Understanding Food and Behavioral Taboos as Ontological Configurations: The Case of an Amazonian Society

Understanding how dietary and behavioral taboos are differently perceived and practiced sheds light on the processes involved in the emergence of ontological configurations. Some studies provide functionalist explanations, suggesting, for instance, that these restrictions are adaptive responses to potentially harmful food, overlooking the role that local conceptions play in decision-making processes regarding such taboos. Ethnographic explanations account for cultural understandings of food taboos, but conceive of such restrictions as general rules that contribute to the cohesion of the social group, ignoring individual variation in notions of non-humans. This paper takes a novel ontological approach to understanding local conceptions associated with the food and behavioral restrictions practiced in an Indigenous Matsigenka community in Amazonian Peru. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods, this study explores how certain non-human beings are differently conceived, and why they are considered taboos. Based on these results, I conclude that tabooed non-humans are harmful for a variety of different reasons, and I propose a new theory to explain the emergence of certain ontological configurations underlying food and behavioral restrictions.