Epistemological assumptions and social anthropology

Both sociology and anthropology have faced similar ontological, epistemological, and methodological problems which originating in the apprehension of their complex sphere of knowledge. On the whole, two possible solutions have been offered: on one hand, an objectivist one, advocated by Durkheim, in which the factual character of the social milieu is assumed. On the other hand, a nominalist one is defended by Weber and sustained on the theory of individual action. The objectivist approach, of universalist nature, have had a relevant impact on anthropologists linked to the French sociological school (Mauss), to the British functionalism (Malinowski, Radcliffe-Brown and others), and to structuralism (Levi-Strauss). However, the positivist model has been gradually replaced by the interpretivist, as becomes evident in the works of Evans-Pritchard. The nominalist approach, dominated by constructionism and interpretivism, has exerted a profound influence on symbolic anthropology (Turner, Geertz, etc.).