Hybridized Ethnomethodological Logic: A Reply to “Critics” of Revolution and Witchcraft

• In Event: 50403 - Conversation Analysis and Ethnomethodology: Context, Sequence, and Meaning in Interaction

Abstract

In November 2024 at the Social Science History Association annual meeting, the author (of Revolution and Witchcraft) encountered several “critics” as a book author. Many questions hinge on the ambiguities regarding the logic of certain ethnomethodological program—not all of which have been completely laid out, developed, or resolved. Adding to the complications is the fact that the ethnomethodological logic is muddled with other ones during the course of “hybridization.” This paper presents an elaborate “reply to critics,” discussing the various methodological transgressions and compromises made, and the costs and benefits of them. By sharing this interchange, I hope this presentation will stimulate discussions pertaining to methodological hybridization within and beyond the Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis (EMCA), Comparative-Historical Sociology (CHS), and Sociology of Culture communities.

Authors

• Gordon C. Chang, Western Illinois University

• J.R. Osborn

• Aminda Smith