selves more fully in the social contexts in which their users live and work. Although the ethical concerns of design (clients) and anthropology (human subjects) remain distinct, according to Miller this ‘distinction is dissolving’ (94). Miller subsequently states that ‘[n]aturalistic inquiry [participant observation] and qualitative research methods have become staples of design research’ (100). In the advertising industry discussed in Chapter 7, Malefyt and Morais explain that contentious issues can arise from the nature of the products that are advertised, such as potentially harmful products (including alcohol, drugs, cigarettes), rather than advertisement itself. They suggest that business anthropologists with ethical concerns should sensitively choose the assignments that they take on. The final two chapters shed light on educational institutions. In Chapter 8, Jo Aiken, Victoria Schlieder, and Christina Wasson introduce the case of a course in a business anthropology program at the University of North Texas (UNT), in which students conducted a research project. Wasson was the instructor for this course, while Aiken and Schlieder were students. They describe the dilemmas they faced when conducting a fieldwork interview with a participant who turned out to be intoxicated, while her minor daughter was present. The authors who experienced this ethically grey case stress that ‘storytelling [sharing field experiences] is a valuable tool in preparing researchers in any discipline for adventures in the field’ (136). In the final chapter, Dawn Lerman, a business school professor, criticises business education for its lack of attention to the study of people, despite the fact that ‘business is really about people’ (142). She emphasises the value of liberal arts, which provide students with an opportunity to learn about people and society. Throughout the book, the importance and limitations of codes of ethics are repeatedly commented on by the contributors. The rigid application of apparently universal codes of ethics, such as ‘do no harm’, ‘informed consent’, and ‘transparency’, might unintentionally cause harm. Therefore, the book highlights the concept of ‘doing some good’ by considering the social, organisational, and cultural contexts in which business anthropologists work. This book also suggests continual revision, for instance, of the AAA’s Code of Ethics for those who work in ‘pluridisciplinary teams’ (Miller) in non-traditional areas. Several contributors mention the emergence and importance of communities of practice through working in such teams. The first-hand experiences of business anthropologists introduced in this book provide effective, practical guidelines, not only for applied anthropologists but for all practitioners, as well as students who may work in such grey areas in their future careers. This book, which shares invaluable stories, might itself contribute to such communities of practice.

中文翻译：

---

澳大利亚古节食者的疾病、身份和禁忌

在用户生活和工作的社会环境中更充分地展现自我。尽管设计（客户）和人类学（人类受试者）的伦理问题仍然不同，但根据米勒的说法，这种“区别正在消散”（94）。米勒随后指出“[n]自然调查[参与者观察]和定性研究方法已成为设计研究的主要内容”（100）。在第 7 章讨论的广告行业中，Malefyt 和 Morais 解释说，有争议的问题可能来自广告产品的性质，例如潜在有害的产品（包括酒精、毒品、香烟），而不是广告本身。他们建议有道德问题的商业人类学家应该谨慎地选择他们承担的任务。最后两章阐明了教育机构。在第 8 章中，Jo Aiken、Victoria Schlieder 和 Christina Wasson 介绍了北德克萨斯大学 (UNT) 商业人类学课程中的一门课程，学生在该课程中进行了一个研究项目。Wasson 是这门课程的讲师，而 Aiken 和 Schlieder 是学生。他们描述了在与一名结果醉酒的参与者进行实地采访时面临的困境，而她的小女儿也在场。经历过这种道德灰色案例的作者强调，“讲故事 [分享实地经验] 是让任何学科的研究人员为该领域的冒险做好准备的宝贵工具”（136）。在最后一章中，商学院教授道恩·勒曼，批评商业教育缺乏对人的研究，尽管事实上“商业实际上是关于人的”（142）。她强调文科的价值，它为学生提供了解人和社会的机会。在整本书中，作者反复评论了道德准则的重要性和局限性。严格应用看似普遍的道德准则，例如“不伤害”、“知情同意”和“透明”，可能会无意中造成伤害。因此，本书通过考虑商业人类学家工作的社会、组织和文化背景，突出了“做一些好事”的概念。这本书还建议不断修订，例如，AAA 的道德准则，适用于在非传统领域的“多学科团队”（Miller）中工作的人员。一些贡献者提到了通过在这样的团队中工作实践社区的出现和重要性。本书中介绍的商业人类学家的第一手经验不仅为应用人类学家，而且为所有从业者以及在未来职业生涯中可能在此类灰色地带工作的学生提供了有效、实用的指导方针。这本书分享了宝贵的故事，它本身可能会为这样的实践社区做出贡献。不仅适用于应用人类学家，而且适用于所有从业者，以及在未来职业生涯中可能在此类灰色地带工作的学生。这本书分享了宝贵的故事，它本身可能会为这样的实践社区做出贡献。不仅适用于应用人类学家，而且适用于所有从业者，以及在未来职业生涯中可能在此类灰色地带工作的学生。这本书分享了宝贵的故事，它本身可能会为这样的实践社区做出贡献。