Concerning the boundaries of serious anthropology, or: Can witches fly?

In a commentary on German anthropology in the 1970s and 1980s, the literary critic Peter Braun has remarked that Duerr’s essay “Can witches fly?” (together with Hubert Fichte’s “Heretical remarks for a new human sciences”) represented nothing less than a charter “for the revolutionary renewal of anthropology against the orthodox forces of the discipline” (Braun 2002: 223). As the literary critic Ian Robinson once observed (1975: 124), “‘In reality’ is the assertion that one set of rules should judge the rest, especially if they are the rules of physics.” Duerr’s compact and sometimes cryptic argument is essentially an exploration of how such judgments about reality are made with respect to claims of sorcerous flight, from the Renaissance scholar Della Porta to the ethnographer Carlos Castaneda. How is an anthropologist to get to grips with such experiences? It cannot be, suggests Duerr, by positing that alien forms of life are radically incomparable, nor yet by assuming that they can be neatly folded into our own frameworks. Instead, we ought to keep ourselves open to the onto-epistemic surprises occasioned by boundary crossings and borderline cases. For if—as Duerr suggests elsewhere (1985a: 131)—“shocks are the precondition for insight” then this is only so long as we allow ourselves the possibility of being affected.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Hau Journal of Ethnographic Theory
Published
2026-10-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1086/743373
Primary Topic
Anthropological Studies and Insights
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Concerning the boundaries of serious anthropology, or: Can witches fly?

Hans Peter Duerr
Hau Journal of Ethnographic Theory
Anthropological Studies and Insights
article

Concerning the boundaries of serious anthropology, or: Can witches fly?

Hans Peter Duerr
article en

Abstract

In a commentary on German anthropology in the 1970s and 1980s, the literary critic Peter Braun has remarked that Duerr’s essay “Can witches fly?” (together with Hubert Fichte’s “Heretical remarks for a new human sciences”) represented nothing less than a charter “for the revolutionary renewal of anthropology against the orthodox forces of the discipline” (Braun 2002: 223). As the literary critic Ian Robinson once observed (1975: 124), “‘In reality’ is the assertion that one set of rules should judge the rest, especially if they are the rules of physics.” Duerr’s compact and sometimes cryptic argument is essentially an exploration of how such judgments about reality are made with respect to claims of sorcerous flight, from the Renaissance scholar Della Porta to the ethnographer Carlos Castaneda. How is an anthropologist to get to grips with such experiences? It cannot be, suggests Duerr, by positing that alien forms of life are radically incomparable, nor yet by assuming that they can be neatly folded into our own frameworks. Instead, we ought to keep ourselves open to the onto-epistemic surprises occasioned by boundary crossings and borderline cases. For if—as Duerr suggests elsewhere (1985a: 131)—“shocks are the precondition for insight” then this is only so long as we allow ourselves the possibility of being affected.

Hau Journal of Ethnographic TheoryVol. 16(3)
University of Bremen (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Anthropological Studies and Insights
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.

Laika access coming soon