Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Immortal Goat
I'll do it for him.
Quote:
|
Chagnon's work has been heavily criticised and discredited by other anthropologists who have worked with the Yanomami, and described as thoroughly biased and even fabricated.
|
Need a link, dumbshit?
http://www.survival-international.org/news.php?id=156 |
If it was so clear that he's discredited then why do you think The New York Times hasn't mentioned it? Any controversial work in this field is challenged, and I can find just as many links to people who support him as you can to people who don't.
Here's one to a defence of his work against the Patrick Tierney claims:
Here, dumbshit
'It is the "political incorrectness" of Chagnon's position that seems to bother moralists the most; by raising the possibility that violence is part of human nature rather than a pathology, Chagnon undermines the moral activists' efforts to promote a less violent world. Sponsel (1998:114) also admits that much of the criticism of Chagnon results from biophobia, which he defines as "an almost automatic reaction against any biological explanation of human behavior, the possibility of biological reductionism, and the associated political implications." Clearly it is the "political implications" that most annoy those with a moralizing agenda.'
Threaded Mode