LEC 2 - Nadasday reading #1

Question 1

Nadasday - criticism of Ingold

Answer 1

sees “personhood” as a metaphor

Question 2

Nadasday - is Ingold right that the hunt is about reciprocity?

Answer 2

Not entirely. It also involves “destabilizing” the psyche of the animal – like the islanders of Malinowski did to each other

Question 3

Nadasday - Anthros always take either a _ or a _ view on human-animal relations

Answer 3

functionalist ecological OR symbolic (Kantian) view

Question 4

Nadasday - the problem with Anthro is that -

Answer 4

it cannot involve itself with the “human in the animal”

Question 5

Nadasday - Mauss one-upped Ingold in one way =

Answer 5

he accepted that gifts have spirits, despite academic rules to “not adopt the beliefs of one’s subjects” (but he also denied that Malinowski/Kula have “disinterested gifts”)

Question 6

Nadasday - injured rabbit returns to him “to be killed”

Answer 6

Nadasday convinced that human-animal relationality is not a metaphor “woo” / tho of course the rabbit could have been asking to be freed / and if he should have freed it more would have come?!? – just in the same way we interpret coincidences, (as “fatealism”)