Contribution short abstract:

We often leverage moral logics that are at odds with those of our informants. Here I share some of the lessons that moments of moral tension can hold for changing scholarly approaches to ethics, and suggest ways to engage empathetically without assuming empathy’s uniform nature around the world.

Contribution long abstract:

Anthropologists are often faced with ethical dilemmas in the field, as we work to compassionately represent the lives and struggles of our interlocutors. Sometimes make choices that are not easily aligned with the moral worlds we encounter. When we decide to intercede in our informants’ lives - whether simply through the act of participant-observation or through high-stakes decisions - and write about their personal struggles, we often leverage moral logics that are at odds with those of our informants. In this talk I will relate two ethical dilemmas I have faced in my experiences conducting fieldwork among people in a small Buddhist community in Northern Thailand, to demonstrate how such dilemmas can come about, and how their resolution can add theoretical fodder to the ethics of ethnographic methods. The first involves a decision to intercede in a medical crisis against the wishes of the field informant involved in it. The second involves a decision to share that experience in writing, in my book Living Buddhism, and to involve my field informants in its translation into Thai. In facing these dilemmas I was struck by the differences in moral frameworks of my informants and I, as we navigated the ambiguities that arose in privileging autonomy and community in our ethical stances. In tracing the outcomes of these dilemmas I share some of the lessons they hold for changing approaches to ethics in the anthropological field, and suggest thoughts for expressing empathy without assuming its uniform nature around the world.