Abstract
In the last fifty years, anthropology has engaged in intense debates about the rational grounds upon which ethnographic understanding rests. Whatever the particular stand taken by the respective interlocutors in these debates, the main reference shared by all interventions is the symbolic character of anthropological data and understanding. If that is so for any ethnographic context, the importance of focusing on the symbolic pre-structure of the lifeworld is even more significant when we look at normative disputes. This is because differently than assertoric statements about facts in the world, the meanings of norms exist prior to the research interests of the interpreter and lie first and foremost in the world views of the subjects who share them. My research about dispute resolution has shown that reason and sentiment often become entangled in these processes and their proper articulation is a condition for making the respective conflicts intelligible.
Keywords:
reason; sentiment; disputes; United States; Australia; Brazil