This paper highlights the ways in which natives employ the concept of ‘evidence’ in the field and attempts to explore new possibilities of its concept. Although evidences are consistently located in questions that anthropologists encounter during ...
This paper highlights the ways in which natives employ the concept of ‘evidence’ in the field and attempts to explore new possibilities of its concept. Although evidences are consistently located in questions that anthropologists encounter during their research, its concept itself has been rarely discussed in earnest. By focusing on three cases of fieldwork, which study debates and practices of scientists, medical doctors, and engineers, respectively, this paper looks at how those natives produce, use, and justify their evidences. As a result, the understanding of ‘their evidences’ has enabled anthropologists to reflect on how we imagine and make use of ‘our evidences.’ In this paper, while evidences that anthropologists have predominantly assumed are defined as ‘representational evidences,’ ‘ontological evidence (Holbraad 2008)’ is redefined and proposed as a new concept of evidence. Lastly, this paper shows that the concept of ‘ontological evidence’ not only negates hierarchies between natives` and researchers` evidences but also resolves confrontations between science and anthropology.