Paper short abstract:

It is well accepted that the discussion about centres and peripheries in the production of anthropological knowledge has a reductionist character that hides the complexity of a globalized world. In spite of this, we cannot neglect that in the production and dissemination of anthropological knowledge there has been main centres of irradiation and foundational schools that have historically influenced others defined as peripheral. In this process, hegemonic traditions, privileged channels and dominant languages have arisen in front of others that have been unknown or directly ignored.

Paper long abstract:

It is well accepted that the discussion about centres and peripheries in the production of anthropological knowledge has a reductionist character that hides the complexity of a globalized world. In spite of this, we cannot neglect that in the production and dissemination of anthropological knowledge there has been main centres of irradiation and foundational schools that have historically influenced others defined as peripheral. In this process, hegemonic traditions, privileged channels and dominant languages have arisen in front of others that have been unknown or directly ignored. As Gustavo Lins Ribeiro and Michal Buchowski point out, the globalization processes have created the conditions for the development of world anthropologies. However, current anthropology does not interact at the same level as we would wish, not even at the level that new communication media could allow us. Professor Shinji Yamashita has proposed the articulation of an interactive anthropology, individually connected and transnationally organized. The articulation of this anthropology would imply going from an asymmetrical to a transversal relationship in the production of knowledge. The paper explores this challenge posing the need to shift from a model of structured perceptions to one of fluent perceptions that overcomes disconnections and imbalances in the global production of anthropological knowledge.