Cited by 20Historical, Religious, and Philosophical StudiesAnthropological Studies and InsightsCultural and Sociopolitical Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Representational vs conjectural divination: innovating out of nothing in Mongolia

Swancutt, Katherine·2006·Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute

Abstract

Divination is often regarded as a practice undertaken to obtain a standardized, best possible result. This characterization is made at the cost of analysing how people obtain desired innovations through divinatory procedures. To show how divination actually forces people to adopt strategies that lead to innovation, this article classifies all forms of divination into ‘representational’ or ‘conjectural’ categories. Drawing on Mongolian ethnography, the article argues that in conjectural divinations repeated questioning links known impossibilities to prospective possibilities, producing the basis for innovations which initially appear to arise out of nothing. The article demonstrates how conjectural divinations initiate processes of innovation wherein repeated questioning leads to combinatory thought which imposes novel combinations on people, who perceive the need for innovation, access an innovation, and finally recursively posit that innovation’s conceptual origins.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-9655.2006.00294.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. 10.2307/2801815 · DOI
  2. Bawden C.R., 1994, Confronting the supernatural: Mongolian traditional ways and means, collected papers, 161
  3. Beattie J., 1967, Magic, witchcraft and curing, 211
  4. 10.1017/CBO9780511896866.008 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/978-1-4757-1807-2 · DOI
  6. 10.1525/9780520340565 · DOI
  7. Csikszentmihályi M., 1990, Flow: the psychology of optimal experience
  8. Diemberger H., 1993, Gendered anthropology, 88
  9. 10.4324/9780203361832 · DOI
  10. Dulam B., 2002, Mongol böögiin zan üil (Mongol shamanic ritual)
  11. Empson R.2003.Integrating transformations: a study of children and daughters‐in‐law in a new approach to Mongolian kinship. Ph.D. thesis University of Cambridge.
  12. Evans‐Pritchard E.E., 1976, Witchcraft, oracles and magic among the Azande
  13. 10.4324/9780203392850 · DOI
  14. Galdanova G.R., 1987, Dolamaiskiye verovaniya Buryat (Pre‐lamaist beliefs of the Buryat)
  15. 10.3167/015597704782352555 · DOI
  16. Humphrey C., 1995, The anthropology of landscape: perspectives on place and space
  17. 10.1093/oso/9780198279419.001.0001 · DOI
  18. Kapadia K., 1995, Siva and her sisters: gender caste and class in rural south India, 92
  19. Lévi‐Strauss C., 1968, Structural anthropology (trans. C. Jacobson & B.G. Schoepf), 206
  20. Lévi‐Strauss C., 1969, The elementary structures of kinship (trans. J.H. Bell, J.R. von Sturmer & R. Needham)
  21. Lewis D., 1973, Counterfactuals
  22. Mackie J.L., 1974, The cement of the universe: a study of causation
  23. Mikhailov T.M., 1980, Iz istorii Buryatskogo shamanizma, s drevneishikh vremen po XVIII v (On the history of Buryat shamanism, from the earliest times to the eighteenth century)
  24. Mikhailov T.M., 1987, Buryatskii shamanizm: istoriya, struktura i sotsialnye funktsii (Buryat shamanism: history, structure and social functions)
  25. Park G., 1967, Magic, witchcraft and curing, 233
  26. Parkin D., 1991, African divination systems: ways of knowing, 173
  27. Puri J., 1999, Woman, body, desire in post‐colonial India: narratives of gender and sexuality, 75
  28. Schutz A., 1971, Collected papers II: studies in social theory
  29. Sperber D., 1975, Rethinking symbolism (trans. A.L.Morton)
  30. 10.7591/9781501717192 · DOI
  31. Wagner R., 1986, Symbols that stand for themselves
  32. 10.1525/aa.1973.75.5.02a00140 · DOI
  33. 10.2307/2803659 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Swancutt, K.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Swancutt, Katherine
Venue
Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-05-26
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
331-353
ISSN
  • 1359-0987 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9655
OpenAlex
W2064272669
Cited by
20
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
12.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Anthropological Studies and Insights
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Cultural and Sociopolitical Studies
Keywords
divination, innovation, Mongolian ethnography

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