Misfortune of Comparison(<Special Theme>Reconsideration of Comparison as Anthroplogical Method)

Abstract

Comparison was for a long time the mainstream in Anthropological studies. However, concept comparison appears to be out of fashion after the critical, self-inspection of scientificism and objectivism fromthe1960s, and the power of anthropological writings from the 1980s.

The main targets of critiques in the 1960s were the scientific, cross-cultural comparisons in anthropology, exemplified by the comparative sociology work done by A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, and the "complete-universe statistical" comparison, or Human Relations Area Files by George P. Murdock.

On the other hand,comparisons done in the French structuralist method. such as Dumont's suggestions, are thought provoking, Dumont insisted one should consider value-ideas in the comparative study. Furthermore,the comparative method of Dumont as well as Levi-Strauss clearly commands respect in the face of the dominance and modem universalism of the Western world.

When doing comparisons, researchers need to realize that universalism has been forced in the non-Western world through the civilization process mainly under the Christian universalistic influence. On this basis the genealogy of "religion" in the European Christian world, and the definition of the religions in the non-Western world, need to be re-evaluated.

The new concept of comparison, where we are conscious of the limitations of "forced" universalism, might open a new criticism of western-centricism and a new field of anthropology.