO ADDITIONAL SOURCES ARE REQUIRED.
Here are some of the personalities and their stands on the controversy:
https://embodiedknowledges.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-chagnon-controversy-what-are-issues.html (Links to an external site.)
For those of you who prefer film, here is a conference session with different people giving their opinions:
http://anthroniche.com/darkness-in-el-dorado-controversy/archived-resources/yanomami-controversy-a-decade-later/ (Links to an external site.)
The paper should be 6-7 pages double-spaced. Read your draft aloud before making a final copy to turn in, this helps you find both typing errors and errors in reasoning. Begin with an introductory paragraph, what you will discuss. Now choose 3 allegations from the list below, state Chagnon’s view and his opponents view with a paragraph each. Then write a paragraph of YOUR view of it and justify your argument. Do you agree with his critics, or feel they are unfair? Then write a conclusion about how you feel about the controversy in general after this exercise.
Here are the topics:
Were Chagnon’s relationships with the Yanomami unethical?
Is Chagnon’s ethnographic description of the Yanomami derogatory, and therefore unethical?
Should Chagnon have refrained from publishing data which could be misused by others to justify oppression of the Yanomami?
Was Chagnon’s treatment by the AAA unethical?
Did Chagnon deliberately falsify his data to fit sociobiological theories?
Is Chagnon’s claim that violence in Yanomami society at the time and place of his fieldwork was primarily motivated by male desire for access to women justified by the evidence?
Is Chagnon’s claim that Unokais (men who had killed) had more wives and children than other men their own age justified by the evidence?
If Unokais (killers) are more reproductively successful than other comparable men, can this finding be generalized to make the sociobiological claim that in ancestral human populations, violence enhanced reproductive success and therefore chronic warfare was the normal condition?
Should anthropology be a science, and is anthropological knowledge scientific knowledge?
Is the production of scientific knowledge compatible with activism on behalf of indigenous people?
Cast of Characters: Darkness in El Dorado Debate (so you can remember who is who)
Napolean Chagnon: In studying the Yanomamo, he hurts anthropologists’ feelings by 1) attributing warfare to competition over women, hence a matter of reproductive success, not culture and 2) depicting Yanomamo as anything but Noble Savages, rather violent and kind of disgusting.
Marvin Harris: Maintains that culture not biology causes behavior, though he attributes causal priority to the relationship between people and the environment. He proposes it is “Protein Hunger” that causes Amazonian warfare.
Brian Ferguson: Objects to sociobiology explanations, claims Chagnon’s data on killers is incorrect, as well as their reasons for killing. Hosts seminar about the conflict at the American Anthropological Association. Claims warfare is the consequence of contact with the West.
Leslie Sponsel: He states “From the start of the controversy through to this day my position has been that it is primarily about the harm done to the Yanomami”, says theoretical debate is a smokescreen
Elizabeth Povinelli: Objects to ethnocentric hurtful description of Yanomamo
Ken Good: A doctoral student of Chagnon’s who had a falling-out with him after they spent time together in the field. (He ultimately got his doctorate working with Marvin Harris, a critic of Chagnon.) Good spent twelve years among the Yanomami and married a Yanomami (Yarima). He did not find the Yanomamo fierce.
3 links are above, not sure if they’ll come out as links may have to copy and paste into google or something
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|