Instrumental Speeches, Morality, and Masculine Agency among Muinane People (Colombian Amazon)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals among People of the Center (Colombian Amazon) produced numerous discursive depictions of themselves and of others, regarding their own competence and morality and others’ lacks thereof. Here, I attend particularly to a set of portrayals that pertained mostly to men: those concerning forms of knowledge that each People of the Center deemed uniquely their own. Individuals stressed the great amount of knowledge they possessed, the propriety of their processes of acquisition and the legitimacy of their use of it, its effectiveness and authentically patrilineal character, and the respect and fear others had of them because of it. They also criticized others for shortcomings in these regards. They articulated their evaluations in terms of what they found to be admirable or desirable in gendered human subjectivity and action, in the frame of a perspectival cosmos permeated by predatory relations. I argue that individuals produced such portrayals motivated by desire to embody a certain ideal of masculine agency, and spurred by their awareness of the likelihood that their own actions and subjectivities would be portrayed as immoral, animalistic or otherwise inadequate by others around them. As a whole, the essay stresses the importance of attending ethnographically to individuals’ subjectivity. Individuos entre la Gente de Centro (Amazonía colombiana) solían producir numerosos retratos discursivos concernientes a su propia competencia y moralidad y a la ausencia de éstas entre los demás. En este ensayo, enfoco en particular ciertos retratos que sobre todo trataban sobre hombres: aquellos referentes a formas de conocimiento que cada grupo de Gente de Centro consideraba exclusivamente suyo. Los individuos en cuestión enfatizaban la gran cantidad de conocimiento que poseían,la rectitud protocolaria del proceso de su adquisición,su efectividad,su carácter auténticamente patrilineal, y el temor y respeto que éste despertaba entre los demás. También criticaban a los demás por sus insuficiencias en estos sentidos. Formulaban sus evaluaciones en términos de lo que consideraban admirable o despreciable en el comportamiento y la acción humanos, distinguiendo entre los géneros. Contextualizaban estas evaluaciones en un cosmos perspectivista permeado por relaciones depredadoras. Arguyo que los individuos producían estos retratos motivados por el deseo de encarnar un cierto ideal de agencialidad masculina y azuzados por la plena conciencia de la probabilidad de que sus acciones y subjetividades serían retratadas como inmorales, bestiales o de cualquier manera inadecuadas por quienes les rodeaban. El ensayo en general recalca la importancia de prestarle atención a la subjetividad de los individuos al hacer etnografía.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".