Scholarlink

<p>Wacquant’s critique of ethnographic reductionism is trenchant and insightful, but&#xa0;it presents two major problems&#xa0;for practicing fieldworkers. First, his philosophy of social science focused on “conquering” facts is ill suited to the empathic competencies needed for ethnography—that is, the methodology is problematic as method. Second, Wacquant’s a-social, rationalist vision is at odds with what the sociology of science tells us about knowledge production. Turning to the pragmatist tradition and reflecting on my own research experience, I show the benefits of viewing ethnographic facts as less conquered in combat&#xa0;than co-constructed&#xa0;in community. Collaborating with the community under study and the scientific community of inquiry can help researchers conduct better fieldwork, lean on others’ creativity, and ultimately reach Wacquant’s desired end goal&#xa0;of “thick construction.”</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Is the Ethnographic Fact Conquered or Co-Constructed?

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年4月30日

查看全文
  • Neil Gong

摘要

Wacquant’s critique of ethnographic reductionism is trenchant and insightful, but it presents two major problems for practicing fieldworkers. First, his philosophy of social science focused on “conquering” facts is ill suited to the empathic competencies needed for ethnography—that is, the methodology is problematic as method. Second, Wacquant’s a-social, rationalist vision is at odds with what the sociology of science tells us about knowledge production. Turning to the pragmatist tradition and reflecting on my own research experience, I show the benefits of viewing ethnographic facts as less conquered in combat than co-constructed in community. Collaborating with the community under study and the scientific community of inquiry can help researchers conduct better fieldwork, lean on others’ creativity, and ultimately reach Wacquant’s desired end goal of “thick construction.”