Re: A disappointed anthropology student

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: 'mookie' J. Epler: "Re: help! major/minor in anth"
• Previous message: David Wilson: "Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory""
• Maybe in reply to: M.Escribano-Del-Moral: "A disappointed anthropology student"
• Next in thread: Gil Hardwick: "Re: A disappointed anthropology student"

In article <7366@rook.ukc.ac.uk>, M.Escribano-Del-Moral <me3@ukc.ac.uk> wrote:
> I see that anthropology is more short-sighted than what anthropologists
>think, at least in the U.K..
> I see that anthropology is unable to study itself, unable.
> It is unable to look at itself, how will it then look at the rest
>of the world???
> I am really disappointed.

Can't speak for the USA, but I got fed up with anthro here at U.W. 'cos
it seemed to be unable to study anything _besides_ itself. Maybe we
should switch schools. =)

mook.

-- 

Chris Mealy                              mookie@u.washington.edu       

        "Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons"

                                       -- Popular Mechanics, 1949

• Next message: 'mookie' J. Epler: "Re: help! major/minor in anth"
• Previous message: David Wilson: "Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory""
• Maybe in reply to: M.Escribano-Del-Moral: "A disappointed anthropology student"
• Next in thread: Gil Hardwick: "Re: A disappointed anthropology student"