The misperception of the environment: A critical evaluation of the work of Tim Ingold and an alternative guide to the use of the senses in anthropological theory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents a critical evaluation of the work of Tim Ingold from the standpoint of social and sensory anthropology. It acknowledges the novelty of the emphasis on enskillment, movement, process, and growth in Ingold's work. However, it is critical of his abstraction of the senses, which are rendered ‘interchangeable’, and of persons, who are reduced to generic individuals. Ingold's anthropology is shown to be pre-cultural and post-social at once, with the result that it fails to address the sociality of sensation and cultural mediation of perception. Ingold's doctrine of ‘direct perception’ is exposed as particularly problematic. In place of his emphasis on ‘the life of lines’, this article foregrounds the life of the senses, and in lieu of his diminution of the social, it acknowledges the politics of perception that inform most every perceptual act. The article concludes with a series of reflections on how to go about sensualizing anthropological theory and practicing sensory ethnography (i.e. the methodology of participant sensation).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it