Neste n\u00famero da S\u00e9rie Antropologia est\u00e3o publicadas as vers\u00f5es em ingl\u00eas e em portugu\u00eas da comunica\u00e7\u00e3o \u201cThe sins and virtues of anthropology\u201d, apresentada na \u201cConference on Methodological Nationalism\u201d, London School of Economics, 26 e 27 de junho de 2002.

During the past decade, anthropology has been accused of many sins and mal- practices in the course of its development. Indeed, for many practitioners anthro- pology is no more\ue000 in the United States at least, anthropology is considered to be doomed to extinction. Personifying the worst of the \u201cpolitically incorrect\u201d social disciplines, for the past two decades anthropology has slowly but relentlessly been replaced by alternatives, such as \u201ccultural studies,\u201d \u201cSTS (science, technology and society) programs,\u201d \u201cculture critique,\u201d \u201csituated knowledges,\u201d and so on, all within the context ofpost-anthropology. In other places, however, such as Brazil and India, anthropology blooms and flourishes. Besieged at the center, it looks like anthro- pology is well and thriving in the periphery, providing a positive, critical, constructive approach. How this situation relates to the question of \u201cmethodological nationalism\u201d and what anthropology has to contribute to this pressing problem is my concern here.

School of Economics, 26-27th June 2002. I want to thank James Ito-Adler, Wilson Trajano Filho and Michael Fischer for precious suggestions and reactions to its first version. I wrote this text during the spring semester of 2002, as a Visiting Scholar at the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies, Harvard University, which provided me worderful working conditions. During this period, I also profitted from a Senior Scientist Fellowship from CNPQ, Brazil.