Inside, outside and in-between: ambiguity, fieldwork and ethnography
The extent to which researchers in religious fields claim membership of the group has long been a subject of debate in the social sciences. While many theoretical and methodological concerns have been thrashed out since the 1980s, which have resulted in a general consensus that prioritises “good res...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
[2015]
|
| Dans: |
Diskus
Année: 2015, Volume: 17, Numéro: 1, Pages: 47-53 |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (doi) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Résumé: | The extent to which researchers in religious fields claim membership of the group has long been a subject of debate in the social sciences. While many theoretical and methodological concerns have been thrashed out since the 1980s, which have resulted in a general consensus that prioritises “good research”, regardless of membership or position. However, in practice, the faith status of the researcher continues to raise its head, either from practitioner or scholarly quarters. In this short reflexive account I consider some implications of insider/outsider debates: I start by reflecting on recent conversations about my research status, and use these to explore the shadow the “Lurhmann effect” has cast on my relationships with British Witches and Wiccans and the ambiguous boundaries between inside and outside. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0967-8948 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Diskus
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.18792/diskus.v17i1.66 |