Old Discipline, New Trajectories: Theories, Methods and Practices in Anthropology

Going under the title “Old Discipline, New Trajectories: Theories, Methods and Practices in Anthropology”, the conference seeks to provide a “home” for socio-cultural and linguistic anthropologists as well as archeologists and bio-evolutionary anthropologists who identify themselves and seek to connect with scientifically minded anthropologists. It does not neglect the humanistic aspect of anthropology and embraces it as part of the unity implicit in the study of human lifeways and the cultural stuff that gives meaning, direction and collective identities to us. The conference might be seen as an important foundational step to establishing closer collaboration and integration among different disciplinary and methodological strands within the discipline of anthropology. The conference will broadly focus on theory, methods and practices in anthropology and will address the following questions: -  Can we still say that anthropology is the most scientific of humanities and most humanistic of social sciences?-  What does a scientific approach to the study of culture imply theoretically and methodologically?-  Should ethnography still hold a central place in anthropology?-  How can the results of the study of human evolution, cultural evolution and language evolution contribute insights into the current human condition?-  What are the consequences the current rapid technological change is having on culture?-  What can anthropology contribute to the important questions of today’s world such as pandemics, growing economic inequality, fascism, second demographic transition, climate change, etc.

The need for culture (even if it doesn't exist): a Lithuanian example

This article states that despite the many postmodern theoretical explanations of the understanding of culture, up until now it is usually defined in a way that, although we acknowledge it unconditionally and consciously, that there is a subjectiveness characteristic for our discourse on culture. We speak about cultures like connected wholes, with special “basic” traits characteristic for all of them. Arguments are given as why culture does not exist as a thing in itself but why nonetheless it is necessary to create an impression and think that “it” really does exist. A pragmatic theory of culture is given, which rejects neither an empirical nor postmodern view towards cultural research. It is stated, that the understanding of culture is a cognitive mediating means, which individuals use between groups of people to find existing commonalities or differences and lay claim to them. This article discusses that cognitive mediating means help to join “module” behavior-cultural environments. Examples are given as to how these cognitive means functions in creating a holistic image of Lithuanian culture. In reality there is not a holistic Lithuanian culture, except for the fact, of how it is imagined by Lithuanians themselves (or some other group). The author provides examples how this cognitive mediating means function in Lithuanian discourse. The pragmatic theory provided states that all cultural attributes change between members of a culture. These are not attributes, but rather an organised knowledge, which is provided when one wants to clarify a behavior, which is a “culture”

Kultūros tyrimai : patirtis ir apibendrinimai

Bibliogr.: p. 204-206Ši knyga pristato įvairius metodus, kurie buvo naudojami paruošiant ir vykdant romantiškos meilės tyrimo projektąVytauto Didžiojo universiteta

Pirminis, antrinis ir esamas tretinis lietuvių tautinio identiteto suvokimas: antropologinė perspektyva

The term ‘national identity’ implies homogeneity, but field research shows that the members of a nation are very heterogeneous in their conceptions of their own national identity. How then can we speak of a national identity when there is significant diversity among the members of a nation? I rely on concepts of ‘first order’ and ‘second order’ components of identity to resolve this question. First order concepts are constructed from the top down by the cultural elite and second order concepts are precipitates of behavior from the bottom up through personal experiences. I also rely on the importance of situated knowledge as the way identity is understood in social practice. Situated knowledge used by ego in social interactions. Situated knowledge creates a common national (or cultural) identity when ego knows not only that alter knows what ego knows but that ego “knows that alter knows that ego knows that alter knows.” It is this third order “Knowing” that creates, expresses, and maintains a national identity that is actually practiced in everyday life. I conclude by noting that a socially just inclusive model of national identity has to be based on this “third order” understanding of national identity.Lauko tyrimai rodo, kad lietuvių tautos nariai tautinį identitetą supranta heterogeniškai, nors pats terminas „tautinis identitetas“ reiškia homogenišką jo suvokimą. Tad kaip galime kalbėti apie tautinį identitetą, jei jo suvokimas tarp tautos narių ryškiai skiriasi? Tai paaiškina „pirminio“ ir „antrinio“ identiteto komponentų konceptai. Kultūrinio elito pirminio suvokimo konceptai yra konstruojami ir nuleidžiami iš viršaus į apačią, o antrinio suvokimo konceptai yra skubotas ir neapgalvotas elgesys, pasireiškiantis per asmenines patirtis. Ne mažiau svarbios yra situacinės identiteto suvokimo socialinėse praktikose žinios, individų naudojamos socialinėse sąveikose. Situacinės žinios sukuria bendrą tautinį (ar kultūrinį) identitetą, kai individas žino ne tik tai, kad jo artimas žino, ką jis žino, bet ir kai individas „žino, kad jo artimas žino, jog jis žino apie savo artimo žinojimą“. Tai ir yra tretinis „žinojimo“ identiteto suvokimas, kuris sukuria, išreiškia ir palaiko kiekvieną dieną praktikuojamą tautinį identitetą. Apibendrinant galima teigti, kad socialiai priimtinas tautinio identiteto modelis turėtų būti pagristas pastaruoju, „tretiniu“, tautinio identiteto suvokimu

Lithuanian farmers in a time of economic and environmental ambiguity

These are unusually ambiguous, even turbulent, times for Lithuanian farmers. The main reasons for this are related to recent history and present instabilities. Lithuania was and continues to be a land of relatively small independent farmers. This profile was interrupted, of course, during Soviet times (from 1945 to 1991), when lands were collectivized. In the period after independence, farmers gradually returned to the pre-Soviet conditions, though a few managed to buy and gain title to large farms (over 200 hectares in size). Joining the European Union in 2004 has led to yet another cycle of adaptations to new regulations and expectations that shape not just the economic lives of farmers, but also their own sense of autonomy over their farms. As this study shows, the Lithuanian farmer does not perceive her or his farmland, nature, and their own sense of self as disconnected domains of value and meaning. These domains are distinct and distinctively interwoven. Describing the cultural model(s) of Nature and identifying their role in the life of Lithuanian farmers is the subject of this study

Romantic love, sex and marriage Lithuania style

Recent cross-cultural studies indicate that sexual permissiveness is culturally accepted, endorsed and practised in the Baltic states. Flaws in these studies are pointed out and a more extensive multi-method approach is used to examine Lithuanian conceptions and practices of romantic love and to propose a cultural model of romantic love. It is shown that young adult Lithuanians tend to view romantic love as an initial and temporary "dreaming" stage in a love relation. This stage is differentiated from ordinary life and is very "poetic" but ends either in separation or in a transformation into "real" or "true" love. Romantic love, as a temporary and poetic form of love, is typically practised during the period when males and females are pursuing career goals. Thus, young adult Lithuanians may adopt values of sexual-romantic permissiveness during this time. Once they are established on a career path they are more likely to attend to the business of marriage. "True" rather than "romantic" love then becomes the criterion for a successful marriageSocialinių mokslų fakultetasVytauto Didžiojo universiteta

Pirminis, antrinis ir esamas tretinis lietuvių tautinio identiteto suvokimas: antropologinė perspektyva

The term ‘national identity’ implies homogeneity, but field research shows that the members of a nation are very heterogeneous in their conceptions of their own national identity. How then can we speak of a national identity when there is significant diversity among the members of a nation? I rely on concepts of ‘first order’ and ‘second order’ components of identity to resolve this question. First order concepts are constructed from the top down by the cultural elite and second order concepts are precipitates of behavior from the bottom up through personal experiences. I also rely on the importance of situated knowledge as the way identity is understood in social practice. Situated knowledge used by ego in social interactions. Situated knowledge creates a common national (or cultural) identity when ego knows not only that alter knows what ego knows but that ego “knows that alter knows that ego knows that alter knows.” It is this third order “Knowing” that creates, expresses, and maintains a national identity that is actually practiced in everyday life. I conclude by noting that a socially just inclusive model of national identity has to be based on this “third order” understanding of national identityVytauto Didžiojo universiteta

[Review] : Ethnographies of grey zones in Eastern Europe: relations, borders and invisibilities

Sociologijos katedraVytauto Didžiojo universiteta