Authors in the pragmatic and phenomenological traditions offer several distinct but overlapping theories of meaning. Drawing on a number of these theories, I analyze the speech of a panic sufferer, as he recounts an attack of panic and as he has one, in order to contrast the enactment of meaning with its paralysis. This material offers an opportunity to deepen our understanding of the construction of self as it arises out of the interaction between a human being and their cultural environment.

Authors in the pragmatic and phenomenological traditions offer several distinct but overlapping theories of meaning. Drawing on a number of these theories, I analyze the speech of a panic sufferer, as he recounts an attack of panic and as he has one, in order to contrast the enactment of meaning with its paralysis. This material offers an opportunity to deepen our understanding of the construction of self as it arises out of the interaction between a human being and their cultural environment.

Pragmatic approaches can effectively address questions of cultural dynamics-how culture is renewed, contested, or changed in historical situations. The practice-oriented direction of much of contemporary cognitive science offers an emerging opportunity to more fully integrate thought and emotion into anthropological pragmatism. Here I urge attention to a realm of enacted culture that illustrates how certain interactive processes bring cultural conventions into a communicative environment where they are renewed, transformed, created. As an example, I discuss depictions, improvisational performances in which speakers use material resources such as their hands or voices to formulate and portray thoughts. In a close analysis of three short narratives, I show that depictions are used by speakers to help to create an affect-rich environment in which cultural conventions are introduced into interactional space, whence they become subject to negotiation. It is not only in these spontaneous and improvisational practices that cognition and culture unfold in time as a dialectical interplay of mind and environment; this also occurs in stylized formats such as public rituals and narratives.

People leave religious institutions or change their religious beliefs for many different reasons. A person might change their religious affiliation because a political transformation has rendered that affiliation dangerous or economically undesirable; there may be some form of coercion involved. For example, the colonisation process with its attendant Christian missionisation entailed a massive replacement, on several continents, of indigenous religions with some version of Christianity. Did the people who abandoned indigenous religions deconvert? Of course, this is but one of many possible scenarios of religious change. A person might gradually abandon the faith in which they were raised, or might encounter a religious tradition that for one reason or another seems extraordinarily compelling, and for that reason leave her old faith for a new one. Whether all of these phenomena should be considered instances of deconversion is by no means resolved. Furthermore, the similarity between such instances of leaving religion may be only superficial, and thus a single theoretical framework—a single general explanation for all of these cases—may not be possible. For these reasons, writing coherently about leaving religion requires one to specify which sort of leaving is being explained. In most of the literature on leaving religion, the phenomenon is studied in the context of the contested ideological situations in contemporary societies (although important exceptions are found in Part 1 and 2 of this book). As Gooren (2011) notes, in practice the study of deconversion was shaped by its origins in the context of sociological study of new religious movements that arose in the early 1970s. Since that time the purview of the topic has expanded considerably, but it is fair to note that to some extent the concerns of these early studies established the paradigm in this literature. Above all—and Gooren’s (2010) thorough review and synthesis of the literature on conversion and disaffiliation makes this clear—across several

EthosVolume 46, Issue 3 p. e4-e6 Book Review A Diagram for Fire. Miracles and Variation in an American Charismatic Movement. Jon Bialecki. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 2017. 263 pp. Peter Stromberg, Peter Stromberg University of TulsaSearch for more papers by this author Peter Stromberg, Peter Stromberg University of TulsaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 04 September 2018 https://doi.org/10.1111/etho.12209Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume46, Issue3Special Issue: Culture, Poverty, and PersonhoodSeptember 2018Pages e4-e6 RelatedInformation

Anthropology NewsVolume 57, Issue 11 p. e273-e274 November Online Content Roy D'Andrade Bambi Chapin, Bambi ChapinSearch for more papers by this authorApril Leininger, April LeiningerSearch for more papers by this authorNaomi Quinn, Naomi QuinnSearch for more papers by this authorClaudia Strauss, Claudia StraussSearch for more papers by this authorPeter Stromberg, Peter StrombergSearch for more papers by this author Bambi Chapin, Bambi ChapinSearch for more papers by this authorApril Leininger, April LeiningerSearch for more papers by this authorNaomi Quinn, Naomi QuinnSearch for more papers by this authorClaudia Strauss, Claudia StraussSearch for more papers by this authorPeter Stromberg, Peter StrombergSearch for more papers by this author First published: 11 May 2017 https://doi.org/10.1111/AN.247AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume57, Issue11November 2016Pages e273-e274 RelatedInformation

Among the related but distinct ideas that comprise contemporary American individualism is the ethic of self-realization, the belief that each person has the moral duty to develop their own characteristic talents and potentialities. Here I argue that although the intellectual sources of this belief are well-understood, we have little knowledge of how this idea became an ethic, how it acquired the emotional force of a moral directive. I suggest that this development can be explained in part by exploring the history of the Wesleyan doctrine of Sanctification, the conviction that the Christian believer can achieve a state of perfection. In the 19th century, debates erupted over whether Sanctification—originally an ecstatic experience occurring in revivals—could also take place as a gradual process, the development of Christian character. By the early 20th century, broader cultural forces conditioned a theological shift whereby Sanctification was increasingly understood in liberal thought as realization of the divinity that dwells within each individual soul. Along this path, Sanctification progressively permeated certain routines of daily life. This history provides an example of gradual transformation within Christianity, an example that can help to refine understandings of the processes of continuity and discontinuity that have been central to discussion in the Anthropology of Christianity.

Among the related but distinct ideas that comprise contemporary American individualism is the ethic of self-realization, the belief that each person has the moral duty to develop their own characteristic talents and potentialities. Here I argue that although the intellectual sources of this belief are well-understood, we have little knowledge of how this idea became an ethic, how it acquired the emotional force of a moral directive. I suggest that this development can be explained in part by exploring the history of the Wesleyan doctrine of Sanctification, the conviction that the Christian believer can achieve a state of perfection. In the 19th century, debates erupted over whether Sanctificationoriginally an ecstatic experience occurring in revivalscould also take place as a gradual process, the development of Christian character. By the early 20th century, broader cultural forces conditioned a theological shift whereby Sanctification was increasingly understood in liberal thought as realization of the divinity that dwells within each individual soul. Along this path, Sanctification progressively permeated certain routines of daily life. This history provides an example of gradual transformation within Christianity, an example that can help to refine understandings of the processes of continuity and discontinuity that have been central to discussion in the Anthropology of Christianity.