Gluckman versus Frazer: if-I-were-a-horse arguments

Abstract

I present anthropologist Max Gluckman’s explanation of what “if-I-were-a-horse” arguments are and introduce three questions. How do we define this kind of argument? Are earlier anthropologists “guilty” of them? And is it a bad idea to make them? I address the first two questions, proposing that Frazer is not much guilty of precisely these, though his project calls for them.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-09-07

Downloads
233 (#111,760)

6 months
69 (#86,776)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Terence Rajivan Edward
University of Manchester (PhD)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references