Essentialism manifests itself in a diversity of forms and is used in multiple ways. Yet it is always potentially dangerous — even when it is mobilised strategically and in apparently worthy forms for purposes of overcoming oppressive structures. As the first in a collection of articles focused on various manifestations of essentialism, this article offers a brief historical outline of how social anthropology deployed essentialist thinking, even amongst its canonical exponents. It examines how Durkheimian theorisations and the structuralist traditions to which they gave rise — in particular assumptions of the singular and homogeneous symbolic classification of society — lent themselves to essentialism. It considers the example of South Africa where essentialist social theories contributed to inhumane political formations. Given that essentialism always carries a latency to be used for pernicious ends, the article concludes by considering social anthropological approaches that might permit an understanding of individuals and society in ways that neither lead to nor need essentialist thinking, and instead recognise the contradictoriness, flux and incompleteness inherent in social life.

中文翻译：

---

遇到，解释和驳斥本质主义

本质主义以多种形式表现出来，并以多种方式被使用。然而，它始终具有潜在的危险-即使出于克服压迫性结构的目的而以战略方式和显然有价值的形式动员了它。作为关注本质主义各种表现形式的文章的第一篇，本文提供了关于社会人类学如何部署本质主义思想的历史简要概述，甚至包括其规范的代表人物。它研究了涂尔干主义理论和它们所产生的结构主义传统，特别是社会的单一和同质象征分类的假设，如何使他们适应本质主义。它以南非为例，本质主义社会理论促成了非人道的政治形态。