(no subject)

[stormdog]

This text reminds me, a little bit, of a conversation elsewhere on Facebook today. It makes me think, too, of the holistic, comparative perspective that my professor has stressed is so very important in anthropology. It's from the piece I mentioned reading earlier, writing by Donna Haraway. She's talking about feminist critiques of science. It's important, she argues, to realize that knowledge that can be called to account, that's justifiable as knowledge, must come from a position of incompleteness. It's not possible to see a thing from every point of view; you must realize that other points of view exist and collaborate. That points of view are always constructed; they don't spring fully-formed into perfect objectivity. Yet to find something that you can argue *is* objective, they must be examined and combined.

"The knowing self is partial in all its guises, never finished, whole, simply there and original; it is always constructed and stitched together imperfectly, and *therefore* able to join with another, to see together without claiming to be another. Here is the promise of ojbectivity: a scientific knower seeks the subject position, not of identity, but of objectivity, that is, partial connection."