Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 21

Thinking as a Moral Act: Ethical Dimensions of Anthropological Fieldwork in the New States Author(s): Clifford Geertz Reviewed work(s):

Source: The Antioch Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Summer, 1968), pp. 139-158 Published by: Antioch Review, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4610913 . Accessed: 04/02/2012 08:03
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Antioch Review, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Antioch Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Thinking

as

Moral

Act:

Ethical

Dimensions
Fieldwork
in

of
the

Anthropological New
States
By CLIFFORD GEERTZ

* When I try to sum up what, aboveall else, I have learnedfrom grapplingwith the sprawlingprolixitiesof John Dewey's work, what I come up with is the succinct and chilling doctrine that thoughtis conductand is to be morallyjudgedas such.It is not the notion that thinking is a seriousmatterthat seemsto be distinctive of this lastof the New Englandphilosophers; intellectuals all regard mental productions with some esteem.It is the argumentthat the reasonthinking is seriousis that it is a social act, and that one is thereforeresponsible it as for any other social act. Perhaps for even more so, for, in the long run, it is the most consequential of social acts. In short, Dewey brings thinking out into the public world whereethicaljudgmentcan get at it. To some,this seemsto debase it terribly, turn it into a thing, a weapon,a possession someor to moralists-for that, finally, thing equally ordinary.Revolutionary of is amid all his awkwardness expression, what Dewey was-are of nevermuch liked, particularly those,in this casepractitioners by
and of the SocialSciencesat the CLIPFORD GEERTZis Professor Anthropology of Universityof Chicago. He is also Chairmanof the Committeefor the ComparativeStudy of New Nations. Among his works are The Religion of lava, Agricultural Involution,and forthcomingthis fall, Islam Observed. '39

140

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

They are call trades, whomtheyso severely to account. the intellectual as almostalwaysattacked, he has been, as underminingestablished the practicesand corrupting young. Yet, for betteror worse, they are if usuallyhavetheireffect:the practices, not undermined at least are shaken; the youth, if not corrupted, at least disquieted.Since Dewey, it has been much more difficultto regardthinking as an to from action,theorizingas an alternative commitment, abstention excused and the intellectuallife as a kind of secularmonasticism, by from accountability its sensitivityto the Good. Nowhere has this been more true than in the social sciences. As these scienceshave developedtechnically,the questionof their moralstatushasbecomeincreasingly Yet, from a Deweyian pressing. by point of view, most of the debatesstimulated this concernhave been somewhatlacking in point, for they rarelyhave been based on any circumstantial examinationof what such researchis as a form of conduct.Humanistscry that the social scientistsare barbarizingthe world and grabbingoff all the grants,social scientists that they are savingit-or anywayare going to shortly,if only their of But grantsareincreased. the moralqualityof the experience workthe ethical life they lead while pursuingtheir ing social scientists, inquiries,is virtuallynever discussedexcept in the most general of terms.This shouldbe a searching investigation a centralaspectof it modern consciousness. Unfortunately, has descendedinto an exchange of familiar opinionsbetween culturalgame wardens,like like fundamentalists, B. F. Skinner, JacquesBarzun,and scientistic studyof concerning terribleor wonderfuleffectsthe systematic the man has had, is having, or is going to have soonerthan we think. of Yet, the impactof the socialsciencesupon the character our more by what sort of moralexperilives will finallybe determined ence they turn out to embodythan by their merelytechnicaleffects or by how much moneythey are permittedto spend.As thoughtis conduct,the resultsof thoughtinevitablyreflectthe quality of the in The methods kind of humansituation which they were obtained. and theoriesof socialscienceare not being producedby computers but by men; and, for the most part,by men operatingnot in labbut oratories in the same socialworld to which the methodsapply and the theoriespertain.It is this which gives the whole enterprise Most social scientificresearchinvolvesdirect, its specialcharacter.

THINKING

AS A MORAL

ACT

141

ntimateand moreor less disturbing encounters with the immediate detailsof contemporary encounters a sort which can hardly life, of help butaffectthe sensibilities the men who practice And, asany of it. disciplineis what the men who practice makeit, thesesensibilities it becomeas embeddedin its constitution do those of an age in its as culture.An assessment the moral implicationsof the scientific of studyof man which is going to consistof more than elegantsneers or mindless celebrations must begin with an inspectionof social scientificresearch a varietyof moral experience. as To propose,after such a preamble, own experience a fit my as subjectfor review may seem to suggest a certainpretentiousness. Certainlythe risk of attitudinizingis not to be lightly dismissed. Discussingone'smoralperceptions publicis alwaysan invitation in to cant and, what is worse,to entertain conception the that there is something nobleabouthavingbeen refinedenoughsimply especially to have had them. Even the confirmedself-hater prideshimself,as Nietzscheoncepointedout, on his moralsensitivity discerning in so acutelywhat a wretch he is. Yet, if I do proposeto discusshere a few of the ethicaldimensions of my own researchexperience, is not becauseI consider it them uniqueor special.Rather,I suspectthem of being commonto the point of universality amongthose engagedin similarwork, and therefore representative somethingmore than themselvesor myof self. Evenmoreimportant, my work has had to do with the New as Statesof Asia and Africa (or, more precisely,with two of them, Indonesiaand Morocco), and with the general problem of the modernization traditional of societies,it is perhapsparticularly appositeto an assessment socialresearch a form of conductand of as the implicationsto be drawn for social science as a moral force. Whatever one maysayof suchinquiry,one canhardlyclaimthat else it is focusedon trivialissuesor abstracted fromhumanconcerns. It is not, of course,the only sort of work social scientistsare doing, nor even the only sort anthropologists doing. Other inare sightswould be derived,otherlessonsdrawn,from inspectingother sorts;and a generalevaluation the impactof socialscienceon our of culturewill have to take accountof them all. It is to contribute towardputtingthe debateover the moralstatusof socialscienceon firmerground,and not to proposemy own experiences my own or

I42

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

line of workas canonical, the followingscattered necessarily and that somewhatpersonalreflections directed. are II One of the more disquietingconclusionsto which thinking about the new statesand their problemshas led me is that such thinking is rathermore effectivein exposingthe problemsthan it is in uncoveringsolutionsfor them. There is a diagnosticand a remedialside to our scientificconcernwith these societies, and the diagnostic seems,in the verynatureof the case,to proceedinfinitely faster than the remedial.Therefore,one result of very extended, verythorough,periodsof carefulresearch usuallya much keener is realization the new statesare indeedin somethingof a fix. The that emotionthis sortof rewardfor patientlaborsproduces ratherlike is that I imagineCharlieBrownto feel when, in one "Peanuts" strip, Lucy saysto him: "Youknow what the troublewith you is Charlie Brown?The troublewith you is you'reyou."Aftera panelof wordless appreciation the cogency of this observation, of Charlieasks: "Well, whatevercan I do about that?"and Lucy replies:"I don't give advice.I just point out the rootsof the problem." The rootsof the problemin the new statesare ratherdeep,and socialresearch often serveslittle morethan to demonstrate how just deep they are. When it comes to giving advice, what has been discovered usuallyseemsto be more useful in pointingout ways in which the present unbearablesituationcould be worsened (and will probably be) ratherthanwaysin which it might be ameliorated. FrancisBacon'saphorismseems to me distinctlyless axiomaticby the day:Knowledge-at leastthe sortof knowledgeI havebeenable to dig up-does not alwayscometo verymuch in the way of power. All this is not a mere attackof sentimental pessimismon my part;it is a stubbornly objective aspectof socialresearch the new in states.In evidenceof this assertion, me discussfor a moment a let problemwhich is fundamental, only in Indonesia not and Morocco, I have encountered but in virtuallyall the new states: where it, agrarianreform. in This problemappears quite different, even contrasting, forms in Indonesia Morocco, reasons for and which are at once ecological, and economic,historical, cultural.But, in eitherplace,to analyzeit

THINKING

AS A MORAL

ACT

I43

systematically not only to appreciate the first time just how is for greata problemit reallyis, but to uncoverthe factorswhich make it so recalcitrant; these factorsturn out to be very similarin the and two places.In particular, thereis in both situations radicalshorta run incompatibility betweenthe two economicgoalswhich together comprisewhat agrarian reformin the long run consistsof: technological progressand improved social welfare. Less abstractly,a radical increase agricultural in production a significant and reduction of ruralun- (or under-) employmentseem for the moment to be ambitions. directlycontradictory In Indonesia,and particularly its Javanese in heartlandwhere the populationdensitiesrun up to over I500 per squaremile, this contradiction expressesitself in terms of an extraordinarily laborintensive, on the whole, highly productive but, mode of exploitation. The countlessthird- and quarter-acre terraceswhich blanket rice Java, Bali, and certain regions of Sumatraand the Celebes,are workedalmostas though they were gardens-or, perhapsmore exactly,greenhouse tanks.Virtuallyeverything done by hand.Very is simple(and veryingenious)toolsareused.Hordesof laborers drawn from the enormousruralpopulationwork with extremecare and thoroughness. Whetheryou want to call these workers"underemployed" or not dependson definitions. Certainly, most of them make some contributionto the high per acre output; with equal certainty,they would be betteremployedelsewhereif there were an elsewhereto employ them and if there were mechanizedmeans at hand to actasks.There are not, however.And it is complishtheiragricultural here that the rub comes:technological of progress any seriousscope (i.e. asidefrom marginalchangeslike increased fertilizingand improved seed selection) means the massive displacementof rural underpresentconditions. a Dutch labor,and this is unthinkable As with moderntechnologythe agricultural economistonce remarked, work of Javacould be done with io per cent of the presentwork force,but that would leavethe othergo per cent starving. At this point, someone who rememberswhat became of dire forebodings Malthus' concerning Europealwaysappears say, to But to "Industrialization!" how is industrialization be financedin a itselfconsumes overwhelming the wherethe huge peasantry country

144

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

bulk of what it produces, and what exportsexist largelygo toward securingthe subsistence the urbanmasses?And how, even if it of can be financed, it possiblybe of sucha scope(and in thesedays can of automation, sucha sort) to absorb of morethana minutefraction of the labora true agricultural revolution Javawould release? in In essence,faced with a choice between maintainingemployment and increasingproductionper worker, the Javanese peasant "chooses" absurdly (an voluntaristic word to use in this context) to maintainemployment regardless the level of welfare.In fact, he of has been making that "choice"at virtuallyevery juncturefor at least a hundred years.It is hard to see what else he could have done underthe circumstances what else he can do now. or the is blackas all this. Admittedly, situation not as unrelievedly I simplifyfor argumentand emphasis. There are some things (improvededucational levels, awakenedpopularaspiration)to be enteredon the other side of the ledger.But it is hardlycheery.There is the close connectionbetweenthe labor-absorbing technologyand the intricatevillage social system.There is the thoroughinterlocking of the processesof land parcelization, multiple croppingand sharetenancywhich makeseachof them thatmuchmoredifficult to reverse.There is the ever-increasing emphasison subsistence crops and the consequent declineof animalhusbandry mixedfarming. and Whereveryou turn, the arteriesare hardened. The Moroccan situation on a presents the surface quite different picture,but not, when closelyexamined,a very much brighterone. is its Though the population growingwith alarmingrapidity, sheer bulk is not yet the toweringproblemit is in Indonesia. Ratherthan a highly laborintensive, highly productive, but exploitation pattern, there is a split between large-scale(often very large-scale-2,500 acresand more) modern farmers,the bulk of them French, and four- and five-acre traditional farmers,entirely dirt very small-scale Moroccan. firstarehighly mechanized-moreso, probably, The than in most of their compatriots France-and, for the most part, quite The secondare not only not mechanized, the level but productive. of theirtraditional technology unlikethat of Java,verylow. Since is, they are working marginallands in what is at best (again in contrastto Java) an extremelydifficultecologicalsetting,they are sigA nally unproductive. statistical epitome,even if it is only approxi-

THINKING

AS A MORAL

ACT

145

mate, communicates situationwith sufficientbrutality:about the one-halfof one per cent of the ruralpopulation-some 5,000 European settlers-cultivates about7 per cent of the country's land, contributesabout I5 per cent of its total agricultural product,and accountsfor about6o per cent of its agricultural per cent of total) (30 exportincome. The image is thus classicand clear.And so is the dilemmait presents. the one hand, a continuation large-scale, On well-to-do of foreignfarmersalongsideimpoverished small-scale indigenousones is, overand aboveits socialinjustice, one that is likely to endure not very long in the post-colonial world, and indeed has now already begun to be altered.On the other,a disappearance such farmers of and their replacement peasantsthreatens,at least initially and by perhaps a verylong time,a fall in agricultural for outputandforeign exchange earningswhich a country approachinga demographic crisisat full gallop and plaguedby the usual balance-of-payments problems cannotverywell regard with equanimity. As in a situationlike the Indonesian, first responseis to the think of industrialization, in a situationof this sort it is to think so of land reform.But though land reformcan remove-and indeed is removing-the settlers easilyenough,it cannotin itselfmakegood modernfarmersout of poor traditionalones. In fact, as it tends, given popularpressures, involve extensiveparcelization conto and sequentdecapitalization the large farms,it amountsto a step in of the Indonesian directionof choosinghigher levels of ruralemployment over economicrationalization. This sort of "choice"is, for all its welfareattractions, most dubiousone, given a physicalseta ting whereadvanced are techniques necessary just to preventthe not decline of output but to avoid a progressive deterioration the of environment levelsfor all intentsand purposesirreversible. to But so, equally,is its reversedubious:the maintenance an of enclaveof prosperous foreignfarmers(or as is now increasingly the case,highly mechanized,elite-runstate farms) in the midst of an expandingmass of impoverished rural proletarians. Indonesia, In the Marxists have been somewhathard put to locate their familiar classenemiesso as to pin the blame for peasantpovertyon them; kulaks are in short supply.But in Morocco,their argumentshave more than a surfaceplausibility. The Moroccan situationis revolu-

146

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

to tionaryenough.The only problem thatit is difficult see how the is revolution couldlead to anythingbut declininglevelsof living and a to wholesalemortgaging futurepossibilities somequite short-run, of of and quitemarginal, gainsfor a smallpercentage the presentrural extremelyrough,but if, population. The calculation admittedly, is, as has beenestimated, I96o) 6o per cent of the ruralpopulation (ca. owns no land and the colons own about two million acres,then redistributing French lands in, say, ten-acreparcelswould reduce the propertyless population about3 per cent-the annualrate of by demographic increase. Again, the situationis actually neither so thoroughlybleak nor so simple.A more balanceddiscussion would have to mention the seriouseffortsbeing made to raise the technologicallevel of peasantagriculture, relatively the high degreeof realismof Moroccan governmental to policiesas compared those of the Indonesian, and so forth. But my point here is merely that, in Moroccoas in and Indonesia, taskof aligningthe need for maintaining increasthe ing agricultural productionand the need for maintainingand indifficultone. creasingagricultural employment an extraordinarily is The twin aims of genuine agrarian reform-technologicalprogress and improvedsocial welfare-pull very strongly against one another; and the more deeply one goes into the problem,the more this unpleasant becomes.Indeed,if I feel at the mofact apparent ment slightly more optimisticabout the Moroccansituationthan I do aboutthe Indonesian, fear it is only becauseI have not been I studyingit as long. But my intent here is not to preachdespair,a despairI do not in fact feel, but to suggestsomethingof what the moral situation embodiedin the sort of work I do is like. The imbalancebetween an abilityto find out what the troubleis, or at least somethingof what the troubleis, an an abilityto find out what might be done to alleviateit is not confined,in new state research, the area of to In one agrarian reform;it is pervasive. education, comesup against the clashbetweenthe need to maintain"standards" the need to and expandopportunities; politics,againstthe clashbetweenthe need in for rationalladershipand effectiveorganizationand the need to involvethe massesin the governmental processand to protectindividual liberty;in religion, against the clash between the need to

THINKING

AS

A MORAL

ACT

I47

preventspiritualexhaustion and the need to avoid the petrification of obsoleteattitudes. And so on. Like the problemof aligning productionand employment, these dilemmasare hardlyuniqueto the new states.But they are, in general,graver,more pressingand less tractable there. To continuethe medical image, the sort of moral atmosphere which someoneoccupationally in committedto thinking aboutthe new statesfindshimself,oftenseemsto me not entirely incomparable that of the cancersurgeonwho can expectto cure to only a fractionof his patientsand who spendsmost of his effort he delicately exposingseverepathologies is not equippedto do anything about. III All this is, however, on a rather impersonal,merely professional level; and one meets it, more or less well, by conjuringup the usual vocationalstoicism.However ineffectivea scientificapproach to social problemsmay be, it is more effective than the available alternatives:cultivating one's garden, thrashing about wildly in the dark,or lighting candlesto the Madonna.But there is another moralpeculiarity fieldworkexperience the new states of in which is rathermore difficultto neutralizebecause,so much more personal, strikesrathercloserto home. It is difficultto formulate it it very well for someonewho has not expenrenced or even, for it, that matter,for oneself.I shall try to communicate in termsof a it notion of a specialsortof irony-"anthropological irony." Irony rests, of course,on a perceptionof the way in which realityderidesmerely human views of it, reducesgrand attitudes and large hopes to self-mockery. The common forms of it are familiarenough.In dramaticirony, deflationresultsfrom the conconceiveshis situationto be and trastbetweenwhat the character what the audienceknows it to be; in historicalirony, from the betweenthe intentions sovereign of inconsistency personages the and naturaloutcomes actionsproceeding of from thoseintentions. Literof ary irony rests on a momentaryconspiracy author and reader against the stupiditiesand self-deceptions the everydayworld; of Socratic,or pedagogical, irony rests on intellectualdissemblingin orderto parodyintellectual pretention.

I48

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

But the sort of irony which appearsin anthropological fieldwork, though no less effectivein puncturingillusion, is not quite like any of these.It is not dramatic, the becauseit is double-edged: actorsees throughthe audienceas clearlyas the audiencethrough the actor.It is not historical, becauseit is acausal: is not that one's it actionsproduce,through the internal logic of events, results the reverseof what was intended by them (though this sometimes happenstoo), but that one's predictions what other people will of do, one'ssocialexpectations, constantly are surprised what, indeby pendentlyof one'sown behavior, they actuallydo. It is not literary, becausethe partiesare not only not in league,but they are in differentmoraluniverses. And it is not Socratic, becauseit is not intellectualpretention which is parodied, the merecommunication but of thought-and not by intellectualdissembling,but by an all-tooearnest,almost grim, effort at understanding. In fieldwork,the manifestation seriousmisapprehensions of as as to what the situationis almostalwaysbegins on the informants' side of the encounter,though, unfortunately the investigator's for it self-esteem, doesn'tend there.The first indications, having to do with blunt demandsfor materialhelp and personalservices, though always tricky to handle, are fairly easily adjustedto. They never and disappear, they neverceaseto temptthe anthropologist the into easy (and useless) trinkets-and-beads out of establishing way relationships with the nativesor of quietinghis guilt overbeing a prince among paupers.But they soon become routine,and after awhile one even developsa certainresignationtoward the idea of being viewed,even by one'smost reliablefriends,as much as a sourceof income as a person. One of the psychologicalfringe benefits of anthropological research-at least I think it's a benefit-is that it teachesyou how it feels to be thoughtof as a fool and used as an object,and how to endureit. Muchmoredifficult cometo termswith, however,is another to very closely related sort of collision between the way I typically see things and the way most of my informantsdo; more difficult, becauseit concernsnot just the immediatecontentof the relationship betweenus but the broadermeaning of that content,its symbolic overtones. all but completelytraditional For informants(and one finds very few of those anymore),I representan exemplifica-

THINKING

AS

A MORAL

ACT

I49

they themtion, a walking displaycase, of the sort of life-chances then surelytheirchildren. selveswill soonhave,or if not themselves, As my earlierremarksaboutproblemsand solutionsindicate,I am ratherless certainaboutthis than they are, and the result,from the is point of view of my own reactions, what I think of as "thetouchto It ing faith problem." is not altogethercomfortable live among to vast possibilitiesthey men who feel themselvessuddenlyheir surelyhave everyright to possessbut will in all likelihoodnot get. Nor does the fact that you seem in their eyes to have already been gifted with such a heritage (as, in fact, though not to the degree they usuallyimagine, you actuallyhave) ease the situation any. You are placed,willy-nilly,in a moralposturesomewhatcomparableto that of the bourgeoisinformingthe poor to be patient, Rome wasn'tbuilt in a day. One does not actuallyprofferthis sort of homily; at leastnot more than once. But the postureis inherent of irrespective what one does,thinks,feels,or wishes, in the situation, is by virtueof the fact that the anthropologist a member,however marginal,of the world'smore privilegedclasses;and yet, unlesshe naive or wildly self-deceiving as sometimes (or, is eitherincredibly happens,both), he can hardlybring himself to believethat the inchildren,are on the immediateverge of formant,or the informant's elite. It is this radical him as membersof this transcultural joining in asymmetry view of what the informant's(and beyondhim, his country's)life-chancesreally are, especiallywhen it is combined with an agreementon what they shouldbe, which colorsthe fieldwith thatveryspecialmoraltone I think of as ironic. work situation It is ironic in the first place becausethe social institutionsof which the anthropologist himself such an exemplaryproduct, is valuesratherhighly, do not seem to be and which he consequently that they were for the royalroadsto well-beingfor his informants him: he is a displaycasefor goods which are, despitetheir surface resemblances local products,not actuallyavailableon domestic to where noticeable to with respect education This is especially markets. the touching faith problem appearsin its most acute form. The transnotionthat schoolsaremagicwandswhich will in themselves child into those of or form the life-chances a Moroccan Indonesian For a of an American,a French,or a Dutch child is widespread. it very, very small minorityof the alreadywell-positioned can and

I50

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

does. But for the great majorityit can but change completelyuneducatedchildren into slightly educated ones. This is, in itself, no meanachievement. rapidspreadof populareducation one The is of the more encouraging phenomenaon the generallyunencouraging new state scene, and if it demandsillusionsto sustainit then we shall have to have the illusions.But for people with grander ideas, ideas stimulated the manic optimismof radicalnationalby ism,this sortof marginal advance verymuchnot whatthey havein is mind.Similarconfusions hopesfor possibilities of centeraroundcivil serviceemployment, ownershipof machinesand residencein large cities;and with respect the countryas a whole, aroundeconomic to planning,popularsuffrageand third-force diplomacy.These institutionsand instrumentalities theirplacein any genuineattempt have at socialreconstruction; indeed,such reconstruction in all likeliis, withoutthem.But they arenot the miracleworkers hood,impossible to revolution risingexpectations theyarereputed be. The so-called of shows a fair promiseof culminatingin a revolutionof rising disa who appointments, fact which the anthropologist, will be afterall in going home to suburbia a year or so, can permithimself to see rather moreclearlythan his all-too-engage informants. They, at best, can allow themselves, uneasilyand half-consciously, to suspect only it. Such a sensethat one sees the relationship betweenoneselfand one'sinformants with an uncloudedeye would be more comforting, however,were it not for anothertwist to the whole situation which puts this supposedfact in ratherseriousdoubt.For, if the anthroto pologistis indeedlargelyirrelevant his informants' fatesand governedby interests which, savein the most glancingof ways, do not touch theirs,on what groundshas he the right to expect them to acceptand help him? One is placed,in this sort of work, among men necessitous hopingfor radicalimprovements theirconditions in of life that do not seem exactlyimminent;moreover, is a type one benefactor just the sort of improvements of they are looking for, also obliged to ask them for charity-and what is almost worse, having them give it. This ought to be a humbling,thus elevating, but experience; most often it is simply a disorientingone. All the familiarrationalizations havingto do with science,progress, philanand selflesspurity of dedicationring false, thropy,enlightenment,

THINKING

AS A MORAL

ACT

151

and one is left, ethicallydisarmed,to grapplewith a human relationshipwhich must be justifiedover and over again in the most immediateof terms. Morally,one is back on a barterlevel; one's is currency unnegotiable, one's creditshave all dissolved.The only thing one reallyhas to give in orderto avoidmendicancy (or-not to neglectthe trinkets-and-beads is approach-bribery) oneself.This is an alarmingthought; and the initial responseto it is the appearanceof a passionate wish to becomepersonally valuableto one'sinformants-i.e. a friend-in orderto maintainself-respect. notion The that one has been marvelously successful doing this is the investiin gator'sside of the touchingfaith coin: he believesin cross-cultural communion(he calls it "rapport") his subjects as believein tomorrow. It is no wonder that so many anthropologists leave the field seeingtearsin the eyesof theirinformants that,I feel quite sure,are not reallythere. I do not wish to be misunderstood here. No more than I feel that significantsocialprogressin the new statesis impossibledo I feel that genuine human contactacrossculturalbarriers imposis sible.Had I not seen a certainamountof the first and experienced, now and then, a measureof the second,my work would have been insupportable. What I am pointingto, in eithercase,is an enormous pressureon both the investigator and his subjectsto regardthese goalsas nearwhen theyarein factfar,assured when they aremerely wishedfor, and achievedwhen they are at best approximated. This pressurespringsfrom the inherentmoral asymmetry the fieldof work situation. is therefore wholly avoidable is partof the It not but ethicallyambiguouscharacter that situationas such. In a way of whichis in no senseadventitious, relationship the betweenan anthrorestson a set of partialfictionshalf seenpologistand his informant through. So long as they remainonly partialfictions(thus partialtruths) and but half seen-through(thus half-obscured), relationship the well enough.The anthropologist sustained the sciprogresses is by entificvalue of the data he is getting, and perhapsby a certainrelief in merelydiscovering that his task is not altogetherSisyphean afterall. As for the informant, interestis kept alive by a whole his seriesof secondary gains;a senseof being an essential collaborator in an important, but dimlyunderstood, if enterprise; pridein his own a

I52

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

cultureand in the expertness his knowledgeof it; a chanceto of expressprivateideas and opinions (and retail gossip) to a neutral outsider;as well, again, as a certainamount of direct or indirect materialbenefitof one sort or another.And so on-the rewarding elementsare different almosteachinformant.But if the implicit for agreementto regardone another,in the face of some very serious universe indications the contrary, members the samecultural to as of breaksdown, none of these more matter-of-fact incentivescan keep the relationship going very long. It either graduallyexpiresin an atmosphere futility,boredomand generalized of disappointment or, much less often, collapsessuddenlyinto a mutual sense of having been deceived,used and rejected.When this happensthe anthropologistseesa lossof rapport: has beenjilted.The informantsees he a revelation bad faith:he has beenhumiliated. of And they are shut uncommunicatup once more in their separate, internallycoherent, ing worlds. Let me give an example.When I was in Java,one of my better informants was a young clerk in his earlythirties,who, though he had been born in the small countrytown I was studyingand had lived there all his life, had larger aspirations; wanted to be a he writer.In fact, he was one. While I was there he wrote and produced a play, basedon his sister'srecentdivorce,in which, partly for verisimilitude rathermore for revenge(her unfortunate but exhusbandstill lived in the town), the sisterplayedherself.The plot Doll's House: an educatedgirl (she amountedto a sortof Javanese had been to junior high school) wishes to escape the bounds of the traditional wife role; her husbandrefusesto permither to do so, so she walksout on him-except that,art being an improvement on life, in the play she shot him instead.Aside from this curiouswork, he wrote a large numberof other (unpublished)storiesand (unproduced)plays, most of which took their general outlines from traditionaltales in which he was, for all his surfacemodernism, His very much interestedand very knowledgeable. work with me had mainlyto do with such materials-myths,legends,spells,etc.and he was a good informant:industrious,intelligent, accurate, We enthusiastic. got along quite well until an odd incidenthaving to do with my typewriter after which he refusedeven to occurred, greetme in the street,muchlessto work with me.

THINKING

AS A MORAL

ACT

I53

He had been borrowingthe typewriter now and again to type his works up in hunt-and-peck fashion,preparinga sort of manuscripteditionof them. As time went on, he borrowedit more and more,until he seemedto have it most of the time, which, as I had no other,was inconvenient. decided,therefore, try to bring the I to borrowingdown to more moderatelevels. One day, when he dispatched,as usual, his little brotherto borrowthe machinefor an I afternoon, sent backa note sayingthat I was sorrybut I neededit for some work of my own. This was the first time I had issued such a refusal.Within ten minutes,the youngerbrotherwas back a carrying note which, not mentioningthe typewriter my refusal or at all, merelysaid that my informant,owing to a pressingengagement,wouldbe unable(alsofor the firsttime) to makethe scheduled we appointment had for the following day. He would try, however, to makethe next one,threedayshenceif he could.I interpreted this, as quite correctly, a tit for my tat, and, fearful as ever of a loss of rapport,I made what was a stupid,and, so far as our relationship fatal error.Insteadof just letting the incidentpass,I was concerned, the answered note, sayingI was sorryhe would be unableto make I our appointment, hoped I had not affronted him in any way, and after all as I was going to go out into I could sparethe typewriter the paddies instead. Three hours later, back came the younger brother,the typewriter,and a very long (typewritten)note, the burdenof which was that: (i) of coursehe had not been affronted, after all it was my typewriter;(2) he was very sorry,but it now turnedout that not only would he be unableto make our next appointment,but the pressof his literarywork unfortunately made it for impossible him to find the time to come any moreat all. I made somefeebleefforts repairthe situation-rendered to evenmorefeeble senseof havingbehavedlike an ass-but it was too late. He by my went back to copying his works in longhandand I found a new a informant-a hospitalworker,who, practicing certainamountof medicineamong his neighbors, was more interested my amateur in drug supplythan my typewriter-to work with on mythicmaterials. A mere quibble,ridiculously overblown?A comicalmisunderthin skins and stupiderrorsof standingaggravated abnormally by But tact? Certainly. why did such a molehill becomesuch a mountain? Why did we have such difficulty with so simple a matteras

I54

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

borrowing and lending a typewriter? of Because, course,it was not a typewriter-or, at least,not only a typewriter-which was being borrowedand lent, but a complexof claims and concessions only dimly recognized.Borrowingit, my informantwas, tacitly,asserting his demandto be taken seriously an intellectual, "writer"as a i.e. a peer;lending it, I was, tacitly,grantingthat demand.Lending it, I was, tacitly, interpretingour relationshipas one of personal friendship-i.e., admittingmyself to the inner circle of his moral community;borrowingit, he was, still tacitly,acceptingthat interpretation. both knew, I am sure,that theseagreements We couldbe only partial:we were not reallycolleagues not reallycomrades. and But while our relationship persisted, they were at leastpartial,were to some degreereal,which given the facts of the situation-that he was as far from being an ingloriousMilton as I was from being a Javanese-was something of an accomplishment. But when I refusedthe use of the symbolof our unspokenpact to regard,by a kind of mutual suspension disbelief,our two culturalworlds as of one,his suspicion, alwayslingering,thatI did not takehis "work" as seriouslyas I took my own, brokeinto consciousness. When he in turn refusedto come to our next appointment, fear,also always my there,that he saw me as but an inconsequent stranger whom he to was attached only the mostopportunistic considerations, by of broke into mine. Its trueanatomyapparently the colexposed, relationship and disappointment. lapsedin bitterness Suchan end to anthropologist-informant is relationships hardly typical:usuallythe sense of being members,howevertemporarily, of insecurelyand incompletely, a single moral communitycan be even in the face of the wider socialrealities maintained which press in at almosteverymomentto deny it. It is this fiction-fiction, not falsehood-that lies at the heart of successful anthropological field research; and, becauseit is nevercompletelyconvincingfor any of the participants, renderssuch research, it considered a form of as ironic. To recognizethe moral tension, the conduct,continuously ethicalambiguity, implicitin the encounter anthropologist inof and it formant,and to still be ableto dissipate throughone'sactionsand is one'sattitudes, what encounter demandsof both partiesif it is to be authentic,if it is to actuallyhappen.And to discoverthat is to discoveralso somethingvery complicated and not altogetherclear

THINKING

AS A MORAL

ACT

155

and aboutthe natureof sincerity insincerity, and genuineness hypocFieldworkis an educational risy,honestyand self-deception. experience all around.What is difficult to decidewhat has been learned. is

IV
Thereare,of course, of manymoreethicaldimensions fieldwork between thanthe two I havebeenableto discuss here:the imbalance the abilityto uncoverproblemsand the power to solve them, and and the inherentmoraltensionbetweenthe investigator his subject. Nor, as the fact that I have been able to discussthem perhapsindicates,arethesetwo necessarily mostprofound. eventhe mere the But revelationthat they, and others like them, exist may contribute towarddispellinga few popularillusionsabout what, as conduct, social science is. In particular,the widespreadnotion that social scientificresearchconsistsof an attemptto discoverhidden wires cardboard men shouldhave some doubt with which to manipulate cast upon it. It is not just that the wires do not exist and the men it are not cardboard; is that the whole enterpriseis directednot towardthe impossible of controlling task historybut towardthe only quixoticone of wideningthe role of reasonin it. It is the failureto see this-not only on the part of those who are hostileto socialscienceon principle(what principleis a deeper question),but on the part of many of its most ardentapologistswhich has renderedmuch of the discussionover its moral status pointless.The fact is that social scienceis neither a sinisterattack it upon our culture,nor the meansof its final deliverance; is merely part of that culture.From the point of view of moral philosophy, the centralquestionto ask aboutsocialscienceis not the one which from either side are foreverasking: would-bePlatonicGuardians Will it sink us or saveus? It will, almostcertainly, neither.The do centralquestionto ask is, What does it tell us about the valuesby which we-all of us-in fact live? The need is to put socialscience not in the dock, which is where our culturebelongs,but on the witness stand. Whether,when this is done, it will turn out to be a witnessfor or the prosecution the defenseis, I suppose,an open question.But it is clearthat its testimonywill, like that of any witness,be more pertinentto certainmattersthan to others.In particular, such an

I56

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

inquiryshould clarifywhat sort of socialbehaviorscientificthinking about human affairsis, and should do so in a way in which decision of analyses ethicalterms,the logic of personal philosophical all of moralauthority-in themselves, usefulendeavors or the sources of -cannot. Even my glancingexamination a few fragmentsof my own experienceoffers some leads in this direction-in exposing method"and the like "scientific "relativism," what "detachment," concreteacts performed and mean not as shibboleths slogansbut as personsin specificsocial contests.Discussingthem as by particular such, as aspectsof a metier,will not put an end to dispute,but it may help to make it profitable. if The nature of scientificdetachment-disinterestedness, one can still use that term-is a good example.The popularstereotype technician,as antisepticemotionally laboratory of the white-coated of is as sartorially, but the expression a generalnotion that such deof neurotic affectiessness to use. put tachmentconsistsin a kind with a useful Like a eunuchin a harem,a scientistis a functionary becauseof an dangerous defect;and, like a eunuch,correspondingly insensibilityto subcerebral(often called "human") concerns. I but don'tknow much aboutwhat goes on in laboratories; in anthrois pologicalfieldwork,detachment neithera naturalgift nor a manearnedand laboriously talent.It is a partialachievement ufactured one What little disinteredness managesto maintained. precariously attaincomesnot from failing to have emotionsor neglectingto perceive them in others, nor yet from sealing oneself into a moral to ethic. subjection a vocational vacuum.It comesfrom a personal What needsexplanaThis is, I realize,not an originaldiscovery. tion is why so many people are so terriblyeager to deny it and to are social scientists uninsist insteadthat, at least while practicing, but movedby moralconcernaltogether-not disinterested, uninterested. With respectto outside critics,perhapsacademicvested inwill carefully will terests explainthe bulk of the cases,and ignorance are most of the rest.But when the sameprotestations made preserve scientiststhemselves-"I don't give advice, I just by many social to point out the rootsof the problem"-it is perhapsnecessary look inherentin sustaininga scientific a little deeper,to the difficulties ethic not just at a writing desk or on a lectureplatform,but in the to of very midst of everydaysocial situations, the difficulties being

THINKING

AS A MORAL

ACT

I57

at one and the sametime an involvedactorand a detachedobserver. fieldworkas of characteristic anthropological The outstanding a form of conductis that it does not permitany significantseparaand spheresof one'slife. tion of the occupational extra-occupational it On the contrary, forcestheir fusion. One must find one'sfriends and among one'sfriends; among one'sinformants one'sinformants one must regard ideas, attitudes,and values as so many cultural factsand continueto act in termsof those which define one's own one must see societyas an objectand experienceit commitments; anyonesays,everythinganyonedoes, even as a subject.Everything of the mere physicalsetting,has both to form the substance one's mill. personalexistenceand to be taken as grist for one'sanalytical off goes comfortably to the office to At home, the anthropologist ply his tradelike everyoneelse. In the field, he has to learn to live and think at the same time. As I have suggested,this learningprocesscan advanceonly so which anyhownever obtain. far, even underthe best of conditions, The anthropologist inevitablyremainsmore alien than he desires than he imagines.But it does enforce,day in and and less cerebral day out, the effort to advance it, to combine two fundamental orientations toward reality-the engaged and the analytic-into a not which we call It singleattitude. is this attitude, moralblankness, And whateversmall degree of it detachmentor disinterestedness. one managesto attain comes not by adopting an I-am-a-camera armor, ideologyor by enfoldingoneselfin layersof methodological in such an equivocalsituation,the scibut simplyby trying to do, entificwork one has come to do. And as the abilityto look at men and events(and at oneself) with an eye at once cold and concerned is one of the surestsigns of maturityin either an individualor a has experience ratherdeeper,and rather people,this sortof research for moralimplications our culturethan thoseusuallyprodifferent, posed. commitmentto view human affairsanalytically A professional to a personal commitment view them in terms to is not in opposition The moralperspective. professional ethic restson the of a particular personaland drawsits strengthfrom it; we force ourselvesto see out of a convictionthat blindness-or illusion-cripples virtueas it comesnot froma failureto care,but from men. Detachment cripples

i58

THE

ANTIOCH

REVIEW

a kind of caringresilientenoughto withstandan enormous tension betweenmoral reactionand scientificobservation, tensionwhich a only growsas moralperception deepensand scientific understanding advances. The flight into scientism,or, on the other side, into subjectivism, but signsthat the tensioncannotany longerbe borne, are that nervehas failed and a choicehas been made to suppress either one's humanityor one's rationality.These are the pathologiesof science,not its norm. In this light, the famousvaluerelativism anthropology not of is the moralPyrrhonism has often been accusedof being,but an exit pression faith that to attemptto see humanbehavior termsof of in the forceswhich animateit is an essential elementin understanding it, and that to judge without understanding an constitutes offense againstmorality.Values are indeed values,and facts, alas, indeed facts.But to engagein that style of thinking called social scientific is to attemptto transcend logical gap that separates the them by a patternof conduct, which,enfoldingthem into a unitaryexperience, rationallyconnectsthem. The call for the applicationof "the scientificmethod"to the investigation human affairsis a call for a of direct confrontation that divorcebetween sense and sensibility of which has beenrightlydiagnosed be the maladyof our age and to to the ending of which John Dewey's lifework, imperfectlike any other,was unconditionally dedicated.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi