Anthropology in the post-Euclidean State, or from textual to oral anthropology

The actual crisis of anthropology is examined in relation to its wide public success. Anthropology has prospered and the anthropologists have proliferated becoming more specific. But the theoretical debate has come to a halt over the last decades. The article suggests that both the methodology and the form of expression of the ethnographic report have developed and then become crystallized around actual protocols. A critique of the dichotomy Subject/Object, namely the key discussion about the notion of Otherness, is here reexamined as the testimony for an immanent “non-protocolar” character of anthropology. This critique together with the end of anthropology as tekhne, i.e. as protocolar activity, will allow anthropology to go on enhancing many other social and non social sciences. The article discusses the re-definition of anthropology in the context of Daseinanalysis and, therefore the changing relation between man and power, that is between the social actor and the post-Euclidean State in the era of the tekhne.