B8926 - Ontological Anthropology (1) (LM)

Learning outcomes

The course moves from the historical interdisciplinary relationship between semiotics and anthropology to present the main authors of the ‘ontological turn’ in the social sciences, exploring their most significant implications for contemporary semiotics. By the end of the course, students will be familiar with the main themes of the most advanced debates in anthropology, and will be able to integrate them into semiotic analyses of texts and social practices.

Course contents

The course, divided into three parts, explores the dialogue between semiotics and anthropology revived by the leading authors of the ontological turn, with a particular focus on structuralist and poststructuralist currents.

At the beginning of the course, we will define the general framework of the so-called “ontological turn,” and then show how its main research interests—such as the relationship with the environment—take shape in Claude Lévi-Strauss’s contribution to structuralism.

Therefore, moving to its central part, the course focuses on the most recent legacy particularly, but not exclusively, on the work of Philippe Descola, Bruno Latour, and Eduardo Viveiros de Castro. Here, the course will highlight the points of convergence between these authors on the basis of a common, though not always recognized, semiotic relevance of the ontological turn. A comparative reading will demonstrate how this turn emphasizes, in various ways, the performative force of the categories that inform our perception, particularly of the environments that surround us, such nature/culture, subject/object, animate/inanimate, continuity/discontinuity, etc. During the course, we will frame this issue semiotically, interpreting the formation of different possible ‘ontologies ’as the effect of the semiotic practices that characterise different human and non-human groups.

Building on this framework, the third part of the course will discuss the divergences and conflicts within the anthropological field itself, and compare these different positions with the contemporary semiotic debates. The aim of this part will be to appreciate how the anthropological debate has been transposed into semiotics, influencing practices of analysis and prompting the discipline to reevaluate, re-assess and strengthen its own theoretical and epistemological heritage.

Readings/Bibliography

The course will be based on the following mandatory readings:

• Olbraad, Martin, Pedersen, Morten Axel, The Ontological Turn. An Anthropological Exposition, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-29.

• Lévi-Strauss, Claude, Totemism, Harmondsworth, Penguin Books, 2016, chapters 1, 4, 5.

• Latour, Bruno, We have never been modern, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1993.

• Descola, Philippe, The ecology of others, Chicago, Prickley Paradigm Press, 2013. Available at: https://archive.org/details/philippe-descola-the-ecology-of-others-prickly-paradigm-press-2013/page/n3/mode/2up .

• Descola, Philippe, "Modes of being and forms of predication", Hau: Journal of Ethnographic heory 4 (1): 271–280, 2014. Available at:https://www.haujournal.org/index.php/hau/article/view/hau4.1.012

• Viveiros de Castro, Eduardo, Cannibal Metaphysics: for a post-structuralist Anthropology, Univocal Publishing LLC, Univocal, First edition, Minneapolis, MN, 2014, chapters from 1 to 4.

In addition, students shall choose one among the following reading suggestions:

• Padoan, Tatsuma, 'Recalcitrant Interactions: Semiotic Reflections on Fieldwork among Mountain Ascetics', Acta Semiotica, 1 (2), 2021, pp. 84-119. doi: 10.23925/2763-700X.2021n2.2663

• Peverini, Paolo, Bruno Latour in the Semiotic Turn. An inquiry into the networks of Meaning, Cham, Springer, 2024, Chapter 1

• Tassinari, Carlo Andrea, Tropes at Play in Latour’s Work. A Tensive Semiotic Portrait of Modernity as a Semiosphere, E/C. Rivista dell’Associazione Italiana di Studi Semiotici, n. 37 2023, pp. 117 – 129.

• Mol, Annemarie, A Healthy Breakfast for your Child: Maintenance, Care, and the Persistence of Fragility. In F. Domínguez Rubio, J. Denis, & D. Pontille (Eds.), Fragilities: Essays on the Politics, Ethics, and Aesthetics of Maintenance and Repair (pp. 35-51). (Infrastructures Series). MIT Press, 2025, https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14227.003.0004

Teaching methods

The course will mainly be delivered through in-present frontal lessons.

Assessment methods

To all students:

Students may choose to be evaluated solely through an oral exam on the course content, or they may also choose to explore a topic agreed upon with the instructor through a term paper. In the latter case, the first part of the oral exam will focus on the term paper.

Attending lessons is not mandatory, but highly recommended. While it will be possible to obtain an excellent grade without necessarly attending the course, active and continous participation will be appreciated for the final evaluation.

The final dissertation and the interview will be evaluated based on the mastery of knowledge and skills acquired during the course, and on effort, originality and clarity of exposition.

Both oral exams and brief discussion over the final dissertation will be scheduled during the exam sessions, that will take place in the following months during a.y. 2026/2027:

1. April: for all students
2. May: for all students
3. June: for all students
4. July: for all students
5. September: for all students
6. October: for all students

To students submitting a final dissertation:

The term paper is an opportunity to go beyond the course material, to develop one’s reasoning and writing skills, and to gain experience in bibliographic research. It is an opportunity for personal growth—one that is not required for passing the exam—and can be a source of personal enrichment and a useful exercise in preparation for the thesis.

For this reason, the use of generative artificial intelligence is permitted exclusively for text revision. Permitted uses of AI for revision purposes include: restructuring a paragraph to improve its clarity, flow, and impact; suggestions for reducing word count; guidance on how to strengthen the argument; and rewriting suggestions.
Such uses must always be explicitly indicated via footnotes in the relevant paragraph, in which the student will describe how and why the software was used to achieve that result.
Any other use of AI for writing undermines the purpose of the learning process and tends to harm oral performance, which remains the focus of the evaluation. Use it with caution.

The final paper shall be sent to carlo.tassinari3@unibo.it [mailto:carlo.tassinari3@unibo.it] in a word document of 10 pages max, in times new roman 12, spacing 1,5, standard margins, at least two weeks before the chosen appeal. The object of the e-mail shall read: “Dissertation for Ontological Anthropology – Appeal of [month of the appeal]”

Persons with disabilities and DSAs

Persons with disabilities or specific learning disorders are entitled to special adaptations in relation to their condition, subject to assessment by the University Service for Students with Disabilities and DSA. Please do not contact the teacher(s), but contact the Service for an appointment. It will be up to the Service to determine what adjustments are appropriate. More information on the page:

https://site.unibo.it/studenti-con-disabilita-e-dsa/it/per-studenti .

Teaching tools

Frontal lessons will be supported by powerpoint that will be published in the “Useful contents” section of the professor’s website.

Office hours

See the website of Carlo Andrea Tassinari