Search

Philosophers have traditionally addressed the issue of scientific unification in terms of theoretical reduction. Reductive models, however, cannot explain the occurrence of unification in areas of science where successful reductions are hard to find. The goal of this essay is to analyse a concrete example of integration in biology-the developmental synthesis-and to generalize it into a model of scientific unification, according to which two fields are in the process of being unified when they become explanatorily relevant to each other. I conclude by suggesting that this methodological conception of unity, which is independent of the debate on the metaphysical foundations of science, is closely connected to the notion of interdisciplinarity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both evolutionary/scientific and constructivist or humanistic approaches have brought valuable understandings to anthropology and continue to do so today. Discussions of the split(s) and possibilities of reintegration across anthropology have been valuable; however, practical reintegration will only come from a serious and open intellectual engagement with a diverse range of theoretical contexts and a direct connection to data. This volume is an attempt to provide innovative contexts for, and examples of, anthropologists reporting on their data and/or conceptualizing approaches to the data in ways that cross or straddle boundaries. While we offer niche construction theory and the extended evolutionary synthesis as common framework, the articles are not all in agreement on explanatory means and priorities. And this is a good thing. To develop an effective reintegration requires anthropologists to move away from artificial dichotomies and standing grudges and toward collaborations and a respect for theoretical plurality. The unifying endeavor of this collection is in the sincere attempt by all of its members to draw on more than a single approach and to integrate understandings gleaned from the inside and the outside. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]