| Dictionary: cultural anthropology |
| 5min Related Video: cultural anthropology |
| Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: cultural anthropology |
For more information on cultural anthropology, visit Britannica.com.
| Dental Dictionary: cultural anthropology |
The study of the interpersonal and community mores of a society or isolate.
| Encyclopedia of Public Health: Cultural Anthropology |
Cultural anthropology emerged as an area of study following the era of European exploration, when the full diversity of human experience became globally apparent. Sir Edward Burnett Tylor (1832–1917) one of the founders of anthropology, defined culture as "that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society" (Tylor 1871, p. 1, emphasis added). It is the holistic emphasis of cultural anthropology that distinguishes it most clearly from other related disciplines. For example, an anthropologist may focus his or her research on a particular dimension of culture, such as religion or political organization, but that dimension will also be described in terms of its relationship to the "complex whole" of the local culture.
Anthropologists generally describe culture in terms of a set of interacting systems that perpetuate cultural practices through generations. For example, kinship systems are one of the basic building blocks of culture, encompassing mate choice, marriage customs, family relationships and obligations, and household composition. Social systems encompass stable non-kin relationships such as voluntary associations. Religions or belief systems provide guidance for relationships between people and the natural world, as well as the unseen or unknown forces that affect people's lives; they exist in all cultures and show an astounding diversity in terms of content and practices. Economic systems and political systems extend relationships beyond the family and household. Though some of these systems and relationships may ultimately encompass global dimensions, cultural anthropologists are primarily concerned with the impact of each of these systems at the local level, in the day-to-day experiences of communities.
The emphasis on understanding local experience has led to the development of an array of field observation methods collectively called "ethnographic" methods. Cultural anthropology is a field-based science that emphasizes direct observation of and participation in a culture as the primary source of knowledge about that culture. Controlled experimentation is rarely an option, for obvious ethical reasons. Instead, emphasis is placed on the collection of detailed, repetitive observations using diverse methods, under diverse conditions, and with diverse community members. Methods include both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis techniques. A single study may include a quantitative household census or survey, structured and unstructured open-ended interviews, time-series observations of specific types of behaviors, and detailed observational notes on events such as marriages and funerals. Anthropologists use a process called triangulation to compare the results from the various data collection strategies. This is often done during the field research process, such that hypotheses generated from one strategy are investigated using another. This iterative process serves to reduce over-all bias and increase the robustness of conclusions.
Within cultural anthropology, a number of subfields overlap. Ethnography is the broadest and encompasses the systematic study of cultures. Medical anthropology focuses specifically on the study of disease and health in the context of cultural systems. Applied anthropology centers on the systematic use of anthropological knowledge to address contemporary problems. Urban, national, and global anthropology are three closely related subfields that focus on interrelationships at these different levels and how they affect and are affected by the everyday social and cultural lives of people living, acting, and struggling in particular places. Psychological anthropology encompasses the study of cultural, psychological, and social interrelations at all levels. Linguistic anthropology explores language in its social and cultural context.
Cultural anthropologists also work within a variety of theoretical perspectives that range from the strongly scientific and objective to the strongly literary and subjective. Hahn (1999) described anthropological theory as encompassing three major areas:
The choice of theoretical perspective is driven by the overall goal of the research, with some problems requiring an integration of theories from different perspectives. For example, the intersecting epidemics of substance abuse, violence, and AIDS in impoverished urban settings in the United States led Merrill Singer (1996) to develop the theoretical construct of syndemics, comprising synergistic, mutually enhancing health and social problems. The syndemic concept integrates aspects of both ecological and political/economic theories in medical anthropology. It also typifies the anthropological approach by striving to model the relationships among multiple subsystems at the community level.
(SEE ALSO: Acculturation; Anthropology in Public Health; Assimilation; Biculturalism; Community Health; Cross-cultural Communication; Cultural Norms; Customs; Ethnicity and Health; Folk Medicine; Lifestyle; Theories of Health and Illness)
Bibliography
Ember, C. R., and Ember, M. (1990). Cultural Anthropology, 6th edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hahn, R. A., ed. (1999). Anthropology in Public Health. Bridging Differences in Culture and Society. New York: Oxford University Press.
Harris, M. (1991). Cultural Anthropology, 3rd edition. New York: Harper-Collins.
Singer, M. (1996). "A Dose of Drugs, a Touch of Violence, a Case of AIDS: Conceptualizing the SAVA Syndemic." Free Inquiry 24:99–10.
Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive Culture. London: J. Murray.
— KATHLEEN M. MACQUEEN
| Archaeology Dictionary: cultural anthropology |
One of the four fields of anthropology, focusing on the description and analysis of the forms and styles of social life of past and present human societies. Its subdiscipline, ethnography, systematically describes contemporary societies and cultures.
| Wikipedia: Cultural anthropology |
|
|
This article is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. WikiProject Anthropology or the Anthropology Portal may be able to help recruit one. (November 2009) |
| Anthropology |
| Fields |
|
Biological anthropology |
| Methods and frameworks |
| Key concepts |
| Areas and subfields |
| Related articles |
Cultural anthropology is one of four or five fields of anthropology (the holistic study of humanity). It is the branch of anthropology that examines culture as a meaningful scientific concept.
Cultural anthropologists study cultural variation among humans, collect observations, usually through participant observation called fieldwork and examine the impact of global economic and political processes on local cultural realities. One of the earliest articulations of the anthropological meaning of the term "culture" came from Sir Edward Tylor who writes on the first page of his 1897 book: “Culture, or civilization, taken in its broad, ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.”[1] The term "civilization" later gave way to definitions by V. Gordon Childe, with culture forming an umbrella term and civilization becoming a particular kind of culture.[2]
The anthropological concept of "culture" reflects in part a reaction against earlier Western discourses based on an opposition between "culture" and "nature", according to which some human beings lived in a "state of nature".[citation needed] Anthropologists have argued that culture is "human nature," and that all people have a capacity to classify experiences, encode classifications symbolically (i.e. in language), and teach such abstractions to others.
Since humans acquire culture through the learning processes of enculturation and socialization, people living in different places or different circumstances develop different cultures. Anthropologists have also pointed out that through culture people can adapt to their environment in non-genetic ways, so people living in different environments will often have different cultures. Much of anthropological theory has originated in an appreciation of and interest in the tension between the local (particular cultures) and the global (a universal human nature, or the web of connections between people in distinct places/circumstances).[citation needed]
The rise of cultural anthropology occurred within the context of the late 19th century, when questions regarding which cultures were "primitive" and which were "civilized" occupied the minds of not only Marx and Freud, but many others. Colonialism and its processes increasingly brought European thinkers in contact, directly or indirectly with "primitive others."[3] The relative status of various humans, some of whom had modern advanced cultures that included engines and telegraphs, while others lacked anything but face-to-face communication techniques and still lived a Paleolithic lifestyle, was of interest to the first generation of cultural anthropologists.
Parallel with the rise of cultural anthropology in the United States, social anthropology, in which sociality is the central concept and which focuses on the study of social statuses and roles, groups, institutions, and the relations among them, developed as an academic discipline in Britain. An umbrella term socio-cultural anthropology makes reference to both cultural and social anthropology traditions.[4]
Contents |
Modern cultural anthropology has its origins in, and developed in reaction to, 19th century "ethnology", which involves the organized comparison of human societies. Scholars like E.B. Tylor and J.G. Frazer in England worked mostly with materials collected by others – usually missionaries, traders, explorers, or colonial officials – this earned them their current sobriquet of "arm-chair anthropologists".
Ethnologists had a special interest in why people living in different parts of the world often had similar beliefs and practices. In addressing this question, ethnologists in the 19th century divided into two schools of thought. Some, like Grafton Elliot Smith, argued that different groups must somehow have learned from one another, however indirectly; in other words, they argued that cultural traits spread from one place to another, or "diffused".
Other ethnologists argued that different groups had the capability of creating similar beliefs and practices independently. Some of those who advocated "independent invention", like Lewis Henry Morgan, additionally supposed that similarities meant that different groups had passed through the same stages of cultural evolution (See also classical social evolutionism). Morgan, in particular, acknowledged that certain forms of society and culture could not possibly have arisen before others. For example, industrial farming could not have been invented before simple farming, and metallurgy could not have developed without previous non-smelting processes involving metals (such as simple ground collection or mining). Morgan, like other 19th century social evolutionists, believed there was a more or less orderly progression from the primitive to the civilized.
20th-century anthropologists largely reject the notion that all human societies must pass through the same stages in the same order, on the grounds that such a notion does not fit the empirical facts. Some 20th-century ethnologists, like Julian Steward, have instead argued that such similarities reflected similar adaptations to similar environments (see cultural evolution).
Others, such as Claude Lévi-Strauss (who was influenced both by American cultural anthropology and by French Durkheimian sociology), have argued that apparently similar patterns of development reflect fundamental similarities in the structure of human thought (see structuralism). By the mid-20th century, the number of examples of people skipping stages, such as going from hunter-gatherers to post-industrial service occupations in one generation, were so numerous that 19th-century evolutionism was effectively disproved.[5]
In the 20th century, most cultural (and social) anthropologists turned to the crafting of ethnographies. An ethnography is a piece of writing about a people, at a particular place and time. Typically, the anthropologist lives among people in another society for a considerable period of time, simultaneously participating in and observing the social and cultural life of the group.
Numerous other ethnographic techniques have resulted in ethnographic writing or details being preserved, as cultural anthropologists also curate materials, spend long hours in libraries, churches and schools poring over records, investigate graveyards, and decipher ancient scripts. A typical ethnography will also include information about physical geography, climate and habitat. It is meant to be a holistic piece of writing about the people in question, and today often includes the longest possible timeline of past events that the ethnographer can obtain through primary and secondary research.
Bronisław Malinowski (who conducted fieldwork in the Trobriand Islands and taught in England) developed this method, and Franz Boas (who conducted fieldwork in Baffin Island and taught in the United States) promoted it. Boas's students drew on his conception of culture and cultural relativism to develop cultural anthropology in the United States. Simultaneously, Malinowski and A.R. Radcliffe Brown´s students were developing social anthropology in the United Kingdom. Whereas cultural anthropology focused on symbols and values, social anthropology focused on social groups and institutions. Today socio-cultural anthropologists attend to all these elements.
Although 19th-century ethnologists saw "diffusion" and "independent invention" as mutually exclusive and competing theories, most ethnographers quickly reached a consensus that both processes occur, and that both can plausibly account for cross-cultural similarities. But these ethnographers also pointed out the superficiality of many such similarities. They noted that even traits that spread through diffusion often were given different meanings and function from one society to another.
Accordingly, these anthropologists showed less interest in comparing cultures, generalizing about human nature, or discovering universal laws of cultural development, than in understanding particular cultures in those cultures' own terms. Such ethnographers and their students promoted the idea of "cultural relativism", the view that one can only understand another person's beliefs and behaviors in the context of the culture in which he or she lived or lives.
In the early 20th century, socio-cultural anthropology developed in different forms in Europe and in the United States. European "social anthropologists" focused on observed social behaviors and on "social structure", that is, on relationships among social roles (e.g. husband and wife, or parent and child) and social institutions (e.g. religion, economy, and politics).
American "cultural anthropologists" focused on the ways people expressed their view of themselves and their world, especially in symbolic forms, such as art and myths. These two approaches frequently converged and generally complemented one another. For example, kinship and leadership function both as symbolic systems and as social institutions. Today almost all socio-cultural anthropologists refer to the work of both sets of predecessors, and have an equal interest in what people do and in what people say.
Ethnography dominates socio-cultural anthropology. Nevertheless, many contemporary socio-cultural anthropologists have rejected earlier models of ethnography as treating local cultures as bounded and isolated. These anthropologists continue to concern themselves with the distinct ways people in different locales experience and understand their lives, but they often argue that one cannot understand these particular ways of life solely from a local perspective; they instead combine a focus on the local with an effort to grasp larger political, economic, and cultural frameworks that impact local lived realities. Notable proponents of this approach include Arjun Appadurai, James Clifford, George Marcus, Sidney Mintz, Michael Taussig and Eric Wolf.
A growing trend in anthropological research and analysis is the use of multi-sited ethnography, discussed in George Marcus's article, "Ethnography In/Of the World System: the Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography"]. Looking at culture as embedded in macro-constructions of a global social order, multi-sited ethnography uses traditional methodology in various locations both spatially and temporally. Through this methodology, greater insight can be gained when examining the impact of world-systems on local and global communities.
Also emerging in multi-sited ethnography are greater interdisciplinary approaches to fieldwork, bringing in methods from cultural studies, media studies, science and technology studies, and others. In multi-sited ethnography, research tracks a subject across spatial and temporal boundaries. For example, a multi-sited ethnography may follow a "thing," such as a particular commodity, as it is transported through the networks of global capitalism.
Multi-sited ethnography may also follow ethnic groups in diaspora, stories or rumours that appear in multiple locations and in multiple time periods, metaphors that appear in multiple ethnographic locations, or the biographies of individual people or groups as they move through space and time. It may also follow conflicts that transcend boundaries. An example of multi-sited ethnography is Nancy Scheper-Hughes's work on the international black market for the trade of human organs. In this research, she follows organs as they are transferred through various legal and illegal networks of capitalism, as well as the rumours and urban legends that circulate in impoverished communities about child kidnapping and organ theft.
Sociocultural anthropologists have increasingly turned their investigative eye on to "Western" culture. For example, Philippe Bourgois won the Margaret Mead Award in 1997 for In Search of Respect, a study of the entrepreneurs in a Harlem crack-den. Also growing more popular are ethnographies of professional communities, such as laboratory researchers, Wall Street investors, law firms, or information technology (IT) computer employees.[6]
Sociologists' work has a greater focus on the behavior of the group, and thus examines such phenomena as interactions and exchanges at the micro-level, group dynamics and group development, and crowds at the macro-level. Sociologists are interested in the individual and group, but generally within the context of larger social structures and processes, such as social roles, race, class, gender, ethnicity, and socialization. They use a combination of qualitative research designs and quantitative methods(less used in Social Anthropology), such as procedures for sampling and surveys. Sociologists in this area are interested in a variety of demographic, social, and cultural phenomena. Some of their major research areas are social inequality, group dynamics, social change, socialization, social identity, and symbolic interactionism. Traditionally, Social/Cultural Anthropology studied human societies in non-industrial settings in other countries and Sociology studied the industrialized societies in the western countries. Now Social/Cultural Anthropology and Sociology have expanded into studying more variety of societies in other countries and in the western countries that they both have had a major convergence with each other. Although Sociology is not part of the field in Anthropology, the overlaps with Social/Cultural Anthropology are more significant than most of the other Social Sciences.
| Wikibooks has a book on the topic of |
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
| social anthropology (in archaeology) | |
| ethnology (philosophy) | |
| Henri Thèodore Fischer (parapsychology) |
| Cultural anthropology- What circumstances lead to the development of anthropology? | |
| In anthropology what are cultural restraints? | |
| What is expressive culture in anthropology? |
Copyrights:
![]() | Dictionary. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2007, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. © 2006 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Dental Dictionary. Mosby's Dental Dictionary. Copyright © 2004 by Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Encyclopedia of Public Health. Encyclopedia of Public Health. Copyright © 2002 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Archaeology Dictionary. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Archaeology. Copyright © 2002, 2003 by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Cultural anthropology". Read more |
Mentioned in