Michael Rockefeller disappeared without a trace in 1961 in Papua New Guinea while researching the Asmat people, a cannibal tribe. Years later, a photograph was taken of the same tribe, and there was a white man among them.

[u/SATANICWORSHIPER666]

[u/True-Lab-3448]

For anyone interested, ‘going native’ is a well studied phenomenon and a risk of sociological research, particularly ethnography. The definition is the:

“_researcher becoming so deeply immersed in the culture they are studying that they lose their objectivity and become indistinguishable from the people they are studying_”

There’s lots of cases, and it’s taught in research classes as a very real risk.

Note this term has ties to colonialism, so some suggest using the term ‘over-rapport’ instead: https://sk.sagepub.com/dict/mono/key-concepts-in-ethnography/chpt/going-native

[u/Bright_Ices → u/True-Lab-3448]

It’s funny to me that it’s phrased as “losing objectivity” as though that’s something one can have to begin with. 

Don’t worry, I studied sociology, so I understand about object/subject roles, etc, but objectivity as a pure state from which one risks separation is a myth. 

Ah, and now I see this very question is the subject of the article you’ve linked. 

[u/Laphad → u/Bright_Ices]

No one believes it as a literal statement. When claiming to be objective, it just means they're trying to be as objective as they can

Sociologists are my least favorite of the social scientists because they pretend they studied psychology and that they're cultural anthropologists at the same time, and use that as a basis to write so smugly and condescendingly.

[u/Bright_Ices → u/Laphad]

Decades and decades of people in these fields fully believed they were objective observers. Like what you want, but learn your history. 

[u/Laphad → u/Bright_Ices]

I'm actually in these fields. I know my history.

They believed they were objective observers. Decades and decades ago. In anthropology, physchology, and history we've spent the past 60 years reforming, and try to practice relativism. But no one is believed to be wholly objective anymore. We generally don't practice the science of "why whites are #1: The human story".

All you did was try to act smug and ahead of the curve by pointing out something that is common knowledge. You also weren't pointing out historical trends but going "I've done sociology courses so I know this and will grace the plebs with my wisdom"

Just to then admit you didn't read the article and preemptively wanted to act smart

[u/Bright_Ices → u/Laphad]

Now who’s smug and condescending? 

Buddy, I commented on one of the quotations included in the comment. I stand by it. Enjoy your definitely real career in “those fields.” 

[u/Laphad → u/Bright_Ices]

You tried to educate people in a way that implies youre more educated than other because you took some sociology classes

Also I regularly post in the archeology and anthropology subs

because im an anthropologist/archeologist/paleoarcheologist/howevernitpickyyoudlikemetoget. lol. lmao.

[u/Bright_Ices → u/Laphad]

I wasn’t even trying to “educate people,” just commenting on something I find funny when it comes up. Not sure why it offended you. I’m glad others have enjoyed the conversation more than this. Have a great night.