pg. 124: "In English, ‘multiplication’ covers both reproduction, as in speaking of a discipline reproducing itself, and diversification, as in the aspiration for diverse anthropologies that will proliferate through different interests. To have a future, then, anthropology must be at once recognizable as itself (as one entity) and able to flourish in numerous and unforeseen circumstances (be multipliable)."
pg. 128: "if what we value about a future world with anthropology in it includes its multiple character, that is going to be bound up with the work to which anthropologists put the very idea of relations."
pg. 131: "Rather than the idea of constant fragmentation as disciplines divide, what emerges is the relational character of fractal distinctions, the same relationship repeated over and again, that generates similar structures at multiple ‘levels’ of organization. In fact, this may be conducive to merging as well, for these replications become entangled with cross-cutting possibilities."
pg. 144: "More generally, anthropologists’ exploration of relations of all kinds serves as a marker or stand-in for an aspiration to see beyond their own conventions of knowledge-making. What this nonachievable aspiration does achieve is a humility of sorts towards those who provide information, along with a commitment to a social accounting of its acquisition. (Such an interest in ‘origins’ keeps epistemic and social relations in tandem.) They may express this in terms of an open-ended approach to people’s relational worlds."
pg. 147: "Identity is not something one sees without specifying relations between different moments."
