Technique or technology? Distinction of concepts to understand the relationship between people and obsidian towards the first millennium of the era: Comentado por Gabriel López y Salomon Hocsman
In this essay we propose to use the notion of technique and not technology to refer to how social relations were assembled using obsidian as a mediator, in the first millennium of the era. We extract from the theoretical proposal of Ingold (1990) the idea that it was a personal knowledge, subjective...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo publishedVersion Opinion essay peer-reviewed Ensayo evaluado por comentaristas invitados |
| Publicado: |
Instituto de Arqueología y Museo, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e IML, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán
2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://publicaciones.csnat.unt.edu.ar/index.php/mundodeantes/article/view/22 http://suquia.ffyh.unc.edu.ar/handle/suquia/10017 |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | In this essay we propose to use the notion of technique and not technology to refer to how social relations were assembled using obsidian as a mediator, in the first millennium of the era. We extract from the theoretical proposal of Ingold (1990) the idea that it was a personal knowledge, subjective, in which the whole person was involved, the one that guided the relationship between subjects and objects. We will use from the proposal of Latour (1993-1994) the concept of mediator to understand the agency of obsidian materiality to build social relations in the first millennium of the era. |
|---|