Abstract
There is a discernible “anti-anthropologist” attitude on the part of many missionaries who have had direct contact with anthropologists in the field — even on the part of many who are not “anti-anthropology.” Ideological differences, of course, are often poles apart, but both groups, in their saner moments often recognize that each has much to offer the other. They sometimes find it hard to talk to each other because assumptions and vocabulary are so different. Practical Anthropology has served in a small way as a vehicle for some communication, and for those anthropologists who read it, may serve to build some understanding of the missionary community. Missionaries, if they are to fully profit by the contributions of anthropologists, need also to understand this breed of beings. This article should contribute to that end.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
