Cosmological Perspectivism in Amazonia and elsewhere, Four Lectures given in the Department of Social Anthropology, University of Cambridge, February–March 1998

by Eduardo Viveiros de Castro, Roy Wagner

A tour-de-force in the anthropology of ours and other cosmologies. The first official version of the lessons which sparked one of the most influential anthropological movements of the twenty-first century.

Genres: Anthropology

190 pages, Kindle Edition

First published September 1, 1998

About the author

Eduardo Viveiros de Castro is a Professor of Social Anthropology at the National Museum, Rio de Janeiro.

Reviews

[Asa · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I read this book I was a bit woo-wooed how abstract it was. So I did a bit of a search to find out if I was alone in this. Lo and behold, I found that none other than David Graeber had a few issues with it too along that same road.

Here are the two facing each other off:

1. Theoretical Innovation

Viveiros de Castro's Argument (Perspectivism)

Strengths: Viveiros de Castro’s introduction of perspectivism is highly innovative, offering a novel framework to understand indigenous worldviews. It challenges Western assumptions about subjectivity and perception, providing valuable insights into how different cultures conceptualize reality.

Weaknesses: While theoretically rich, it may be criticized for being abstract and potentially detached from practical realities.

Graeber's Argument (Critique of Perspectivism)

Strengths: Graeber’s critique emphasizes the need for practical and material considerations in anthropology, which is a valuable counterpoint to purely theoretical approaches.

Weaknesses: While it provides important balance, it might be seen as less innovative in terms of theoretical advancement compared to perspectivism.

Stronger Argument concerning Theoretical Innovation: Viveiros de Castro

2. Practical Relevance

Viveiros de Castro's Argument:

Strengths: Perspectivism helps to broaden our understanding of cultural diversity and challenges ethnocentric biases.
Weaknesses: The theory might be seen as less directly applicable to concrete issues facing indigenous communities, such as socio-economic struggles or political challenges.

Graeber's Argument:

Strengths: Graeber’s focus on practical and political realities is highly relevant. His argument emphasizes the importance of addressing real-world issues and the lived experiences of indigenous peoples.

Weaknesses: It could be criticized for potentially dismissing the value of theoretical contributions that might not have immediate practical applications.

Stronger argument concerning Practical Relevance: Graeber

3. Engagement with Material and Political Realities

Viveiros de Castro's Argument:

Strengths: It opens up new ways of thinking about indigenous knowledge and challenges dominant paradigms.
Weaknesses: It may not sufficiently address the material and political conditions that affect indigenous peoples' lives, focusing more on theoretical aspects.

Graeber's Argument:

Strengths: Graeber’s approach is grounded in material conditions and political realities, advocating for a more engaged and activist-oriented anthropology.
Weaknesses: While highly relevant, his critique might sometimes overlook the potential value of theoretical frameworks in understanding and addressing these realities.

Stronger argument concerning Engagement with Material and Political Realities: Graeber

Summary:

Viveiros de Castro’s Perspectivism: Strong in theoretical innovation but less focused on practical relevance and material realities.
Graeber’s Critique: Strong in practical relevance and engagement with material realities, but comparatively less innovative theoretically.

Conclusion: You need practical/material/realistic Graeber to balance out the theory of Viveiros de Castro.