In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Notas Introducci6n 1. Segun George E. Tinker, Cultural genocide can be defined as the effective destruction of a people by systematically or systemically (intentionally or unintentionally in order to achieve other goals) destroying, eroding , or undermining the integrity of the culture and system of values that defines a people and gives them life. First of all, it involves the destruction of those cultural structures of existence that give a people a sense of holistic and communal integrity . It does this by eroding both their self-esteem and the interrelationships that bind them together as a community. (6) Tinker desarrolla una discusion sobre las imbricaciones entre la empresa evangelica y el genocidio cultural indfgena en America del Norte en Missiqnary Conquest: The Gospel and Native American Cultural Genocide (particularmente en las paginas 5-11 y 15-18). 2. El siguiente juicio de Inga Clendinnen sobre la mision en la zona de Yucatan se ajusta mas a 10 que fue la regIa: It is possible that fury subdued a touch of guilt at the direction , or misdirection, of [the missionaries'] energies. For all their high dedication, the missionary programme must be judged as slipshod. Toral, coming from New Spain, where long years of competitions between the orders had bred a tough professionalism , was shocked by what he saw in his new diocese. Very few friars had bothered to become proficient in Mayan; remote areas, like Cozumel, had been entirely neglected; and even where the Spanish presence was well-established the friars appeared content to minister to those Indians living conveniently 'close to the monasteries. By his standards there was in 1562 no Church in Yucatan. (114) Otro tanto plantea Donald F. Lach con respecto a las misiones portuguesas en Asia (l: 229-314). Para una vision india-norteamericana consultar Missionary Conquest, de Tinker. 3. En Crftica de la raz6n dialectica: marxismo y existencialismo, JeanPaul Sartre teoriza la institucion como un "proceso" dialectico entre 10 "instituido" y 10 "instituyente." El canicter especffico de la institucionalizacion es el producto del juego de fuerzas de esta manera generado. En otras palabras, y a diferencia de Emile Durkheim, para Sartre la institucion no es una totalidad sino una totalizaci6n: no es cosa sino prdctica. 4. Ver estas palabras de Peter L. Berger y Thomas Luckman: Institutions ... by the very fact oftheir existence, control human conduct by setting up predefined patterns of conduct, 163 / Notas a La pagina 4 which channel it in one direction as against the many other directions that would theoretically be possible.... On the pretheoretical level ... every institution has a body of transmitted recipe knowledge, that is, knowledge that supplies the institutionally appropriate rules of conduct. Such knowledge constitutes the motivating dynamics of institutionalized conduct. It defines the institutionalized areas of conduct and designates all situations falling within them. It defines and constructs the roles to be played in the context of the institutions in question. (55-65) 5. Berger y Luckman observan: What is taken for granted as knowledge in the society comes to be coextensive with the knowable, or at any rate provides the framework within which anything not yet known will come to be known in the future.... Knowledge, in this sense, is at the heart of the fundamental dialectic of society. It "programs" the channels in which externalization produces an objective world. It objectifies this world through language and the cognitive apparatus based on language, that is, it orders it into objects to be apprehended as reality.... Knowledge about society is thus a realization in the double sense of the word, in the sense of apprehending the objectivated social reality, and in the sense of ongoingly producing this reality. (66) 6. Berger y Luckman notan: The analysis of roles is of particular importance to the sociology of knowledge because it reveals the mediations between the macroscopic universes of meaning objectivated in a society and the ways by which these universes are subjectively real to individuals. (79) 7. Segun Berger y Luckman: All institutional conduct involves roles. Thus roles share in the controlling character of institutionalization.... The roles represent the institutional order. This representation takes place on two levels. First, performance of the role represents itself. For instance, to engage in judging is to represent the role of judge. The judging individual is not acting "on his own," but qua judge. Second, the role represents an entire institutional nexus of conduct. The role of judge stands in relationship to other roles, the totality of which comprises the institution of law...

Share