During the 20th century, anthropology has developed following influential people such as Boas. The four subfields existed for a long time as separate fields, but with the direction of examining human culture within the United States, it became important to be holistic. Each subfield contributed greatly as no one field can study the entire breadth or depth of culture and behavior. However, there are forces that are contributing to each field going in its own direction that can lead to a break-up in the future. First, the emphasis on the profession have lead others to concentrate and specialized in their own perspective. Each field also has an increased difficulty to be well versed in all four subfields when there are alliances to other disciplines that relate more specifically to their specialization. Finally, there always seems to be a divide between the science and humanities which has lead to a constant tension within anthropology, which sits on the border.
One reason for the creation of the four-field approach in anthropology is the study of Native Americans, which were seen as disappearing (Darnell 2002:1). John Powell, as an example, has been studying Native Americans through ethnological and linguistic means, and later created a Division of Mound Exploration (Patterson 2001:37, 39). Powell was also influenced by Spencer’s and Darwin’s evolutionism as he studied Native Americans, and then influenced a large part of professional anthropology through publications of field investigations and researchers from different fields (Patterson 2001:40). However, the actual development of anthropology as a four field approach comes during Boas’s time and when anthropology became a profession.
Anthropology became a professio...
... middle of paper ...
..., Bloomington.
Little, Michael A.
2010 Franz Boas’s Place in American Physical Anthropology and Its Institutions. In Histories of American Physical Anthropology in the Twentieth Century, edited by Michael Little and Kenneth Kennedy. Lexington Books, Lanham, MD.
Little, Michael A., and Kenneth A.R. Kennedy
2010 Introduction to the History of American Physical Anthropology. In Histories of American Physical Anthropology in the Twentieth Century, edited by Michael Little and Kenneth Kennedy. Lexington Books, Lanham, MD.
Moore, Jerry
2012 Visions of Culture: An Introduction to Anthropological Theories and Theorists. 4th ed. Altamira Press, Lanham, MD.
Patterson, Thomas
2001 A Social History of Anthropology in the United States. Berg, Oxford.
Trigger, Bruce
2006 A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Journalist John G. Neihardt’s Black Elk Speaks is one of the most famous texts on the Sioux culture. However, when considering journalism and anthropology, one may realize that Neihardt’s work was much more journalistic than anthropological. When studying culture, an anthropologist would do it holistically. Rather than only looking at individual components of culture, anthropologists must consider every piece of a society to fully understand it. Additionally, an anthropologist would use the ethnographic method. This technique is conducted through fieldwork and requires a person to become immersed into the culture as an active participant. To effectively learn about a new culture, the person must have an open mind by setting aside all of their
Joseph-Marie Degerando was a revolutionary, French philosopher who transcribed one of the original guidelines for the study of anthropology in the year 1800 titled, I: Societe des Observateurs de l’Homme in French, and translated into English as, The Observations of Savage Peoples. According to the author of the introduction and translator of his work into English, F. C. T. Moore, Degerando’s guidelines were a “capital work of anthropology” (Moore, U of CA Press. p. 2). Whether Degerando provided the most accurate guidelines for the study of humans is argued; however, his work was certainly influential as it served as a foundation for the science of anthropology. In fact, Moore declares there are consistent similarities between the anthropological recommendations of Degerando and those practiced by modern day anthropologists (Moore, U of CA Press. p. 4-5).
Lewis Henry Morgan has been credited as being the founder of American cultural anthropology or more broadly as the father of “American Anthropology.” Many anthropologists at the time were called “arm-chair” academics, meaning that they studied anthropology from a distance while sitting in chairs, reading and thinking; Morgan was not an “arm-chair” anthropologist. He went out into the field to learn about other cultures. As noted by Kinton, Jacob Bachofen and John McLennan influenced Morgan (1974:4).
Park, M.A. (2008). Introducing anthropology: An integrated approach, with PowerWeb, 4th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978–0-07-340525-4
Embarking on a journey of anthropological fieldwork will undoubtedly include a plethora of setbacks. At its foundation, fieldwork requires developing rapport with the native people in order to gain access of genuine knowledge pertaining to the specific culture being studied. Subsequently, social communication between the researcher and the native people is a key component to the entire process; yet simultaneously it is a root of the many problems a researcher can encounter while in the field. It is no secret that the cultural background of the researcher can often highly contrast the culture he or she enters during fieldwork. This initial cultural adaptation one must undergo while doing anthropological fieldwork is what many in the realm describe as culture shock.
...hat is considered appropriate in one part of the world may not be acceptable in other parts of the world. This indigenous multiplicity of cultures across the globe is probably what makes Anthropology an enriching subject. (Flesche, 1912)
Lewis, Herbert S. (2001). Boas, Darwin, Science, and Anthropology. Current Anthropology Vol. 42, No. 3, June 2001 . The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research.
In 1972, Jack Kelso complained that physical anthropologists were not reaping the boon of the postwar funding explosion in the United States because they looked too much like biologists to the social scientists and too much like social scientists to the biologists (Kelso 1972). Echoing his concerns, a 2003 special issue of American Anthropologist featured stories by bio...
The American Anthropological Association 's (AAA) aim is to offer guidelines and promote education and discussion. American anthropologists do this often by speaking and interacting with individuals living and experiencing the culture. Truly understanding, learning, and becoming accustomed to a new cultural environment takes a significantly long period of time, perhaps even years of exposure to the culture in order to truly understand traditions, morals, and customs. For instance in the Shostak`s study on the !Kung people, it was important for the researchers to say words correctly, at appropriate times, and in a culturally accepted manner, in addition, in order to interview individuals, specifically women, the anthropologist would ask one to “enter work” with her and they would talk for an hour or a day, or over a long period of time, perhaps two weeks. When studying another culture, American anthropologists include host country colleagues in their research planning and when requesting funding, establish true collaborative relationships, include host country colleagues in dissemination, including publication, and they also ensure that something is given back to the host. When studying other countries, the process is done carefully and thoughtfully, in order to end the study with new information on a culture and to establish new connections
Welsch, Robert L, and Kirk M Endicott. “Should Cultural Anthropology Model itself on the Natural Science.” Taking sides clashing views on controversial issues in cultural anthropology. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. Print.
With the end of colonialism and the emergence of a seemingly new world order, there raised a demand that research be useful and relevant, indicating that knowledge for its own sake was insufficient. As a result of this, what emerged was a new focus on 'development' and 'modernization' in the form of postmodernism. In these changing times, anthropology has come into contact with a variety of evolving concepts, including hybridity, montage, fluidity, and deconstruction. The question remains, how these concepts reflect the social, cultural and political changes that are occurring in study of anthropology today.
Credibility- the anthropology contributes a lot it make us understand human issues and to differences that it brings to the many different fields of application which rely on its validity, reliability and relevancy (Hill 2012:14)
The idea of using an holistic approach in Anthropology is not only demonstrated throughout these works, but the downfalls of failing to use holism is shown as well. When discussing perspective, the standpoint of the individual and the relationship he or she has with the subject or area of study is of vital importance. Any pre-conceived notions one has entering into a study can affect the process and validity of gathering information in the form of facts. In the tale, the men were unable to gather reliable information because they had already made up their minds about what the elephant looked and acted like. Anderson, however, was able to observe from both a participant standpoint and an onlookers point of view when collecting information regarding her various cultures of study. Ones culture provides a frame of reference that places limitations on the way people of varying cultures look at one another (Tversky and Kahneman). If one has only knowledge and experience of their native culture, they will have difficulty comprehending the world around them
Since humans have come together, there has been culture, and while we continue to live there will continue to be culture. Culture is a thing that we as humans all have in common, but our culture is also what keeps us apart. Anthropology is the study of humans, how we work, what are our rituals, the study of our past. The anthropological perspective is how one must look at culture or at another society to observe it without bias and without judgement. There are four important parts to observing through the anthropological perspective the first being the concept of culture, holistic perspective, comparative perspective, and culture relativism. Through the study of cultural anthropology one, will understand how societies as people are the same and how they are different. The same things that make societies different make them the same. It is also important to understand why and how societies work. The anthological perspective is an important part of viewing cultures.
Boas, F. (1930). Anthropology. In, Seligman, E. R. A. ed., Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences. Macmillan: New York.