Human behavior is complex and affected by a variety of different influences. One generally turns to psychology or sociology when searching for answers to questions on human behavior. However, culture is also an essential component of human thoughts and actions. This revolutionary outlook led to the evolution of anthropology from a field based on conjecture to a field based on ethnographic fieldwork. Anthropologists like Franz Boas discovered that studying foreign cultures could only be done successfully by immersion and that this research technique was actually very enlightening to the dynamics of human behavior. This is the basis for anthropological empiricism, an essential piece of modern anthropology. In the film Franz Boas: The Shackles …show more content…
However, the purpose of Boas’ journey was not to study anthropology. Boas was primarily concerned with constructing maps of Eskimo territory; cultural dynamics were still only a budding interest of his. Boas’ primary area of interest was Baffin Island, a large island in the Canadian province of Nunavut that had not been studied greatly by other geographers before Boas’ arrival. Boas learned the Inuit language in order to converse with the native people, something that helped him analyze Eskimo culture on a deep level. By discussing the land’s topography with the Inuit, Boas discovered that the native people had excellent spatial awareness and were very good with directions (Dakowski and Singer). Their abilities were remarkable relative to those of most North Americans and Europeans. This piqued Boas’ interest in examining other aspects of Inuit culture. He began to question one of the chief anthropological outlooks of his time, scientific racism. Boas stated that, “I often ask myself what advantages our good society possesses over that of the savages and find the more I see of their customs that we have no right to look down upon them. We have no right to blame them for their forms and superstitions which may seem ridiculous to us. We highly educated people are much worse, relatively speaking.” (Dakowski and Singer) This discovery coupled with Boas’ growing influence in the field of anthropological eventually led to the rise of cultural relativism and the fall of scientific
For the purposes of this discussion we will focus on the lives of the Inuit. The Inuit are a group of people often mischaracterized as Eskimos. They lived in the area of central and northeastern Canada and Greenland. There has been much discussion of the orignination of this group of people but the most recognized theory is that they crossed from northern Asia across thin bridge of land over the Bering Strait sometime around 6000-2000 BC. Many people mistakenly think that the Inuit and Native Americans are one in the same. It seems that the Inuit most likely came from Asia more likely than the Native Americans. Although both probably came to the Americas through the Bering Strait. Biological, cultural and dialect differences show the different origin. Much of this theory is supported due to the close resemblance of the Inuit to the Mongoloid races of Eastern Asia. Because of the harsh land and climate of the Arctic, this area was probably one of the last regions to be inhabited making the Inuit on of the earth’s younger cultures.
Across Canada and the United States there are many First Nations languages which are a part of the Algonquian language family, all of which with varying states of health. Although these languages share many characteristics of the Algonquian language family, the cultures, systems of beliefs, and geographic location of their respective Nations differentiate them. In being shaped by the landscape, cultures, and spirituality of the First Nations, the language brings the speakers closer to their land and traditions while reaffirming their identity as First Peoples. Using the Blackfoot Nation to further explore this concept, this paper will show that while language threads together First Nations culture, spirituality, traditions and land, as well as their identity, each of these essential components also maintain and revitalize the language.
Cultural Anthropology: The Human Challenge, 14th Edition William A. Havilland; Harald E. L. Prins; Bunny McBride; Dana Walrath Published by Wadsworth, Cengage Learning (2014)
... argues that even though our mission is to understand the culture we our studying one cannot make final assumptions about a culture. One has to reflex on the fact that a culture is always changing and that our preparation of our discipline is not often the method one uses in fieldwork.
Ethnography is typically defined as research designed to explore cultural phenomenon that take place in another part of society or even the world. This requires a researcher to analyze similarities and differences between cultures through a perspective that is not judgmental, but more so open to new concepts that aren’t necessarily normal to their own culture. For my research, I decided to interview a friend of mine who is culturally different when compared to myself. Before beginning my interview I created a hypothesis, which I hoped to prove through my findings. Initially, I believed that most children, who are raised within a specific’s culture influence, tend to absorb the lifestyle and mindsets of their parents. Almost similar to the quote “The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.” By growing up within a specific culture’s influence, a child will grasp what they learned from their parents and apply it to their own lives.
Ruth Benedict’s anthropological book, Patterns of Culture explores the dualism of culture and personality. Benedict studies different cultures such as the Zuni tribe and the Dobu Indians. Each culture she finds is so different and distinctive in relation to the norm of our society. Each difference is what makes it unique. Benedict compares the likenesses of culture and individuality, “A culture, like an individual, is a more or less consistent pattern of thought or action” (46), but note, they are not the same by use of the word, “like.” Benedict is saying that figuratively, cultures are like personalities. Culture and individuality are intertwined and dependent upon each other for survival.
The Inuit were people who lived in the Arctic such as Alaska, Northern Canada and Greenland. They can also be called Eskimos. The word Inuit refers to “real people of the north” and from this distinction as well as their way of living which I observed at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, I conclude that these people were a race of people with a strong spirit for life in general as well as each other. Their social customs included storytelling, dancing, drum playing, crafts, celebrations, games, hunting and survival skills. They based their social structure on the land, their families, and traditions that were passed on through generations.
Anthropologists conduct fieldwork by studying people, their behaviours, and their culture. This is done in the field by actively striving to interpret and understand the world from the perspective of those studied (Powdermaker, 1968, Keesing 1981). Anthropological participant-observation includes a “deep immersion into the life of a people” (Keesing, 1981 p.16) with an aim to produce an ethnography that accurately details the experience in a holistic and valuable style (Powdermaker, 1968, Keesing 1981). Generally, full participation in a culture is thought to reduce the interference the researcher has on the behaviour of the informants (Seymour- Smith, 1986). Participant-observation is still widely used by anthropologists as it offers deeply insightful real world accounts which are difficult to achieve using other methods (Seymour-Smith, 1986, Li,
In the book titled Around the World in 30 Years, Barbara Gallatin Anderson’s makes a precise and convincing argument regarding the acts of being a cultural anthropologist. Her humor, attention to detail, and familiar analogies really allow for a wholesome and educating experience for the reader. Her credible sources and uniform writing structure benefits the information. Simply, the book represents an insider’s look into the life of a cultural anthropologist who is getting the insider’s look to the lives of everybody
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
McKinley, Elizabeth. “Locating The Global: Culture, Language And Science Education For Indigenous Students. ”International Journal of Science Education 27.2 (2005): 227-241. Academic Search Premier. Web.19 Apr. 2012.
who led the founding of the Berliner Gesellshaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte (Berlin Society of Anthropology, Ethnology and Prehistory), his academic formation gave Boas a strong liberal tradition and an attitude towards race, which rejected the theories that recognized the existence of racial hierarchies based on cultural differences (Stocking, 1974). In 1883, as part of his training at the University of Heidelberg, Boas set out on his first expedition with the two gains of mapping the Canadian Arctic coastline and indulging his new interest in culture, which as a result of the journey, became interest in finding what determines human behaviour. "A year of life spent as an Eskimo among Eskimos", Boas (1938, p. 202) said, "had a profound influence upon the development of my views, […] because it led me away from my former interests and towards the desire to understand what determines the behaviour of human beings." His study of indigenous people, of their appearance, their language and traditions, allowed him to overcome the concept...
The IK embedded in the stories reveal how such knowledge is instrumental in ushering in and mitigating ecological catastrophe (Woollett, 2007). Cajete (2000) observes that “ultimately, the goal of Indigenous education is to perpetuate a way of life through the generations and through time. The purpose of all education is to instruct the next generation about what is valued and important to a society” (p. 184). In Canada, Native schools have begun to emerge where Native people (of particular tribal groups) conduct education for children in their own languages and develop a curriculum which is based on reclaiming traditional knowledges and worldviews, for example, the importance of land and environment and what land and environment means to Aboriginal
Franz Boas played a key role in the institutionalization of anthropology in both of these areas as he was a founding member of the AAA and one of Columbia’s first instructors in anthropology; he used his positions at the American Museum of Natural History and Columbia University to train a generation of anthropologists. Boas, by 1932, had instructed a sizeable number of people from these marginalized groups, who were lumped together as savages or inferior races. We must remember however, as Dr. Paterson points out, that, “Anthropology was professionalized during a period characterized by intense discrimination against people of color, immigrants, women, and poor folks” (65). Works Cited Boas, Franz.
...y is partly explainable by different influences from outside philosophy. The juxtaposition and comparison of, for instance, the views of Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Hume, Kant, Marx and Nietzsche on human nature should make us despair of finding a philosophical essence of anthropological views. The distinct contribution that philosophy as a discipline can make to the understanding of humans is not so much special content or even a method as its ethos of valuing critical thinking and integration of human knowledge. Philosophical anthropology, as a special area of a unique discipline, should be held suspect. There only is a dimension to each inquiry where many, if not all, of the questions philosophers raise are significant. The mission of philosophy is to make all human inquiries, including the anthropological, maximally reflective in the given cultural situation.