Richards, & Martin, 1990, p. 491). Thus the claim to be neutral and the
attempt to position ones work as beyond politics ultimately enables
researchers to also become better advocates. While advocating for only one
side in a conflict seems to be inevitable, it should instead also be possible to
advocate for both sides. In regards to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,
Nadav Safran pointedly argued: “I happen to believe that both the Arabs
and Israelis have unassailable moral arguments, and anyone who does not
understand how this is true, cannot understand the true nature of tragedy”
(Safran inTyler, 2009, p. 37).
As sociologists of knowledge our professional duty is to uncover the
socialprocesses shaping knowledge claims. By describing and understand-
ing actions, motives, and histories in context, it is neither a researcher’s
duty or call to “grind an evaluative ax” (Scott et al., 1990,p. 476). This is
not to say that as researchers we will not inevitably be “captured” (Scott
et al., 1990, p. 489) by one side or another. And yes, our scientific interest
and focus will likely enter the debate and will be used by one side or
another to further particular aims. Also protagonists in the conflict may
perceive “standing outside” as a political act. Arguably, however, should
we get “captured” by both sides, we will not only have fulfilled our anthro-
pological duty of providing a “thick description,” but we may also become
more effective advocates for either sides. Becoming “captured” while main-
taining a neutral stance does not have to be mutually exclusive. Most politi-
cal breakthroughs came not from partisanship, but from bipartisanship,
from breaking the ranks, and crossing the borders.
The claim to neutrality, of course, has its own politics (see alsoRedfield,
2011 ; Strasser, 2009). It goes hand in hand with various aims, ranging from
getting access to being a witness. Also, advocacy based on a “neutral
stance” is not value-free. Action Researchers have long been committed to
furthering equality and democratic governance, and in cultures of conflict,
contributing to conflict resolution by attempting to increase cross-cultural
understanding (Falzone, 2004). As academic researchers, jointly with local
research partners, we have the privilege of gaining an insider’s understand-
ing of complex social worlds, yet at the same time, we also remain outsi-
ders, which opens up the possibility to become mediators in situations of
conflict.
Historians have pointed out that in the 20th century, science and politics
haveexperienced a unique intermarriage (Eghigian, Killan, & Leuenberger,
2007 ).Indeed science, whether under totalitarian or democratic regimes,
inevitably becomes part of certain political interests, values, and visions.
The claim of neutrality in order to promote an equitable and democratic
36 CHRISTINE LEUENBERGER