Any ideas on the distinction between western & non western views of personhood?

Question

anything to do with ideas of "self" would be useful...i'm having difficulties getting my head round this anthropology topic..ideas related to Mauss or Carston would be usefull.. thanks!

Answer 1

Personhood isn't quite the same thing as Self, as I understand the theories (Mauss, in particular).  Personhood is partially about when a person becomes real (think about the abortion issue and also about ideas of baptism or naming ceremonies, another idea is the placenta as a twin in Malay shamanistic tradition as described by Laderman).  Personhood also relates to death or absence (such as Amish shunning practices) in similar ways (when does someone become dead?  What happens to their spirit? to their body?  When a person cannot be acknowledged, what are they then?)  Self, on the other hand, is a continually evolving theory.  Self can be important or unimportant in particular theories.  It is very important in embodiment paradigms but not at all important in structuralism.  To Mauss, personhood is social while the self is individual, a particular point of view or perspective on the world.  Personhood is also where Carsten's work on kinship fits.

I think you should not look so much at Western vs. Non-western as at more specific examples.  There are not only these two ideas of Personhood or Self.