Fiche du document
28 décembre 2022
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/0760-5668
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/1777-5450
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ , info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Mots-clés
responsibility intention moral anthropology legal anthropology connivence relation relations de pouvoir relation observateur-observéSujets proches
complicityCiter ce document
Émir Mahieddin et al., « Thinking through troubled relationships », Terrain, ID : 10.4000/terrain.24613
Métriques
Partage / Export
Résumé
Figurations of complicity occupy a highly visible place in our contemporary political and moral imaginations. But what does it mean exactly to be “complicit”? Behind its apparently intuitive character, complicity turns out to be a complex notion, involving theories of mind and action, conceptions of responsibility, of the person, as well as ideas about intention. In the field of law as well as in operations of moral judgment, complicity takes different forms according to different contexts and situations, raising fundamental anthropological questions about which this introduction intends to give an overview.