Anthropologists have become increasingly involved as participants on development teams, but their great potential to promote sustainable development is hindered by vestiges of one of cultural anthropology's founding myths. It is the notion of cultures construed as self-contained symbol systems, conceptually opaque to all but true insiders, with an implied notion of correct translation, which makes it an ‘all or nothing’ matter. This notion is also linked to long-standing concerns in the field with moral relativism, value neutrality and colonialism. As a result, within the community of anthropologists working in development, two somewhat opposed positions have arisen: one holds that anthropologists should simply provide cultural knowledge (be ‘knowledge brokers’ as some put it); the other holds that anthropologists should adopt a more partisan stance which, given value relativism's resistance to imposing values from without, compels anthropologists to be advocates of the interests of those groups receiving assistance. I shall consider several ways in which these concerns figure in development controversies, and give reasons why they, and the ideological stances they validate, are unnecessary impediments to progress. I will then offer a pragmatic view of interpretation in the hope of resolving some of these difficulties.

I shall also consider how these methodological problems are compounded by concerns with the political-social impact of anthropological inquiry – concerns which can lead to an overemphasis on these (albeit important) issues, while eclipsing the epistemological challenges which primarily motivate appeal for anthropological input by development agencies.