Die Odyssee der Pygmäen. Eine prekäre Figur auf den neuzeitlichen Spieltischen anthropologischer Differenz

Due to the impacts of postcolonialism, social and cultural anthropology has been dealing intensively with the possibilities and limits of representing "other” human beings and their meaningful worlds. Scholars such as George Marcus, James Clifford or Clifford Geertz have discussed ways of improving anthropological methods of representation without, however, fully raising questions about the quality and validity of the objects represented and the very idea, that they could be “represented”. Thus, despite attempts to purify classical anthropological categories, substantialized presences (“Humans”, “Others”, “Pygmies” etc.), various forms of binary oppositions (us–them, culture–nature, human–animal) as well as certain epistemological modes/ logoi (representation, interpretation) have been rehearsed until today. The research aims to dissect and challenge the metaphysical outputs of the “anthropological machine” (Giorgio Agamben). I intended to solve these from their apparent familiarity as representable identities or differences in order to investigate their genealogy. In Derrida’s and Foucault’s understanding, genealogy becomes manifest mainly in the “blind spots” (Derrida) or “anomalies” (Foucault) between differences, at the borders of identities. As an analytical guideline, the research uses on one concrete metonym for the Derridean blind spot, one incorporation of a Foucauldian Other, namely pygmy narratives within early modern and 19th century imaginings. “Pygmies” have been part of both Western mythology and anthropological reflection since the antiquity and finally became “ethnographical facts” within an evolutionary anthropology in the 19th century during the European exploration of Africa. Throughout this veritable Odyssey, they were mostly precarious “category-jammers” (Timothy Beal), occupying the impossible middle grounds within (proto)anthropological classification. Thus, along with the early modern wild men, enfants sauvages or the apes of proto-primatology, the pygmies of the Homeric myth, as a catalyst for the negotiation of categories, played a decisive role in early modern and 19th century conceptions of the human. Through the precarious Pygmies, concrete socio-historical materializations of Identities (human, European), differences (human–animal etc.), as well as the accompanying logoi which vindicate these as pseudo-entities, appear evident. The research aims to read and write the history of early modern and 19th Century anthropology through one of its many classificatory constituting Others. It thus contributes to a discipline that for a long time has examined concrete systems of knowledge and the genealogy of classification in general. One might call it an “anthropologization” of anthropology.

Stratification of high-risk prostate cancer into prognostic categories: a European multi-institutional study

BACKGROUND High-risk prostate cancer (PCa) is an extremely heterogeneous disease. A clear definition of prognostic subgroups is mandatory. OBJECTIVE To develop a pretreatment prognostic model for PCa-specific survival (PCSS) in high-risk PCa based on combinations of unfavorable risk factors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study including 1360 consecutive patients with high-risk PCa treated at eight European high-volume centers. INTERVENTION Retropubic radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Two Cox multivariable regression models were constructed to predict PCSS as a function of dichotomization of clinical stage (< cT3 vs cT3-4), Gleason score (GS) (2-7 vs 8-10), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA; ≤ 20 ng/ml vs > 20 ng/ml). The first "extended" model includes all seven possible combinations; the second "simplified" model includes three subgroups: a good prognosis subgroup (one single high-risk factor); an intermediate prognosis subgroup (PSA >20 ng/ml and stage cT3-4); and a poor prognosis subgroup (GS 8-10 in combination with at least one other high-risk factor). The predictive accuracy of the models was summarized and compared. Survival estimates and clinical and pathologic outcomes were compared between the three subgroups. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The simplified model yielded an R(2) of 33% with a 5-yr area under the curve (AUC) of 0.70 with no significant loss of predictive accuracy compared with the extended model (R(2): 34%; AUC: 0.71). The 5- and 10-yr PCSS rates were 98.7% and 95.4%, 96.5% and 88.3%, 88.8% and 79.7%, for the good, intermediate, and poor prognosis subgroups, respectively (p = 0.0003). Overall survival, clinical progression-free survival, and histopathologic outcomes significantly worsened in a stepwise fashion from the good to the poor prognosis subgroups. Limitations of the study are the retrospective design and the long study period. CONCLUSIONS This study presents an intuitive and easy-to-use stratification of high-risk PCa into three prognostic subgroups. The model is useful for counseling and decision making in the pretreatment setting.

Intentionality in Reference and Action

This essay asks whether there is a relation between action-serving and meaning-serving intentions. The idea that the intentions involved in meaning and action are nominally designated alike as intentionalities does not guarantee any special logical or conceptual connections between the intentionality of referential thoughts and thought-expressive speech acts with the intentionality of doing. The latter category is typified by overt physical actions in order to communicate by engaging in speech acts, but also includes at the origin of all artistic and symbolic expression such cerebral and linguistic doings as thinking propositional thoughts. There are exactly four possibilities by which meaning and action intentionalities might be related to be systematically investigated. Meaning-serving and action-serving intentionalities, topologically speaking, might exclude one another, partially overlap with one another, or subsume one in the other or the other in the one. The theoretical separation of the two ostensible categories of intendings is criticized, as is their partial overlap, in light of the proposal that thinking and artistic and symbolic expression are activities that favor the inclusion of paradigm meaning-serving intentions as among a larger domain of action-serving intentions. The only remaining alternative is then developed, of including action-serving intentions reductively in meaning-serving intentions, and is defended as offering in an unexpected way the most cogent universal reductive ontology in which the intentionality of doing generally relates to the specific intentionality of referring in thought to the objects of predications, and of its artistic and symbolic expression.

A Matter of Perspective? Disentangling the Emic−Etic Debate in the Scientific Study of Religion\s

This article introduces the emic–etic debate in the scientific study of religion\s and provides a frame for the special issue’s six articles on the topic. Departing from the broader debate’s early history in the 1960s, this article contextualizes the emic–etic debate and locates its point of entry into the scientific study of religion\s in the 1980s. This article argues that in the course of the debate the insider–outsider and emic–etic complexes have become entangled. In order to facilitate an understanding of the debate, this article maintains that the emic–etic debate in the scientific study of religion\s touches upon three central dimensions (existential–political, methodologi- cal, and epistemological). In order to move toward a clearer methodological and epis- temological framework, this article furthermore proposes an iterative model that locates insider–outsider at the level of observers and emic–etic at the level of categories.