Against interpretive exclusivism <sup>*</sup>

Interpretive exclusivism is the dogma that we can only understand cultural systems by interpreting them, thereby ruling out causal explanations of cultural phenomena using scientific methods, for example based on measurement, comparison, and experiment. In this article, I argue that the costs of interpretive exclusivism are heavy and the benefits illusory. I make the case instead for an interactionist approach in which interpretive and scientific approaches work together on an equal footing. Although such approaches are neither easy nor cheap, I argue that they are necessary to improve the intellectual ambition, comparative breadth, and practical relevance of anthropology as a discipline. In all these ways, incorporating rather than excluding scientific methods would improve the long‐term prospects of anthropology as a flourishing field of research and teaching.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute
Published
2024-12-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.14244
Primary Topic
Categorization, perception, and language
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Against interpretive exclusivism *

Harvey Whitehouse
Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute
Categorization, perception, and language
article

Against interpretive exclusivism *

Harvey Whitehouse
article en

Abstract

Interpretive exclusivism is the dogma that we can only understand cultural systems by interpreting them, thereby ruling out causal explanations of cultural phenomena using scientific methods, for example based on measurement, comparison, and experiment. In this article, I argue that the costs of interpretive exclusivism are heavy and the benefits illusory. I make the case instead for an interactionist approach in which interpretive and scientific approaches work together on an equal footing. Although such approaches are neither easy nor cheap, I argue that they are necessary to improve the intellectual ambition, comparative breadth, and practical relevance of anthropology as a discipline. In all these ways, incorporating rather than excluding scientific methods would improve the long‐term prospects of anthropology as a flourishing field of research and teaching.

Journal of the Royal Anthropological InstituteVol. 31(3)
University of Oxford (GB)
Emory University, European Commission, Universitetet i Bergen
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Categorization, perception, and language
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Against interpretive exclusivism <sup>*</sup> — Harvey Whitehouse · Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS