Contributor, Editor, Supervisor
2,305
edits
Editor2018 (talk | contribs) |
Editor2018 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category: Cluster]] | [[Category: Cluster]] | ||
In exploring whether it is possible to separate a relationship from the use of that relationship, the entries in this category highlight the ambivalent nature of relationships – seen by participants as social, but by observers as instrumental, but indeed neither, or both. The substantive ambivalence of informal exchanges – where one cannot agree or disagree with either participants or observers – means that any single categorisation of the way in which gifts, favours, transfers and transactions are given, taken or exchanged would be reductionist. | In exploring whether it is possible to separate a relationship from the use of that relationship, the entries in this category highlight the ambivalent nature of relationships – seen by participants as social, but by observers as instrumental, but indeed neither, or both. The substantive ambivalence of informal exchanges – where one cannot agree or disagree with either participants or observers – means that any single categorisation of the way in which gifts, favours, transfers and transactions are given, taken or exchanged would be reductionist. | ||