SUMMARY（ln English）
The New Political Anthropology：On the Synchronous Development of Politics Scientizing，Anthropology Politicalizing and Ethnography Culture-Writing（Preface）
TAO Qing
（Shanghai Normal University，Shanghai，China）
Summary：The political anthropology is indeed the effort of predecessors and the present colleagues of politics and anthropology.They have bravely walked out of their academic“territory”and the“circle”，“yelled”and contacted to each other and even partly integrated.In my humble opinion，the subject construction of political anthropology is not a mission which can be shouldered by only one discipline，it really needs cooperation of at least two disciplines，that is，politics（including public management）and anthropology（including ethnology）.As Aristotle said，“the human being is an innate political animal”，all forms of human societies belong to a political community without exception，thus，the research of anthropology also has a political complex and tendency.After an intensive reading of this album，we can't deny that no one can ignore the“power”and“right”factors even the domestic excellent works of ethnography in anthropological field nowadays.From“cultural scientific”ethnography to“cultural interpretative”ethnography，and even to“writing culture”ethnography，which one can get rid of its political ecology and the political views it expressed？In particular，cultural（social）anthropology emphasizes the basic function of“culture”in anthropological field，but what kind of“culture”has not been influenced by various“power”？Both the remote and inaccessible“folk landscape”and thriving，quirky“government landscape”have their own“cultures”which are unique and exclusive.And this nature under the differences of race and culture is the fertile soil for“power”.Analyzing from this aspect，the formal formation of political anthropology in anthropological field may need to follow the existing theory and practice，because anthropology has just had its own political proposition since 1940s.（Reference：Fortes，M.and E.E.Evans-Pritchard.1940.African Political Systems.Oxford University Press）.In other words，since then，anthropology has created another kind of“politics”which was different from traditional politics but has the characteristics of anthropology，that is，a special political phenomenon which has no socalled country but having social order，then，anthropology field named it“political anthropology”.
The social life of human is the production of politics at every moment，any kind of political ecology is also inseparable from the active subject-human.Therefore，the academic concept and disciplinary background of political anthropology must be well-versed in the rise and development process of anthropology.From this perspective，traditional politics，including political philosophy and political science，did not“rediscover”the political connotation in the sense of political anthropology and then created the political research category of it as what anthropology had done.If cultural（social）anthropology and politics can“rediscover”and create“political anthropology”which is in accordance with their respective disciplinary characteristic，then what we can ensure is that，whether how the political anthropologists of this two subjects emphasized the importance and exclusiveness of their own subject，they will finally amaze and find that，originally，there are so many same knowledge productions，the consensus of academic connotation and there are so many cooperation need dialogue and communication of the“political anthropology”which they took pride of.In a word，in the survival and development history of academic and historical process of political anthropology，the political anthropology of politics has significantly lagged behind the anthropology's.Therefore，there is an urgent need of learning and using more experience and theory of“political anthropology”of cultural（social）anthropology research in the present political science field，especially for the Chinese politics which has been restored and developed only for about 30 years since 1980s.Among them，in the category of“political anthropology”of cultural（social）anthropology，the colorful“ethnography”is the“scalpel”which can“cure all diseases”in the process of transformation of politics scientized.
The process of politics scientized cannot develop without the anthropological fieldwork and writing ethnography.Modern anthropology and its scientific ethnography can be called the“antecedents”of behavioral research paradigm of political science，and the scientization of politics，to some extent，follows the research ethos of modern anthropology and its scientific ethnography，thus，it can be called the“consequences”of it.
Nowadays，when academia summarizes the scientization of politics or we can say the historical process of political science，it tends to overemphasize on the“catalysis”and“melt effect”of American behaviorism methodology，and largely ignores the founding role of modern anthropology and scientific ethnography which rose in1920's and matured in 1960's.Behaviorism study always shows as two basic methods of empirical research such as the sampling measurement method（survey study）and case study.Political science research gradually formed its own research paradigm（putting forward research question，determining the theoretical assumptions，collecting data，analyzing data，writing research reports，extracting earth-bounded theory）and research principle（objective principle，the principle of causality，system principle，test principle）.It's root and political philosophy is that it always regards abandoning“pseudo and virtual”and seeking“truth and reality”as the only mission.
In the later developing process of cultural（social）anthropology types，in the tendency of politicization of anthropology，great fission occurred，that is，at first cultural（social）anthropology revealed the political life of“non-civilized”primitive society purely and passively，then turned to a new orientation that eliminated the academic“hegemony”of anthropological scholars，abandoned the political privilege that researchers owned the cultural“dominate”status to research objects，after that，it deduced a“cultural interpretative”style that criticized and reflected“cultural science”，finally，it“invited”research objects and even expected readers to reconstruct“pluralistic-integrative culture”instead retaining“right”that“explains”the culture actively and artificially named it as“writing culture”.In this background that the so-called postmodernism is rising，cultural（social）anthropological scholars are not angry with the“loss”of political privilege such as cultural“sovereignty”，on the contrary，they have been praised and cheered by the developing trend of globalization and political democratization increasingly，because these scholars have advocated multi-benefits of stakeholders and reflected democratic political emotion of the coexistence of“multi-channel”.Perhaps，the new style and fashion of ethnographic“wring culture”accelerated the fusion of the scientization of politics and politicization of anthropology，then catalyzed the production and development of the trinity of new political anthropology which contains the scientization of politics，politicization of anthropology and“wring culture”of ethnography.
Although this album is a symposium about“ethnography”，in the perspective of new political anthropology，these all reflected the identity of“politics scientized”，“anthropology politicized”and“‘writing culture of ethnography”.The historical process of politics scientized could not ignore anthropology politicized especially the“writing culture”of ethnography，in other words，without the developing history of politicization of anthropology and“writing culture”of ethnography，political science cannot move towards the temple of“cultural science”.However，the scientization of politics does not weaken its inner essence of political philosophy.On the contrary，because political science aims to realize social public interests and satisfy people's“good life”eventually，it could fully and organically integrate with pluralistic-integrative democratic political connotation of politicization of anthropology especially“writing culture”of ethnography.
Overall，the disciplinary construction of political anthropology seems to show the identity of“triune”type.First，scientization is the direction of politics，it could not ignore fieldwork and earth-bounded method of cultural（social）anthropology.Second，politicization is the developing direction of cultural（social）anthropology，it could not ignore the value rationality and humanistic care of political philosophy.Third，writing culture is the developing direction of ethnography，it could not ignore dialogue and coexistence of diversification of interest entity and species.The unification of“science”，“culture”and“democracy”，the unification of scientization of politics，politicization of anthropology and“‘writing culture'of ethnography”，these are what new political anthropology needs to consider.
Keywords：new political anthropology politics scientizing anthropology politicalizing ethnography culture-writing
（张亦鸣译，陈津京、曾璐雅校）
The Methodology of Contemporary Ethnography——A Criticism to James Clifford's Denying the Feasiblity of Ethnography
CAI Hua
（Peking University，Beijing，China）
Summary：In the development course of anthropology，it has developed many methodologies，such as evolutionism，diffusionism，functionalism，structural functionalism，structuralism，interpretive anthropology，and so on.On this path，anthropology has experienced more than one crisis.However，compared to the prior crisis，there is a prominent difference in the crisis of which has been named structural anthropology（although no scholar has defined the structuralism explicitly）and interpretative anthropology.Some prominent scholars of anthropology have issued inquiry and thoroughly questioned what has been considered to be the most reliable theory before.They summarized some problems faced in the discipline and explored new methodology，such as Rodney Needham and David Schneider's profound and rigorous reflection.What's more，scholars who benefited from structural anthropology before also turn back to criticise in the review of existing theories，questioning the reliability of ethnography from different perspectives.In“on Ethnographic Authority”，Clifford denied that the ethnographer could interpret the exotic culture from the perspective of the subjectivity of western culture through deductive reasoning.In order to promote the construction of scientific contemporary ethnography methodology，as an ethnographer who has the background of Chinese culture rather than western culture，the author makes a dialogue with Clifford based on his own experience of field case from the dimensions of practice and knowledge.
Clifford thought that ethnography text，participant observation，interviewing，right of speechand events are all related to subjectivity，and even the ethnography was a dual lie which was made up by the native's subjective statement and the author's subjective construction.Each person's understanding of the world is only a world of his own.When facing a kind of culture and society，everyone's understanding is personalised，namely subjective，whether he is a member of the ethnic group who creates the culture and society or he is a foreigner as an ethnographer.As a main body，any individual's cognitive products are full of subjectivity，there is impossible for an absolutely objective cognition.In the end，he will find that there is a political and intellectual debate on the theme of writing and reproducing the otherness.Similarly，there is some ethical problems in ethnographic writing.Indirect reference is unable to provide the direct reference and accurate translation，and it also turns a blind eye to the native's specific understanding and creates a monotonic text to explain the cultural knowledge.If the premiseestablished，then we would face a question firstly，that is whether people's cognitive ability can reach to the cultural and social understanding of the people from different nations，rather than how to write.According to his creed，in view of the human being's biological defects and linguistic barriers，people can not perceive the reality of otherness.So，Clifford thought that if we want to seek the fundamental way，we must firstly improve biological quality of human，rather than writing method.According to Clifford's critique，anthropologists（accurately，all social scientists）still face three kinds of natural，original and inherent incurable diseases：there are no neutral words and forms in any discourse，and there is unneutral political position，the individual is under the absolute rule of the subjectivity.If the assumption is tenable，it definitely means such a fact：Even the ethnographer writes an ethnography which is completely combined by direct reference，it will also be a distorted picture of culture and society，not to mention that ethnographies are not written in native words.As is known by all，many nations which were studied by ethnographers have language but no words.What were declared to be bankrupt by Clifford are not only ethnography and anthropology，but also the whole social science.
But we can't deny that Clifford's argument still seriously and potentially invented or challenged every anthropologist who has a rich working experience of ethnography.And That is the power of serious criticism in scientific activity.
As for the professional anthropologists，field work in which they study the different nations would last for years they participant in the native's daily-life（including every annual ceremony），observe and learn about their lifestyle（including acquainting their language gradually）After being familiar with their lifestyle，the ethnographers would study the belief system that supports their lifestyle.The process of field work for ethnographer is observing，thinking，questioning，listening and recording，it goes round and round.Anthropologists report the natives'introduction and explanation of their own social facts by summary，direct reference，or indirect reference analyze the collected materials，and verify the the existing theory through social facts and cultural facts which are newly discovered to confirm，modify or even falsify the basic concepts and general theories（although it is extremely rare in the social science activities，even once in a century）.
Professional anthropologists all know that the process of describing exotic culture is full of difficulties，and every paragraph was written after inner struggle.There are no existing words and expressions for exotic culture in the writers'native language，which is the root reason why it's especially difficult to write ethnography.However，objective observation and faithful description of exotic culture are a mission which can be completed.Anthropology have used the method of description for a long time，and text writers should appreciate the usage of description.As a result，the ethnographers are describing rather than translating when they are writing the exotic culture.What's more，any current system and its practice of a nation can not be optionally changed by anyone.Whether for natives or ethnographers，text of ethnography is not all a fictional，strange and uncontrollable lie.Ethnographers doesn't dream to be coincident with natives'thoughts，what they aim to do is learning the natives'thinking，belief，system and behavior.The ethnographers never fabricated and there is no need to create a collaborative author for them.
To be the lawyer for the authors who were criticized by Clifford isn't the purpose of this text，neither is the cultural background and the subjectivity of an ethnographer wouldn't interfere with his understanding of exotic cultures.Actually，the paper aims to prove that these factors can be prevented after a strict training by the methodology of contemporary anthropology and a lasting and deep fieldwork.As a Chinese ethnographer，according to the experience and analysis getting from the scientific activities in the background of non western culture，the author tries to illuminate that，making double lies is not the fate of the study of exotic cultures.Observing the social and cultural facts of other nations and truly representing it could be a position we struggle for.The study object of anthropology can be recognized，and the whole social scientific activity is not in vain.Ethnography can be science，and so it is nowadays.In addition，it is the foundation which supports the social science knowledge system.Actually，an ethnography can be recognized as an authority only when it represents culture and every aspect of the society systematically，analyzes deeply gets a proper conclusion，and each content can be tested on the spot.
Keywords：scientific ethnography social science exotic culture social facts
（陈津京译，曾璐雅校）
The Ethnography Text and Narration of Truth
CHEN Qingde ZHENG Yu
（Yunnan University，Kunming，China）
Summary：Traditional ethnography，which is based on the hypothesis that cognitive object is in accordance with the real object，claims authenticity as it's symbol.The problem that materials and text were confused with ethnography text，as well as the analysis of the narrative perspective and focus between I and He，emic and etic，the self and the other，profoundly show the essential characteristic，that is，the narrator would inevitably reconstructs the object.Thus，in the integral association，it reveals that society is nothing but a series of narration which is described by the discourses in the practice.The real value of theory，perhaps，lies in the reflection comes from continuous selfcriticism.
The“truth”problem in the fieldwork of anthropology in the past mainly focused on the method about how to ensure the authenticity of the original data.Such as the methods and techniques of collecting materials before the text's formation，and the ways to enter and effectively integrate into the local community，maintain good mentality，carry out effective interviews，make a questionnaire，and so on.These concerns are mostly confined to the study of the research method and how to obtain the real object to the greatest extent.However，it neglected the transformation from real object to cognitive one.This tendency of ethnography had a critical defect from the beginning，as it obscured an important aspect of“truth”which it lived by.
Actually，the problem that ethnography is true or not is related to the authenticity of epistemology，that is，how people's cognition could be true.Heidegger had criticized the traditional truth theory which holds that truth is the coincidence of object and knowledge.The in-authenticity of proposition is said to be inconsistent with object，in addition，the inauthenticity of object is said to be inconsistent with it's essence.If ethnography text was defined as the crystallization of the author's cognitive object，which means text is a conclusion of the subject's summary for cognitive object after the cognitive process.In this sense，the realistic and appreciable ethnography actually includes the whole externalization process from real object to cognitive object.This shows that whether the ethnography text is real or not can only be based on the content recorded in it.It can be judged by the existing knowledge and logic，however，the judge foundation can only be ethnography itself.Therefore，it's possible in theory if we check the ethnography text itself from the last aspect，and then trace back to inquire the formation of cognitive object.In this way，text becomes a basic point which is operable and realistic.Of course，it's necessary to confirm people's cognitive ability at first，as well as to confirm that we can approach the real object by cognition as much as possible.
Text is regarded as a relatively independent and intact structure in narratology.In terms of the analysis of ethnography，narrative text can be assumed to be independent，it is separated from the author and his cultural background，so that the text itself can be restored and showed more objectively.Accordingly，the genuineness problem of text serves as the entry point of that of ethnography.In view of this，many problems will appear，such as the materials and text of ethnography，narrative method and practice，and how the cognitive object transforms to realistic text，which explore a new way to inspect the authenticity of ethnography.
Ethnography can be understood from two aspects，fabula and text.Fabula is the combination of the events which the author sees or hears，generally speaking，it's fragmentary and even chaotic.It includes events，behaviors，time，place and so on.While text refers to the combination of events showed in the works after narration，which is a finite and structured integrity composed by linguistic signs.This finite integrity doesn't mean that text itself is limited，since its significance，effect，function and background are not limited.We can also say that fabula is realistic ingredient which hasn't been logically arranged by people，to the contrary，text is the externalization result of people's cognitive object.Logically，what readers firstly and also merely find is symbolized ethnography，rather than the fabulas.However，the fabulas that readers expect to obtain are from the text redefined by narrators.The way that distinguishes fabulas from text enables us to focus on the genuineness problem of ethnography from a new angel.
In reality，in some classic ethnography，it's normal to use western logic to re-order the local events，to remold the aboriginal culture and logic，to reinterpret and create it，and then create a completely different ethnography.They equated the fabulas with the text that they reconstructed，thus they replaced the local residents'cognition with their special one.As a result，traditional ethnographers didn't realize the limitation as they were special narrators，and they had overly reconstructed the“truth”.Nowadays，it should be noted that a majority of writing method of ethnography take it for granted to obtain the authoritative identity as a narrator，meanwhile，many anthropologists begin to pay attention to the meanings of distinguishing narrator between author.
Geertz attached importance to the research on narrator，who is appeared as author in the above，and thought that the anthropologist's interpretation could only get the approximate value of the real object.Therefore，anthropologist's construction of text is a syntheses which included scientific imagination，the author's culture and ideology.The author，as the third participant，embedded unconscious structure，term and behavior of his own language.Interpretive anthropology distinguishes the fabula from text，and acknowledges the existence of narration and narrator，as well as the important effects on the text by narrator and narration.But the shortcoming is that they differentiates the author and narrator，but also enhance the position of the special narrator who appears as the author to an unprecedented stage，which summarizes the formation of the whole text and its significance into the narrator.
For a long time，on the basis of an“external”reality，individuals'common attitude to ethnography text is not only to understand the facts it describes，but also want to know whether it is true or not；and try to grasp these evidences and inspect that it tells the truth or a lie.Whether it's materials is abundant or worthless；whether it's absolutely correct or has been modified.However，the analysis of some associations，such as“truth”and the narrative perspective or focus，emic and etic，the self and the other mentioned above，drives us to pay attention to the discourse which is as practice，and to reveal the basic qualifications which make a particular discourse possible，in other words，to expose the possible condition of the things within the specific discourse.
Keywords：ethnography text truth narration discourse
（陈津京译、曾璐雅校）
Engaging in Ethnography：Malinowski and Geertz
HU Hongbao ZHANG Limei
（Renmin University of China，Beijing，China）
Summary：Ethnography can not only be used for referring to an academic research methodology which is closely related to field work study of other culture，but also represents the special text form which shows the research achievements gained by this method.However，in different periods of the development history of anthropology，there are differences in the connotation of ethnography in the emphasis point，and it's extension is also diverse.
The vast majority of the early anthropologists selectively used the secondary data which were collected by others and the reliability couldn't be guaranteed，and they constructed the universal theory on the basis of cross cultural comparison.Ethnography was still a specific text formrepresenting the non-western primitive society，but not related to the unique research method.However，the signal of revolution was sent out.The most typical practice was that anthropologists were required to live in a community or a social group containing 400 to 500 for more than one year，as a result，they learned all aspects of natives'life and culture.In such communities，researchers could know all people，research the local lifestyle，and they could also conduct the investigation using the native language，and all these surpassed the general impression.Malinowski lived with aborigine when he stayed in Meru Island and Tollerbrender Archipelago for two years，he developed the field work system of modern ethnography along Rivers's direction.And this caused aprofound revolution in the field of anthropology.With the publication of Argonauts of the Western Pacific in 1922，as a research tool and academic paradigm，modern ethnography appeared ceremoniously.The study of ethnography should not only record what have been seen and heard，but also analyzes its function，and then construct culture science.Thus，Malinowski unified ethnography，field work and theory，which completely changed the status that data collections were separated from theory analysis，field investigations were separated from indoor study.Consequently，ethnography gained the dual features，including specific research method and specific text form.Since then，a large number of scholars studied the non-western tribal society in this way，and wrote many excellent works.However 25 years later，Malinowski's field work diary was published after his death which showed his anguish，boredomand resentment to the aboriginal people that had never been mentioned in his works.The leading scholar who set the standard for an scientific culture description by public works should privately face the dilemma of personality unity and theory integration.It provoked an urgent reflection on the objectivity and authenticity of fieldwork and anthropologists'professional ethic and image.The legitimacy of ethnography were questioned unprecedentedly.With the emergence of a series of experimental ethnography，an era of conscious reflection came.The ethnography method and text of Malinowski suffered critical review from many aspects.
Malinowski believed that as long as he learned the native language，conducted long-time observation and deep experience，he could write the ethnography which can truly reflect the real feature of aboriginal culture，what's more，he can toward the grand goal，that is，culture science.Geertz broke the illusion of this scientific rationality relentlessly.Geertz believed that technology and recognized program such as building relationship，choosing the research partners，taking recording，keeping diary and so on couldn't lead to a definition.Only thick description is the career that anthropologists should pursuit.He took thick description and local knowledge as his weapon to fight against Malinowski's scientific and integral ethnography from the aspects of method and text form.Geertz emphasized literariness and genres.What on earth were the anthropologists doing？He abandoned the standard answer“he observes，he records，he analyzes”and loudly answered“he writes”.Ethnography writers tried their best to make the readers believe that they had actually been there，believed that what they read were the real reports of the local lifestyle he had experienced，and believed that once they went there in person，they would get the same knowledge，feelings and conclusions as the writers.Although both Malinowski and Geertz vindicated ethnography，and actually Geertz had inherited from Malinowski in some aspects，culture science emphasized scientific description and objective reflection，but what culture interpretation stressed is thick description，these are two totally different academic paradigms.It is far beyond the scope of transformation and improvement.
Malinowski emphasized to understand the inherent characteristics of aboriginal culture by long-term participation and observation.But at the same time，he advocated to have comparisons from the following two aspects.First，there is an universal biological basis behind the different cultures and systems.Considering the different ways to meet the basic needs of human beings，we can compare the diverse cultures and systems.Second，he regarded the example of Tollerbrender Archipelago as a critical tool to overturn many grand theories，and then took it as the prototype of primitive society，to construct a unified theory of scientific culture.Geertz was critical about this.In his view，both microcosmic model and natural experiment model were wrong.The basic work of theoretical construction is to make thick description be possible rather than encode for abstract rule，to conclude in the individual case rather than exceed it.In other words，it's necessary for us to combine the microscopic interpretation and macro background with the method of comparison，but we couldn't be confused with the research location and the study object，couldn't be confused with the case and the it's characteristics.The key of representation and approximate deduction is not the case itself，but in the case of general significance.Because of this，case summary becomes a true way to explain the anthropology theory.
In short，whether it is on the issue of ethnography，or on the comparison and approximate deduction，there are great differences between culture science and culture interpretation.This difference is the fundamental diversity between the academic paradigm，which is far beyond the scope of reform and promotion.We shouldn't pull the two into a framework to engage harmony just for the purpose of pursuing academic fashion or seizing the moral high ground.
What should anthropology do between theory and practice？I think that we can refer to Heralded Mackerel's view.On the one hand，culture science and culture interpretation are different ethnography paradigm with fundamental diversity.They have different philosophical basis and theoretical direction.So we shouldn't simply blend them together.On the other hand，although these two appeared in chronological order，the relationship between them is not simply replacing and being replaced.In fact，culture science and culture interpretation both have unique contributions and internal defects.Therefore，in the practice of ethnography，we should avoid simplifying tendency.Neither should we be too superstitious about science and objectivity，nor criticize ethnography authority as worthless.We'd better explore a specific and critical theory in the dynamic practice of ethnography.After all，the theory should be used in practice，rather than be a restriction or a chain of practice.The key problem is neither the dividing line between the theory paradigm，nor the demarcation between theory and practice，actually，it's the degree that the practitioners clearly understand and flexibly grasp the discrepancy.
Keywords：ethnography participant observation method interpretive anthropology culture criticism
（陈津京译，单素敏、曾璐雅校）
The Ordinary Ethnography——Moral Analysis of Altruistic Behavior
LUO Hongguang
（Chinese Academy of Social Science，Beijing，China）
Summary：Since Malinowski，participant observation has been the classic and acknowledged anthropology methodology，namely，aperson engages in long periods of fieldwork in a relatively isolated place transforms the way of knowledge production by eating，living and working with the natives.Explaining the way of thinking and customs in other's world by understanding the natives'understanding，which provides analysis texts named ethnography.
But now，the situation has changed a lot.First of all，today's world is influenced by globalization and information，the other's world is no longer isolated，nor is it divided from each other and unreachable.The world nowadays is a world where we are inseparable.Perhaps the other already exists in the relationship among humans，human and nature people and ideas.In addition，Chinese economic reform in late 1980s leads to the gradual decline of the original collective economy and the disintegration of the rural people's commune，resulting in the rise of the private economy.The relationship between individual interests and collective is discussed again.Since the end of 1980s，China began to reform and open up，as the connotation of socialist spirit，the authority of‘the spirit of Lei Feng'has subsequently declined，and the society focused more on the main body of personal interests.At the same time，there are no new moral standards to regulate the main body in the new situation，and individualism is stressed.What is more，the expression system of love in modern China has been more diverse and complex than before，especially in comparison of the East and the West.There is a conflict on the“love”in the“home” of Ba Jin.Its essence is the problem of how the individual morality is possible which continues until today.
For that reason，this paper studies a public voluntary service，and the characteristics of the study is that showing the interaction between the self and the otherness by serving others.Therefore，the main body of the subject is full of cultural consciousness.In addition，altruism is a kind of moral behavior reflecting values，but it has the problem of the moral authority self-check.So，we examine the virtue of“self”through participating in their altruism actions，and further investigating the ways and methods of testing the moral authority of altruism.This problem is directly related to the implicit ethical issues in the relationship between the service and being-serviced，and the relationship between the assist and being-assisted.In particular，firstly，this study concerns about how to test the rationality of altruism.Secondly，how to prove that their own morality is also the otherness's morality？Thirdly，how to maintain the external force of the main body of altruistic behavior if there is no power or moral authority to promote？Considering all these questions，research group regards the volunteers as research object and requires them to do service works in public service agency chronically，and records their inner thoughts for the purpose of analyzing and reflecting in the future.
This study is called the“ordinary ethnography”，which has the following definitions.Expressions from the life world.It maintains the narrative features of the first person，and fully shows the academic problem of inequality in the“knowledge and power”and the morality of dialogue reflected on the first-hand documents to a great extent.It uses the method of ordinary ethnography，experimenting and discussing the relationships of service and being serviced in the relationship with others.It also solves the problem of the moral authority which can not be selfinspected，what's more，it confirms the hypothesis that knowledge is public and co-structured.That is，knowledge is created by researchers and objects.Therefore，it represents the publicity.This study also provides a new way for large-scale cultural studies under the background of globalization.
Keywords：ordinary ethnography self otherness otherness of self
（陈检豪译，单素敏、曾璐雅校）
Ethnography and Methodology of Social Science
RUAN Yunxing
（Zhejiang University，Zhejiang，China）
Summary：This article discusses the issues of the ethnography method，and aims to participate in discussions about reflection of social science methodology in the context of modern China.Methodology regards method as its research object，which means a study of methods.The author thinks that the methodology research can be roughly divided into two aspects，one is the specific research method of disciplines，the other is researching meta-theory and epistemological basis of relevant methods.The latter and philosophical epistemology are overlapping.The investigation of methodology in this paper involves two levels respectively.Specifically，it reflects the issues of general social science methodology by apreliminary review about ethnography method and meta-theory of anthropology.
This paper consists of the following three parts：the first section mainly discusses the modern ethnography and its epistemological background；the second section introduces the exploration of postmodern ethnology and related meta-theory；the third section is a conclusion of above discussion and has a brief comment on related methodology.Then on the basis of it，the author expresses some opinions about issues in reflection of social science methodology in the context of China.(https://www.daowen.com)
In this paper，we can see two periods of text making in European and American Anthropology—the application of modern ethnography and the exploration of postmodern ethnography，which is demarcated by 1960s，since the writing of modern ethnography established by professional scholars.We regard“how to write”of ethnographic writing as the center，naming three types in the two periods as follows，the first is“overall description model”of modern anthropological culture writing（scientific／modern ethnography），the second is“thick description”model of postmodern anthropological culture writing（ethnography of interpretive anthropology），the third is“dialogue”and“multichannel”model（experimental ethnography of reflective anthropology）.
In the discussion，we have noticed that，in fact，“how to write”“write what”and“why we write”have intrinsic connection.Indeed，the writing（text，discourse，writing culture）which contains these elements is a part and a narrative form of epistemology in that period.In other words，social studies and cultural writing of an era are inseparable from the influence of its meta-theory，philosophical epistemology.This article involves little on this subject，but we still have a rough grasp.Modern ethnography is formed when the scientific research methods determined to become the humanities research methods.Its philosophical epistemology background is the“subject-object dichotomy”，“one dimensional understanding”and“Descartes model”which pursue objective truth.The exploration of postmodern ethnography were emerging when the positivism of humanities research methods was questioned and social science research faced expression crisis.An important meta-theory of reflection and exploration is“dialogue”and“double hermeneutics”in Gadamer's hermeneutics.
Through the rough review of specific cases in the two aspects，and from the view of changes in ethnographic writing mode，we can reveal some basic conditions and characteristics of the evolution of humanities research methodology in Europe and America.
Nowadays，It is significant to discuss the reflections on the social science methodology of a discipline or an inter-discipline.And the review of ethnography in the discussion may be able to provide a new motivation and enlightenment in many aspects.
First，the particular characteristic of ethnography discipline is across two areas—humanities and social sciences.What's more，the discipline is compatible with multidisciplinary research methods，which results in the versatility in achievements of reflection.For instance，ethnography has the character of literature.It combines characteristics of traditional humanities and modern social science，which means that the achievements of methodology investigation perhaps is good for people to treat some problems in the discussion.Such as how to treat the research of human culture，or we can say cultural science disciplines（corresponding with the natural science discipline），how to understand the qualitative research and quantitative research and some related problems，etc.
Second，the emergence of the new western public anthropology booms and a“return”of it provides important information.Just for the latter，return to the field，reliving the classic is not only suggesting the following things.Firstly，it is a mission and obligation of ethnology to provide general information about object or issue（including description and interpretation），and to serve the society（including culture understanding and culture criticism）and the human beings（public care for specific group）.Secondly，for reflection on Chinese social science methodology，perhaps the more important thing is that it reveals the true meaning of reflection and deconstruction，which is aimed at inspecting the misleading of universal truth and polishing it，rather than destroy the obtained achievement（including meta-theory）.Thirdly，it is very important for Chinese social science circles which is in the necessary modernity deconstruction and post-modernity survey times，and at the same time，shouldering the dual construction which contains arduous modernity and post-modernity.
Third，the publication of Chinese version of Writing Culture and the development of cultural writing and methodology research in native ethnography will promote the discussion of social science methodology.Early in the first half of the 20th century，Chinese anthropology has had several innovations and important achievements on the text writing techniques.Since anthropology reconstructed in the 1980s，some scholars also have carried out some beneficial explorations in the cultural writing and ethnography methodology aspects.Recently，the Chinese version of Writing Culture have been published and one of the editor of this book Dr.Marcus will give lectures in China，which will help to deepen and expand the cultural anthropology research in China.And it will also be beneficial to the reflection of Chinese social science circles which have faced methodology crisis and the construction and development of the discipline in the background of social transformations and globalization.
Keywords：ethnography methodology of social science writing culture metatheory
（张亦鸣译，曾璐雅校）
Ethnography and Anthropology：Process Continuum
Naribilige
（Fudan University，Shanghai，China）
Summary：Ingold said ethnography is NOT anthropology，this is a radical idea.A better expression is that ethnography is a part of anthropology and the two are closely related and not contradictory.Description and comparison are two indivisible parts of anthropology，just like the words emphasized by Ingold in the speech，‘sitting in an easy chair rather than doing field work can not make the anthropology'.Interacting with the local is practice，so is writing in the easy chairs.These two kinds of practice are one's specific practice in the life，which is neither imagining nor rising from the ashes，it is closely related to their cultural background，language habits，ways of act，social memory value judgment and so on.Therefore，ethnographic description and anthropological research not only involves the object，the interaction and the“negotiation”between the various subject characteristics but also involve organisms and non-organisms，involve mutual environment——I am a part of your environment，and you are a part of my environment.Ethnography and anthropology consist the same academic ecological activities.The practice of ethnography and anthropology is an open process，including two most important features，dialogue and interaction.Ethnographic workers have formatted mind，they think，judge and choose anytime and anywhere in their fieldwork.They do the work of the ethnography，but also do the comparative analysis of the anthropology.
In Ingold's opinion，ethnography bases on relativism because of describing cases and anthropology is rooted by universalism due to comparative analysis.There is nothing wrong in the inclination.But they are not contradictory and should not be absolutized，after all，they belong to different levels.Ethnography is the foundation that from the changing lives in the world，so it tends to relativity.While anthropology do the comparative analysis on the basis of ethnography which emphasizesthetheoretical abstraction，so it tends to universality.If there are any differences between the ethnography and anthropology，it can only be the results of the temporary shelving.Shelving and breaking caused by the limitations of human cognitive ability drive duality becoming the preference of researchers and readers.Everyone wants to express things clearly.But our life and world are complex and changing quickly，which only can be understood after simplified and shelved.Therefore，we must clearly realize that our research and knowledge are the results of simplification and shelving，which has distance between our real life and world，and it needs to be corrected and updated constantly through constant dialogues and inquiries.
In different histories and specific occasion，different cultures have different concepts of development，which will lead to different actions and different agreements.Cultural consensus is difficult to achieve at the same level，which can only be reached at a higher level.That is，particularity and universality belong to different levels and can run parallel.Even so，the cultural dialogue at the same level is still necessary，which is the foundation of crossing cultural boundaries and achieving a high-level agreement.Dialogue is a kind of energy.Influenced by energy，materiality interacts with spirituality and promotes the practice and produces cognition.
Ingold pointed out in his speech that anthropologists do not search on someone but research with someone，which is profound.There is no idea that Ingold whether agrees that anthropology and ethnography combine to form an open research process，which is a whole，not opposed.We research with others on the meta-connectional ecosystem.We describe the details and polish the theory.I am a part of the environment，and the environment also becomes more complex because of my existence.The process that anthropology and ethnography combine to form should have double meanings，the first is a longitudinal process of spatial and temporal continuum and the second is a continuum with material at one end and spirit at the other.
Chuang Tzu's quotations，“banish wisdom，discard knowledge，and gangsters will stop”，also contain such an ecological concept called coexistence of all things，which means that if everyone gave up being saints or fighting in the resourcefulness and courage，and doesn't do extreme things and makes efforts to the same direction，there will be no undeservingly honored actions.As an analogy，ethnography is equivalent to material，and anthropology is equivalent to spirit.Material and spirit are interconnected，so is materiality and spirituality.In the new world of globalization and digitalization，the relations and integrations between the ethnography and the anthropology are more closed，and its reality of inter-subjectivity should not be ignored.On the one hand，the flow of material，image and idea is unprecedented.On the other hand，the objective ethnicity also has its own ethnographic and anthropological experts，which join the academic ecological chain and vow their own voice.What's more，green environmental protection is being more aware and has become the common agreement of majority.Those existences which is ignored join the conversation by our speaking and actions，and do research and think with us.Ethnography and anthropology will be coexisting in nowadays and future.
Keywords：ethnography anthropology process co-existence of all things
（陈检豪译，单素敏、曾璐雅校）
Dialogue and Reflection：Narrative Analysis of Experimental Ethnography
LI Li
（Yunnan Normal University，Kunming，China）
Summary：The writing style of ethnography has not been formed in the early time，there are many kinds of ethnography，some tests are full of exploration on the writing skills.But after the 1930s，the functionalism which represented by Malinowski and Radcliffe gradually unified the whole country，then functional ethnography gradually became the norm of ethnographic writing format.As the new progress of linguistics research and its influence expanded，the structuralism headed by Levi-Strauss has risen.The meaningful problems of object aroused people's concern.Until 1960s，interpretive anthropology as a kind of new trend boarded the stage of anthropology，thus shaking the“hegemony”status of functionalism.Traditional functional writing paradigm is no longer the only choice.Some authors of ethnography have lost confidence that along the traditional narrative style of“go on”.Then，experimental ethnography explored in expression form in order to reach higher authenticity.
From the view of stylistic feature，Tristes Tropiques is a autobiographical travel which has experimental style.In contrast with“invisibility”used by Malinowski when facing public，in the published work，Strauss exposed and dissected himself sincerely，the words of reflection and self-criticism filling in the lines.After the book was published ten years，experimental ethnography which contains spirit of mutual construction has been written.Compared with the writing culture，this is a shift from one-way construction to mutual construction.In this sense，Strauss is a pioneer of experimental ethnography.
Compared with experimental ethnography，an important feature of functionalism is the character of monologue of narrative voice.Although description of different cultures is the purpose of ethnographic research，readers can only see the single sound which emitted by author who stands in himself cultural position and value through the article.Because ethnographic text is the product of construction，even in the same field，different authors also see different things and write differently.So the ethnography which we called science cannot avoid“one thousand readers have one thousand Hamlet”destiny.On the one hand，the social changes caused social economic structure，daily life and folk beliefs of research object changed，thus，subsequent researchers doubted the objectivity of the predecessors'research.On the other hand，different researchers have different knowledge structure，life background，methodological orientation and interest，these led to what he saw is different with others.
And experimental ethnography reflects experimenter strives to get rid of this kind of one-dimension of research and expression.Pull out from object and examine itself，that is，interactive orientation and ego orientation.Then it will have a new field of vision.It“invited”object involved in and collaborated author complete the cultural／anthropological reflection.In the equal dialogue relationship，the one dimensional authority of knowledge producers who dominated discourse／power and cabined in subject field will open and assign beyond discipline and knowledge.However，the presentation of radical decentralization in writing always decided by the author—who own the ultimate power.So we find that“conversational text”which emphasizes the disintegration of authority of ethnography likes“monologic text”，it's just a writing method.One pattern cannot be better than other patterns and become authoritative pattern.They are not affiliation of ethnography.In this sense，monologue is inevitable，but monologue which is not suffered restriction completely by author is a utopian dream of innovators.
The ultimate purpose of ethnography is expressing object and researchers'experience truly.Whatever we do／write，how to do／write is in order to achieve this goal.Therefore，facts or stories，and even novel，as long as is good for this purpose should be absorbed in writing of ethnography.Fictitious narration may do not have factuality or objectivity，but have profound meaning and authenticity which even more than the reality of fact and truth.This point perhaps is the“weld”of ethnographic expression.Therefore，this paper tries to compare the authenticity of novel and ethnography，compare the position of“story”and“fact”in ethnographic research，discuss the possibility when writing ethnography，we can use the novel narrative model.
keywords：functionalism experimental ethnography novel narration authenticity
（张亦鸣译，单素敏、曾璐雅校）
“Kaleidoscope”of Ethnography Colorful Records of Objects，Science and Culture
PENG Zhaorong
（Xiamen University，Beijing，China）
Summary：Ethnography is colorful，just like a“kaleidoscope”which can present human society and reflect the beauty of objects，science and culture.
The first is the ethnography which related to“objects”in human society.The research of objects in anthropology namely ethnography of objects can be dated from the theory of evolution.So，there are close relations between anthropological view of“object”and Darwin's“The Origin of Species”，whether in cognition，logic，sciencec，knowledge，or analyze.Disciplinary basis of anthropology is the theory of evolution.Although“species”in Darwin's theory of evolution and the whole knowledge spectrum of“object”in ethnographic research of object had a significant development，the“object”in anthropological vision already has completely different topics and meanings in many aspects.Ethnographic research has transcended the concept of“species”，but the basic meaning of“evolution”has been lingering.It still follows the principle of“evolution-development”even if it refers to different“states of matter”.And“change”，“transition”，“adaptation”，“choice”，“variation”and so on also become important aspects of anthropological research.Therefore，the research of object in anthropology should return to Darwin's theory of evolution firstly.
The expressive form of“objects”is far more complicated than we thought.People are used to regarding material as a purely external existence form，ignoring the social valve and meanings of understanding and interpreting the material itself.Objects relate to“manufacture”or the source of objects firstly.Any form and shape of objects are involved in the process of human creation，even including the nature，such as natural heritages，which is identified and approved by human although human beings did not participate in the creation“the Creator”is a special vocabulary，which refers to the creator of all things and the source of thought and wisdom.He created everything including human beings.The religious doctrine of“creation”is related to the origin myth.As for the invention of tools and ideas，it is much more common.People even establish a set of common standards of practice through the practice of material.In fact，the observation and use of objects already contain the creation，manufacture，cognition，and practice of material.
The tradition and history of our country endowed“objects”unique characters.Even the“cultural relics”we talked about nowadays，in addition to the physical time，different cultural traditions and systems are also attached according to different cultural value systems and the principles of classification.There is a motto“etiquette hide in vessel”in the Chinese traditional culture of ancient sacrificial vessel.In the earliest educational classics“Er Ya”，Chapter“Shi Gong”，“Shi Qi”and“Shi Yue”is closely connected with traditional“etiquette”，for example，we always regard sacrificial vessel“tripod”as a symbol of power in the most important sacrificial ceremony of an state and emperor.different dynasties have different specifications with different historical value even at the same time.
The second is related to the“scientific and real”ethnography of human society.“Authenticity”has long been regarded as a core problem in the research of ethnography...which develops into a more complex level.This paper regards different“authenticity”as“longitude”，ethnographic research history as“latitude”，and then analyses the ethnography samples in three different times：the understanding of“authenticity”in traditional ethnography under the“practical rationality”and“cultural rationality”principle；the narrative construction of“authenticity”through“cultural structure”in modern historical anthropology；the conditions and troubles faced by tourist ethnography in recognizing and reflecting“authenticity”under the background of globalization.The author attempts to answer three questions raised by the academic.First，the possibility of authenticity reflected by ethnography.Second，the different characteristics of researches about this problem in different periods of ethnography.Third，the different forms of authenticity reproduced in the different social context.In recent 20 or 30 years，the study of“authenticity”has become a hot spot of humanities and social science.As a reflection and response to the“expressive crisis”，the transformation of expression paradigm in ethnography has been an important enlightenment to other subjects.A faithful record of objects in traditional ethnography translates into an“explanation”of it，which means“ethnography is thick description”.Traditional ethnography focuses on the“objective reality”，historical ethnography emphasizes the explanation of“authenticity”of cultural structure，experimental ethnography intensifies the“real and interpretative”cognition，in addition，the awareness of real society of anthropologists through field work and“writing culture”in ethnography become a practice of understanding and reflecting culture to anthropologists，and also make the ethnographic research becoming a form of“partial reality”.However，in the context of contemporary globalization，the“authenticity”has a new form，which has drawn the attention of ethnographic research.Therefore，it is necessary to figure out the relevance and difference of several important“samples”in the history of the ethnography.
Third is the ethnography of“culture”in human society.There has been an obvious controversy from the beginning in the definition of“science”in anthropology，both in the nature of science or the narrative paradigm.The reflection of ethnographic narration and“writing culture”，to large extent，has beyond a certain expression way，even beyond a certain disciplinary barriers and the principle which discipline have to follow，it becomes a cognition of narrative paradigm.As an important part of ethnology，ethnography shows the records，description，analysis and interpretation of anthropologists'field work fully.However，no matter as a disciplinary principle，investigation method，or as a“work”of anthropologist，ethnography of different school in different ages has different views，and it is also an important historical content of anthropology.In recent decades，the“literariness”（such as the metaphor of literature，the image expression，narration，etc.）of ethnography has influenced the record way of ethnography，which involves the initial observation，the“accomplishment”of ethnography and the way of“obtain sense”in reading activities.Therefore，“writing culture”becomes a reflective problem which could not be avoided and omitted by ethnography.The purpose of“experimental ethnography”is not to seek novelty，but for the selfreflection and the richness of culture.Ultimately，the change of ethnography paradigm is closely connected with contemporary knowledge revolution.“Text of literature”，especially the“literariness”of ethnography，has beyond the scope of a good or unique writing style.When the textual expression become a kind of power，the understanding and interpretation of literary expression must be“excessive”.Just like a person once grasping power，the praise of him must be exaggerated.In fact，power structure of location is more important than the man in the location.Similarly，power-oriented expression is related to the“discourse”of historical context.To large extent，“writing culture”is the extension of state power in the narrative way.Consequently，the discussion of“writing culture”in ethnography is aimed at the reflection of a kind of narrative way on the surface，essentially，we are reflecting the construction of narration in the context of politics and power structure.In a word，with the influence of social reproduction and technology，ethnography has changed from observing and understanding an isolated society to a more complex，interactive society with multiboundaries.And the technology has intensified and strengthened the cultural“decorated”effect.Thus，the nation must identify and confirm the“authenticity”of object.
Keywords：ethnography record of objects record of science record of culture
（张亦鸣译，曾璐雅校）
The Humanistic Traditions of Ethnology and Conversions into Neo-ontology
WANG Mingming
（Peking University，Beijing，China）
Summary：The origin of“ethnography”is the words“ethnos”and“graphy”in ancient Greek，which means“the records of ethnology”.However，ethnology has been regarded as a discipline that aims to“record the diverse objects and traditions in different nations，and compare their similarities and differences.”（CAI Yuanpei）.The combination of“ethnos and graphy”is created in modern times，which has an ambiguous relationship with the conceptions of nation in Europe.Concerning most classic ethnography，despite being regarded as a basic method of“national studies”，the research unit of ethnography is more than“nation”actually，the true meaning of“ethnos”is the objects，society and spiritual world described in it.Namely，a concept of human beings which is differ from the concept of individuals in modern west.As for the author of ethnography，all places are globalized.In the“world”of human relations，the relevance of“self”and“other”are broken down into several relationships and cognition，but they are integrated essentially.It adjusts measures to local conditions and then forms the culture that is human-centered，god-centered or object-centered.They are differ from each other，but there are some coherence in the compound meaning of ranks and mutual benefits.As a result，the scene of ethnography which is far away from“us”always concern about our“own”——as one of many“worlds”，including“nation”，but not equal to it.
There is a trend in anthropology which turns to experimental ethnography as well as reflecting on the realistic ethnography.The conscious reflections regard interpretive anthropology of Geertz as forerunner，and mainly adopt three kinds of expression forms.The first is the expression of experiences in exotic culture，which have different definitions of personhood，self and emotion in diverse cultures.The main aim is to criticize the theory of“collective mentality”in traditional anthropology.Nowadays，the experimental ethnography which formed in the research of personhood in different cultures includes three types：Psychodynamic ethnographies，Realistic Ethnographies and Modernist ethnographies.Modernism anthropologists spend a lot of energy to construct the dialogues between the interviewee and themselves.More interestingly，some informants are also invented by the scholars to participate in the ethnographic writing，which ensures their places in the creation of ethnography.The second is revealing the political and economic process of the world which anthropologists in and making a compromise in the contradictory relationship between the description of traditional small local communities in ethnography and globalization modern times.The formation of this feature is enlightened by the school of political economy's criticism to interpretive anthropology.Interpretive anthropology regards non-western societies as an isolated community.Although it is benefit to respect the value of exotic culture by making interpretations of meaning and symbol in those isolated community，it also has disadvantages——ignoring the culture changes take places in the non-western society which has been effected by western capitalism asince 16thcentury.The third is regarding anthropology as an art of cultural criticism.It advocates that anthropology is the art of cultural critique.As a cultural critique，the spirit of ethnography has already existed in the social anthropology.In the description of the faraway culture，anthropologists are also rethinking the values and norms of their own culture at the same time.The key of cultural critique in anthropology is converting familiar things to unfamiliar ones，common values in west to odd ones，that is，“defamiliarization”.According to Marcus and Fischer，there are two methods of“defamiliarization”，one is the“defamiliarization”of epistemology，the other is the“defamiliarization”of cross-cultural juxaposition.
Ethnography has changed for many times，it has received different definitions of different scholars in different countries，and so has its form.Just like in the past times，ethnography in the present has the characteristics of the times，and scholars have their own explanations about its features，which are described as“ontological turn”by more and more scholars today.Based on the practices and discussions in the second half of the 19thcentury，anthropologists in the first half of the 20th century interpret the ethnography systematically and define the research practice with rules in the name of science.After that，ethnography is enriched，researches are deepened，the coverage of geography is expanded.Along with the second half of the 20thcentury，ethnography has changed twice.One is raising concerns about the geographical and historical contexts of the object，the other is an introduction of critical epistemology.ethnography has successively reflected by hermeneutics and criticized by postmodernism.These two shifts have made the seek of ontology of ethnography turned to textual research of epistemology.However，the situation was changed again in the late 1900s.Ethnography walked out of the critique of epistemology and got back to the focus of the formation of local knowledge.Then ethnography walked into the empirical research field of cosmology and ontology with a new posture.Since then，ethnographic research attaches unprecedented importance to the relationship of existence and the meaning of the world.Thus，it was summarized as“ontological turn”.
It is not to say that ethnography in all stages only has one paradigm since we have used ontology，epistemology and new ontology to represent different characteristics of the three stages of ethnography.Ontology and epistemology always exist in every stage and are closely related.Take“ontological turn”as an example，it argues that we should return to ontology，but in fact，strictly speaking，the idea of“back to ontology”is a kind of claims of epistemology.However，this arguments is different with postmodernism，the latter believes that epistemology is almost everything while it could not give up ontological pursuit of“explaining the world in the world”.The reason why we described a stage as“ontology”or“epistemology”is that the“ontology”or“epistemology”has become an outstanding character of ethnography in that period.
The present ethnography has gotten rid of the repeatedly selfreflection of post modernist epistemology and go back to the tradition that attaches great importance to ethnographic“world”and gives new interpretations to it.This innovative regression shows that the reputation and dynamic of methodology of modernism ethnography has recovered partly after being questioned by post modernists for decades.This means that“modernism”has already contained the connotation of“postmodernism”，contained the“consciousness”of cross boundaries of self and other，self-criticism and“call cosmology of non-modernity”.
After postmodern times，researchers from different countries and“camps”have concerned on the reviews of regional traditions in ethnography，critics on cosmology raised by historical anthropology and the ontological link between researchers and their object，which consists a new form of ethnography.It is a primary stage of anthropological research when the major work of ethnography is fieldwork and writing.However，because of the process of definition，reflection and redefinitionin the“primary stage”，anthropology gradually gets rid of the colonial image，being a human science.Through the redefinition and integration of experience，entirety and relative ethnographic view，and the discrimination and development of the regional knowledge，world views and“indigenous philosophy”，to create a“ethnographic theory”that contains ontology and knowledge which is close to the“object”in humanities.
keywords：experimental ethnography epistemology ontology neo-ontology
（张亦鸣译，曾璐雅校）
Global Horizons for Ethnography and Innovative Development of Chinese Social Sciences
GAO Bingzhong
（Peking University，Beijing，China）
Summary：The literature which we call“ethnography”is a record about what we have seen and heard of people in other places and take it down for people who are similar to ourselves.For thousand years or more，in fact，the form of ethnography article is various，as well as the content，it is hard to classify.But from the depth of participation and mentality of statement of the author's experience in other places，the evolution of ethnography can be approximately divided into three generations.The first is the spontaneous，random and amateur ethnography era.Herodotus was considered as the earliest ethnographer in the history of western ethnography.In the early period of civilization，every nation had many descriptions of alien culture，which were mostly imagined..Not only in The Classic of Mountains and Rivers of China，but also in early stage of western ethnography.The second is the“scientific”era of ethnography.It takes a long time to establish anthropology after the application of ethnography.But when anthropologists who had received a professional training began to write ethnography，the development of ethnography had entered a new era when the scientific nature of ethnography was supported by the discipline standard.The third is the reflection era of ethnography.This era germinated from the reflection of knowledge production process of anthropologists which had aimed to be scientific.Ethnographic research was placed in a reflective review dimension.In 1977，the publication of Reflections on fieldwork in Morocco had a profound influence.The main spirit in the third era was the reflective and sincere commitment.This knowledge group bravely admitted the distance between the actual condition of ethnographic research and the ideal.Now we make more efforts to maintain the bottom line of“sincerity”instead of speaking too much“truth”as what we have aimed in previous career ideal.The researchers now become more frank，confess more background，and present more self-knowledge and self-reflection.The third era is an era of diversified development，and ethnography becomes more open at all aspects.
Social science of China can be divided into social science for China and social science in China.Obviously，these two is different.Up to now，social science of China is essentially a“for China”science which is about China，concerned about China，focus on Chinese society and the development of China.The nature of this orientation is guarding China but only caring about China，stands by China，and does research in China.The other one is the social science“in China”.In Chinese academic circles，besides the researcher of anthropology and ethnology conduct a survey in the community which they focus on，the scholars of politics and international relationship should also research after going to the place where they are talking about and making field investigation.In other words，only when the unique method of ethnography and anthropology develops into a general method for all social science will the Chinese social sciences be the“for China”sciences and the“in China”sciences at the same time.It is a science that has common care，global awareness and humanistic concern but just done in China，by the Chinese academic community and supported by the Chinese political system.And perhaps the scholars in the system are from Thailand，Britain or some other countries，just like now in the USA.The significance of overseas ethnography to China is that China shift from the ethnographic object to a main body who describes the world，from the people in the story to a storyteller.Meanwhile，the teller is also in others'story，just as we talked about them in our text.And this should be a common phenomenon.China was stared by the world in one-way in the past time，stares at the world now and will gaze at each other and“smile at each other”between different cultures.And that is“share niceness，the world will be great harmony”which is advocated by Mr.FEI Xiaotong.
The methodology understanding of“look”in Chinese social science is superficial，and the professional development of ethnography method of“look”has not been widely adopted by academia.It is easy to distinguish the ethnography method“look”from general social survey if we introduce the conception of“gaze”.“Gaze”is a refinement of look，and the ethnography method is a professionalization of general social survey.General social survey can gain a superficial understanding through cursory observation，but ethnography investigation must be absorbed in stare.Because of adopting the method of“focus on society”，China's modern social science can develop parallel by the traditional methodology of texture research.Today，the new development of Chinese social science depends on the ability of“gaze at society”.As for anthropology，from amateur to professional，anthropologists are the professional positions set by this system.A nation and a community setting such a position，because it has such a demand，rather than because of individual hobby.So it is the community that makes scholars.Community produces intellectual interests and resonance groups（the reader）.Why would the articles be read by many people whether in the same or subsequent generation？Because there are prospective readers who are imagined to be a community by the author，maybe a national community，or a language community，or an ideology or political system of community.Anyway，after all，he needs a community.We can see that the ethnography writing of Chinese anthropology is experiencing a shift from the realistic to the reflective.“Ethnography experience research”column witnesses this transformation.I have strongly felt the shift of impulse in my experience of PhD thesis assessment and defense.Ethnographic writing and concern are really complicated.For more and more young researchers，ethnography is no longer a literary form which objectively presents the scientific research achievements，it is an article which can be polished by one's writing skills.Not only to record the exotic people，but also in order to know ourselves.They have selfreflection consciousness both on thesis's topic selection and design.
There is a motto——“find the reason from ourselves”in the Chinese traditional methodology.However the“introspection”and“reflection”discussed here is a western concept.As we all know，reflection refers to a clear consciousness about the environment and the inevitable influence with it.From the scientific request of positivism，researchers should try to overcome the objective interference to conclusion since he realizes the human factor on the research，and then achieves the final understanding of the science.Ethnography is an academic tool which is polished by social and cultural anthropologist.It has been widely used by ethnic community，social science and folklore.What's more，it combines with other social sciences，developing into religious anthropology，political anthropology，legal anthropology，economic anthropology，historical anthropology and educational anthropology.As a combination，anthropological ethnography and fieldwork become a kind of academic normand has been used by multiple disciplines.Ethnography is not only a literary style of empirical research of social science，but also is a kind of method，that is a kind of qualitative research or known as“research on the intrinsic quality”.These disciplines do good at qualitative research.The introduction of ethnographic qualitative research enables them to learn the objects from a holistic view，and present the structure of objects in the article holistically.Ethnography is refined in researches to societies in the pre-industrial age（namely non-western societies，primitive society，traditional society，or simple society）.But the practice in different disciplines makes ethnography become a method or literary form which can investigate the western society and modern society effectively.
It's unable to ignore the immaturity of ethnography for the Chinese social scientific community.The west has developed the modern academic before the appearance of modern discipline in China.Chinese social science does not attach great importance to ethnography，however the western and oriental academics have published a large number fethnography about China which depicts the image of Chinese society in their eyes.These images are painted by the professional scholars which are based on the social facts.However，although it is difficult for us to admit that those are complete social image，we do not have enough images to make up or replace it.
Keywords：overseas ethnography writing culture social fact national culture
（张亦鸣译，曾璐雅校）