Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality,
and to see the links to virtual rooms.
Log in
Accepted Paper:
Cosima Rughinis (University of Bucharest) Simona - Nicoleta Vulpe (University of Bucharest) Alexandra Ciocanel (University of York) Michael Flaherty (Eckerd College)
Paper short abstract:
We discuss a work-in-progress typology of Christian Orthodox and biomedical justifications regarding Covid-19 vaccines in online Romanian media. We also address methodological challenges in sampling, studying readers’ comments, and delineating religious from scientific arguments.
Paper long abstract:
Anthropological studies of conflicting ontologies indicate that realities are based on “incorrigible propositions” (Mehan and Wood, 1975). These are premises that cannot be empirically invalidated, because they define the possibility of truth. At the same time, coherent realities are reproduced through ceaseless interaction and are fragile. How can we study the relationship between Christian Orthodox theology and secular biology and epidemiology, to best capture both the inner coherence of incorrigible propositions, and the permeability - or flexibility- of each ontology?
We examine a sample of online articles and readers’ comments that invoke Christian Orthodox and biomedical justifications on the topic of Covid-19 vaccination, in Romanian media, during 2021. We include articles that support vaccination and articles that advance hesitant or anti-vaxx positions. We attempt to sketch a typology of ontological combinations. What are the contrasts that highlight the immiscibility of ontologies, and what are the articulations that make them work together? How are temporalities and emotions manipulated, to integrate or oppose the two ontologies (Hochschild 1979, Flaherty 2003)?
In this paper, we present a work-in-progress typology, and we discuss several methodological challenges. What are the implications of including or excluding a publication from the sample? How can we integrate the study of articles with readers’ comments, keeping in view their communication situations? How can we identify religious arguments and scientific arguments? What is the role of the current scientific consensus in delineating arguments “from science” and arguments “from religion”, in a period of high scientific uncertainty?
The anthropology of vaccine development and deployment: methodological considerations I
Session 1 Friday 21 January, 2022, -