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.

Author's Profile

Terence Rajivan Edward
University of Manchester (PhD)

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-09-07

Downloads
123 (#84,791)

6 months
61 (#74,736)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?