Over the past six weeks, we have contemplated questions of knowledge. How do we acquire knowledge? How do we know what we know? How does knowledge vary according to culture? How is knowledge (of the body, of history) that seems obvious and normal in fact the product of particular cultural and historical contexts or connected to issues of power and control? Are we in some sense inside Plato's cave? Could we get out, and how might we know if we did? In short, what do you see as the key connections between knowledge, culture, and power, and why are they significant?

This assignment asks you to address the relationship between forms of knowing, cultural context, and power in an essay of 5-7 pages by critically examining the findings and arguments of TWO authors whom we have read. You may choose your authors from the following: Foucault, Martin, Plato, Fadiman, and Grant.

You are encouraged to focus your discussion on a particular theme. You might, for example, concentrate on Western biomedicine through examining Martin and Fadiman. Or you might examine the connection between political power and knowledge in Plato and in the Soviet policies toward the Nivkhi described by Grant. Or you might consider whether one of our ethnographic cases studies (Martin, Grant, Fadiman) exemplifies Foucault's theory of bodily discipline as a technique of control. Your central argument should focus on the insights that we gain by examining these two authors together: what are their relative strengths and weaknesses (in method, in analytical framework), and how does comparing them allow you to address the question? While your essay should focus primarily on two authors,feel free to refer to other relevant readings.

TEXT REFERENCES
These (including references to personal communications) are placed in the body of the text, not as notes. For each quotation or statement specific enough to need a reference, place the citation in parentheses (author's name, year of publication of work quoted or referred to, page(s) cited), thus: (Doe 1968) or (Rowe 1893:115-119).

NOTES
All notes follow the text as endnotes, beginning on a new page, and are restricted to material that cannot be included in the text. Notes are numbered consecutively throughout the text by superscript numerals.

REFERENCES CITED
Do not include any publication not cited in the text. References Cited must begin on a new page, and all entries must be double-spaced, listed alphabetically by last name of senior author, and chronologically for two or more titles by the same author(s). The typed layout should conform to the printed layout as follows:

Driver, Harold E.

1956 An Integration of Functional, Evolutionary, and Historical Theory by Means of Correlations. Bloomington: Indiana University Publication in Anthropology and Linguistics, Memoir 12.

1966 Geographical-Historical versus Psycho-Functional Explanations of Kin Avoidances. Current Anthropology 7:131-182.

Miller, George A.

1954 Psycholinguistics. In Handbook of Social Psychology II. Gardner Lindey, ed. Pp. 693-708. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Thibault, John W., and Harold H. Kelley

1959 The Social Psychology of Groups. New York: John Wiley.

 

FYP 101Homepage | syllabus| study guidequestions/journal and esssay topics | LeshkowichHomepage

 

For more information, contact: aleshkow@holycross.edu