Maurice Bloch

Bio: Maurice Bloch is an academic researcher from London School of Economics and Political Science. The author has contributed to research in topics: Kinship & Ideology. The author has an hindex of 40, co-authored 103 publications receiving 7458 citations.

Interview of Maurice Bloch

Abstract: Professor Maurice Bloch visited Finland in March 2014 as the keynote speaker of the interdisciplinary symposium 'Ritual Intimacy – Ritual Publicity' organized by the Collegium for Advanced Studies at the University of Helsinki. In connection to his visit he granted an interview to Suomen Antropologi, in which he discusses some of the central points of his ritual theory and shares his views on past, present and future directions in the study of ritual.

Du cerveau à la culture : qu’est-ce que l’anthropologie cognitive ?

Abstract: Les culturalistes voient dans les cultures des systemes de symboles utilises par les gens pour communiquer entre eux. A ce titre, ils considerent l'etude de la psychologie individuelle comme inutile pour leur objet : selon eux, l'individu est le produit et non la source de la culture et du langage qu'il manie. Le culturalisme rejette egalement l'approche transactionnaliste ainsi que la sociobiologie. Ces trois theories ont pourtant en commun d'accorder tres peu de place a l'individu, ce que recuse l'anthropologie cognitive. Ainsi, si cette derniere se penche sur la biologie du cerveau, elle met les facultes mentales humaines au centre de ses preoccupations. Les anthropologues culturalistes pensaient que les mots rendaient compte fidelement des concepts. Or, un ecart existe dans de nombreux cas entre l'organisation des connaissances et ce qui peut en etre dit.

Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation

Abstract: Recent ethnographic studies of workplace practices indicate that the ways people actually work usually differ fundamentally from the ways organizations describe that work in manuals, training programs, organizational charts, and job descriptions. Nevertheless, organizations tend to rely on the latter in their attempts to understand and improve work practice. We examine one such study. We then relate its conclusions to compatible investigations of learning and of innovation to argue that conventional descriptions of jobs mask not only the ways people work, but also significant learning and innovation generated in the informal communities-of-practice in which they work. By reassessing work, learning, and innovation in the context of actual communities and actual practices, we suggest that the connections between these three become apparent. With a unified view of working, learning, and innovating, it should be possible to reconceive of and redesign organizations to improve all three.

The WEIRDest People in the World

Abstract: Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers - often implicitly - assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these "standard subjects" are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species - frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior - hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.

Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression

Abstract: Part I. From There to Here - Theoretical Background: 1. From visiousness to viciousness: theories of intergroup relations 2. Social dominance theory as a new synthesis Part II. Oppression and its Psycho-Ideological Elements: 3. The psychology of group dominance: social dominance orientation 4. Let's both agree that you're really stupid: the power of consensual ideology Part III. The Circle of Oppression - The Myriad Expressions of Institutional Discrimination: 5. You stay in your part of town and I'll stay in mine: discrimination in the housing and retail markets 6. They're just too lazy to work: discrimination in the labor market 7. They're just mentally and physically unfit: discrimination in education and health care 8. The more of 'them' in prison, the better: institutional terror, social control and the dynamics of the criminal justice system Part IV. Oppression as a Cooperative Game: 9. Social hierarchy and asymmetrical group behavior: social hierarchy and group difference in behavior 10. Sex and power: the intersecting political psychologies of patriarchy and empty-set hierarchy 11. Epilogue.

Towards an attention-based view of the firm

Abstract: The central argument is that firm behavior is the result of how firms channel and distribute the attention of their decision-makers. What decision-makers do depends on what issues and answers they focus their attention on. What issues and answers they focus on depends on the specific situation and on how the firm's rules, resources, and relationships distribute various issues, answers, and decision-makers into specific communications and procedures. The paper develops these theoretical principles into a model of firm behavior and presents its implications for explaining firm behavior and adaptation. ? 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.