Fieldwork in Political Theory: Five Arguments for an Ethnographic Sensibility
Abstract
This article makes a positive case for an ethnographic sensibility in political theory. Drawing on published ethnographies and original fieldwork, it argues that an ethnographic sensibility can contribute to normative reflection in five distinct ways. It can help uncover the nature of situated normative demands (epistemic argument); diagnose obstacles encountered when responding to these demands (diagnostic argument); evaluate practices and institutions against a given set of values (evaluative argument); probe, question and refine our understanding of values (valuational argument); and uncover underlying social ontologies (ontological argument). The contribution of ethnography to normative theory is distinguished from that of other forms of empirical research, and the dangers of perspectival absorption, bias and particularism are addressed.
Cite this
Lisa Maria Herzog, Bernardo Zacka (2017). Fieldwork in Political Theory: Five Arguments for an Ethnographic Sensibility. British Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123416000703
@article{maria2017fieldwork,
title = {Fieldwork in Political Theory: Five Arguments for an Ethnographic Sensibility},
author = {Herzog, Lisa Maria and Zacka, Bernardo},
year = {2017},
journal = {British Journal of Political Science},
doi = {10.1017/s0007123416000703}
}Citations in this library
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 209 citations exist upstream.