The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Nothing Human is Alien to Me
Abstract
Il s'agit d'une reflexion epistemologique sur l'histoire des sciences humaines et notamment sur l'apparition des termes de monogenese et de polygenese. Dans les sciences humaines, le debat entre monogenese et polygenese a perdure tout au long du XX e siecle. La monogenese celebrait la similitude tandis que la polygenese s'attachait au developpement d'un vocabulaire complexe destine a decrire et a expliquer la difference. Le debat se signalait par la difference entre deux termes: l'anthropologie comme science de l'homme et l'ethnologie comme science des races distinctes
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Beyond Primitivism: Indigenous Religious Traditions and Modernity
Olupona, J. K. (2003) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 88
McCutcheon, R. T. (2006) · The Journal of Religion · doi:10.1086/499634 · Cited by 3
Waggoner, M. (2004) · Culture and Religion · doi:10.1080/0143830042000200346
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, J. Z.
- Affiliations
- University of Chicago (US)
- Corresponding author
- Smith, Jonathan Z.
- Venue
- Religion
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1996-10
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 297-309
- ISSN
- 0048-721X (ISSN-L)
- 1096-1151
- OpenAlex
- W1996137143
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Religion (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Race, Genetics, and Society
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › History of Science and Natural History
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › European Linguistics and Anthropology
- Keywords
- monogenesis, polygenesis, human origins, ethnology, race, human difference, human-likeness, epistemology of the human sciences
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
