OT ETNOSA K ETNICHNOSTI I POSLE (FROM ETHNOS TO ETHNICITY AND AFTER)
Table of contents
Share
QR
Metrics
OT ETNOSA K ETNICHNOSTI I POSLE (FROM ETHNOS TO ETHNICITY AND AFTER)
Annotation
PII
S0869-54150000392-4-1
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Edition
Pages
5-22
Abstract

A dramatic transition took place in the Russian humanities and social sciences since 1991 when the dominant ethnos paradigm was replaced by constructivist interpretations of ethnicity. A new discipline of socio-cultural anthropology emerged in research and education institutions. Meanwhile, primordial approaches associated with the figures of Lev Gumilev and Yulian Bromley are still alive and enjoy enthusiastic response in history, political science, philosophy, and sociology. In spite of this neoprimordialism, sociologists, archaeologists, psychologists, and geneticists, in cooperation with anthropologists, are trying to build interdisciplinary bridges to avoid the pitfalls of ethnos and ethnogenesis theories. Contemporary anthropology and ethnology in Russia are in search of a new synthesis that would allow for the better understanding of today's cultural complexities and human social and cultural coalitions beyond the ethnicity paradigm.

Keywords
social constructivism, ethnos theory, Ethnology and anthropology in Russia, historiography, political science, psychology, philosophy, pedagogy, ethnogenomics
Number of purchasers
1
Views
600
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf

References



Additional sources and materials

Carter R. Genes, genomes and genealogists: the return of scientific racism?//Ethnic and racial studies. 2007. Vol. 30. № 4. P. 520-522.
Gellner E. State and Society in the Soviet Thought. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988.
Nelkin D. Molecular metaphor: the gene in popular discourse//Genetic Nature Reviews. 2001. Vol. 2. № 7. P. 555-559

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate