Paper short abstract:

This paper examines a millenarian community producing conspiracy theories, discussing how anthropological fieldwork creates an ‘ethical-moral mismatch’ for both parties, as accepting the researcher’s presence necessitates a tacit acceptance of the very institutions the interlocutors oppose.

Paper long abstract:

This paper examines the ‘ethical-moral mismatch’ (Tietlebaum 2019) in anthropological fieldwork with a millenarian community in Switzerland that produces and disseminates conspiracy theories. It explores challenges faced when an anthropologist engages with a group viewing modern science as the root of a global conspiracy. The research reveals a paradox: while the anthropologist’s academic affiliation is morally despised regardless of his discipline, his ethical approach is cautiously embraced by some members. This creates an ‘ethical-moral mismatch’ for both the researcher and interlocutors, as accepting his presence requires acknowledging institutions the interlocutors strongly oppose.

The paper examines the interlocutors’ anti-science moral viewpoint and their ethical commitment to sharing information with everyone, regardless of their background. This creates an ‘ethical-moral mismatch’ and internal tensions as the responses to the researcher differ. The researcher faces his own ‘ethical-moral mismatch’. Aware of the dilemma his presence causes, claiming to accept his interlocutors’ position simply to gain acceptance remains unethical. Also, by participating in their activities, the researcher inevitably supports positions that contradict his moral stance. By analysing experiences of navigating suspicion, hope for ‘awakening’ the researcher, and internal debates about the researcher’s presence, this paper contributes to discussions on approaching those with ‘dislikeable views’ (Pasieka 2019), especially when these views include disliking research. It examines how varying degrees of moral alignment impact ethnographic knowledge production and project integrity, offering insights into navigating complex ethical questions.