Anthropology according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary is defined as “the study of human beings and their ancestors through time and space and in relation to physical character, environmental and social relations, and culture.” In essence, anthropology is a theory outlining the origin and nature of the human race as well as how they adapted to various environments accompanied by various cultural discrepancies. However, recently there has been a lingering debate about whether or not anthropology is considered a science. In fact, this argument has become such a hot topic that both the New York Times and Gawker have covered them in extensive detail. Alternatively, there are individuals that regard anthropology as an ideology which promotes beliefs …show more content…
Conversely, objectivity in anthropology is nearly impossible for the sole reason that anthropologists are socialized human beings. Thus, they have deep-rooted values such as morals, values, or even their unique personalities which hinder their ability to be objective primarily because they themselves have difficulties dropping their viewpoints. In turn, leading to conflicting interpretations of said event given that each anthropologist is distinctive in what they believe as a result of their upbringing. In an article published on Thursday November 20, 2008, the need for objectivity would require some self-identification. A quotation that perfectly embodies this concept states that “Between the ostensibly diverging objectives of self-realization and self-transcendence lies a common prerequisite task of self-identification". (Dyck, p.36) Basically, what this quotation emphasizes is that even though self-realization and self-transcendence are two completely different concepts both need to meet the principles associated with self-identification. In brief, objectivity is an unattainable goal for anthropologists due to the fact that they each have specific traits and personas which obstruct their research. As a result, this may create a bias on a topic in which they may feel passionately
In the field of academia, ethnographic studies are often overlooked as a serious source and reviewed as literature for the mass populace. Because of the often common language, fluid writing styles, format, and production of typical ethnographies, it is much more appealing and attainable to popular culture than the research within a scholarly journal or anthology. Although, perhaps instead of deeming ethnographic work unworthy of a scholarly title due to the appeal it possess, historians should relish in this relativity new form of research for its popularity. Ethnographic studies provide readers with a rare and untarnished micro historic view of the customs of a particular culture or individuals within said culture. Opposing most academia, these studies can sometimes be void in political agenda and personal biases, providing the audience with more objective material. Ethnographies often allow readers to see private and intimate moments within the milieu of the subject which is not often reserved for public life, which is the typically sphere of scholarly study; because of this tendency, individuals and groups which lack a strong public voice are frequently the foci of ethnographic studies. Throughout history women have often been the victims of such marginalization, with a recent focus on Eastern and Islamic women. Considering the previous, Muslim women and gender have been the center of contemporary ethnographic studies, giving a voice to non-Westernized Muslim women and providing a natural research of gender relations with little bias or political agenda.
In order to understand Forensic Anthropology we must break it down into the components. According to Oxford American Dictionary the term Forensic is significant to the use of scientific methods to investigate a crime. Anthropology is defined by Oxford American Dictionary as the study of societies, cultures, and human origins. The combination of both, Forensic and Anthropology, consists of applying the principles which are introduced by Anthropologists to solving a crime. Forensic Anthropology is currently a small field but is expected to grow in the upcoming years due how it is being portrayed in books, television shows, classes, and many other resources. The usage of this field is becoming crucial because of how gruesome the crimes being committed by criminals are becoming. Although Forensic Anthropology is currently a small field it requires a lot of education, carries plenty of job responsibilities, and continues to aid in the solving of crimes.
...the anthropological and other social sciences the basis for forming non-biased studies results that can be respectfully referenced and relied upon for their integrity.
Ethnography is a research method used to explore different cultures from a personal view. Many anthropologists have sought to use ethnography as their main study method because of its specificity and opportunity to get hands on. Those that participate in ethnographies are expected to accurately record detailed accounts of the society in which they are staying, but at the same time maintain a critical distance.
Participant observation is a method of collecting information and data about a culture and is carried out by the researcher immersing themselves in the culture they observing. The researcher becomes known in the community, getting to know and understand the culture in a more intimate and detailed way than would be possible from any other approach. This is done by observing and participating in the community’s daily activities. The method is so effective because the researcher is able to directly approach the people in the community in a natural context as opposed to taking the participant out of their environment. The aim of participant observation is to gain an understanding the subject’s life from their perspective, with the purpose of collecting more detailed information about a community’s habits, opinions, relationships and issues.
Race and Ethnicity According to Anthropologists Examining the ideas and beliefs within ones own cultural context is central to the study of Anthropology. Issues of Race and Ethnicity dominate the academic discourses of various disciplines including the field of Anthropology. Race and Ethnicity are controversial terms that are defined and used by people in many different ways. This essay shall explore the ways in which Anthropologists make a distinction between race and ethnicity and how these distinctions serve as frames for cross-cultural comparison and analysis. It is important to accurately define these coined terms before one is able to make accurate comparisons and distinctions between them, and their relation to the concept of culture.
Cultural anthropology involves exploring social and cultural variations of humans. Linguistic anthropology studies how language shapes communication. Archaeology is the study of earlier cultures by analyzing and interpreting material remains. Biological anthropology includes topics such as genetics, evolution, and growth and development. Cultural anthropology can give a more in depth perspective on how different cultures, religions, and nations interact with their children.
Culture is beautifully complex. Cultural practices naturally, therefore, are made up of intricate implicit and explicit thoughts and behaviours. Participant-observation is at the centre of anthropological research because it allows the anthropologist to experience rather than read. Bronislaw Malinowski, regarded as the father of participant-observation, created a scientific framework for how research could be conducted in the field. This framework has evolved as anthropology has changed over the ages. In this essay, I will compare and contrast the central premises of Malinowski’s 1922 book Argonauts of the Western Pacific and a contemporary anthropologist Nancy Kalow’s article Living Dolls which reflects on the participant-observation she carried
Physical anthropology “is in large part, human biology seen from an evolutionary perspective” (Jurmaln, Kilgore & Trevathan, 2011). By this statement, I believe the authors mean that physical anthropology studies human biology from an evolutionary viewpoint rather than a scientific or medical viewpoint. Anthropology, as a broader science, is concerned with and studies human culture and the evolutionary aspects of human biology. Since culture affects human beings and human beings affect culture, the two are intertwined, and it therefore, makes sense to study them together.
Susan Lindee and Ricardo Santos’ goal was to understand the contexts of genesis and development of biological anthropology around the world from an international standpoint, focusing on engagement with living human populations. Their contributors, scholars in history of science, science studies, and anthropology, were guided by key questions about national histories, collections, and scientific field practice.
Anthropology is the study of humans through the ages. It aims to understand different cultures and practices that have existed from the origins of mankind as well. It differs from sociology in that it takes into account humans and cultures that no longer exist.
It analyzes similarities and differences in various cultures and societies. Culture is learned and affects our perception of the world throughout our life. Overtime, a sense of cultural superiority is formed amongst individuals who are constantly exposed to their own culture. Anthropology can help eliminate culturally based biases, also known as ethnocentrism. It is a common practice we all in engage in when evaluating other cultures, however, by practicing anthropology this allows us to learn about other cultures by placing themselves into the cultural environment allows us to learn the traditions and customs by experience. Marjorie Shostak`s study of the !Kung people revealed that they organized themselves differently than Western cultures, which included solving conflicts with discussion, communal behavior, and basic living traditions. Moreover, by interviewing and living in this cultural environment, Shostak was able to empathize with the !Kung people and she also considered that all humans share an emotional life, which is important when studying the history of our human
Prior to the 1990’s, the problem of scientific objectivity was a question many philosophers tried to grapple with. Initially, the Logical Positivist’s view of scientific objectivity was most popular. They held to the belief that science was overall objective because of the distinction between the “context of discovery” and “context of justification,” which still allowed for science to contain some subjective elements (Longino 172). Basically, Positivist’s allowed for subjective qualities, such as mental makeup of scientists and values scientist brought in to their scientific work, by stating that the initial formulation or “discovery” of hypothesis/theories included subjective qualities. However, these subjective characteristics were negated by the fact that when investigating theories scientists focused on comparing their hypothesis to observable consequences in an empirical and objective manor (“context of justification). Thus, this allowed the Positivist’s to “acknowledge the play of subjective factors in initial development of hypotheses and theories while guaranteeing that their acceptance [is] determined not by subjective preferences but by observed reality” (Longino 172). However, although this theory was popular for some period of time, a philosopher by the name of Helen Longino approached the problem of scientific objectivity in a different way. She believed that science was a social practice that involved the inevitable input of various subjective factors such as scientist’s values, beliefs, etc… when performing their work. However, she goes on to say that what made science objective was the process in which scientist performed their work. She essentially thought that if the process in which scientist gained knowledge wa...
Lorraine Datson and Peter Galison discuss pertinent issues concerned with objectivity in the modern world: how it is different from truth? Is it practically possible to acquire an objective view? What are the implications of seeking objectivity?
Anthropology. Through the study of human beings, anthropology enables the inheritance from past decades, centuries, eventually millenniums. “To understand the full sweep and complexity of cultures across all of human history, anthropology draws and builds upon knowledge from the social and biological sciences as well as the humanities and physical sciences” (What is Anthropology?,