Transcending Place and Time in Mirror for Man
In the given passage from Mirror for Man, Clyde Kluckhorn explains the similarities and differences between cultures by first defining the anthropological concept of "culture" and then explaining his definition.
The definition Kluckhorn gives relies heavily on common sense. Culture is:
"the total life way of a people, the social legacy individuals acquire from their group. Or culture can be regarded as that part of the environment that is the creation of human beings."
By giving us this definition, Kluckhorn immediately deletes any chance of mininterpreting the word and concept of culture.
Kluckhorn starts his explanation of this definition by simplifying the concept. He says that a person's acts cannot be explained merely in terms of biology, the life experiences of that person, and/or the immediate situation. Instead "the past experience of other people in the form of culture enters into almost every event". It is not we who determine our culture, but our ancestors who determined for us.
Kluckhorn is saying that who we are -- our culture -- is based on how the people who have the responsibility of raising us were raised by their role models, who were influenced by their role models, and so on.
To illustrate his point, Kluckhorn gives examples of times when the culture someone was raised in plays a major role in determining how the person will react in a given situation -- often how they will react to an aspect of another culture. The examples all showed that one's own culture is where one feels safest. Kluckhorn's illustrations of how people react negatively to other cultures seems to prove the axiom that man's biggest fear is of change.
Despite the almost overwhelming influences of culture, there is still human nature to consider. Basically, all human being are the same. All are similar in biology and in that they must observe the physical laws of nature. Yet the differences between cultures stem from the once original, individual ways of dealing with these problems. Man and his problems are universly the same, but it is his dealing with these problems that is different, and these dealings are determined by the predecessors of each culture. This is the very essence of how Kluckhorn explains the anthropological differences and similarities between cultures.
As for my views, I agree with Professor Kluckhorn wholeheartedly although all of my experience has been in the American culture with various subcultures.
In the Red Badge of Courage, the protagonist Henry, is a young boy who yearns to be a Great War hero, even though he has never experienced war himself. Anxious for battle, Henry wonders if he truly is courageous, and stories of soldiers running make him uncomfortable. He struggles with his fantasies of courage and glory, and the truth that he is about to experience. He ends up running away in his second battle.
In the Historical fiction, “The Red Badge of Courage”, written by Stephen Crane; a young man try’s to find courage in himself in the time of war. After watching your commander die in war, would you stay and fight or return home and be a coward? Enlisting Himself into war Henry, to be more than the common man to prove worthyness and bravery. With the sergeant dead will Henry lead his men to victory, or withdraw his men in war. Not being the only are faced with the decision Jim and Wilson Henry’s platoons will have the same decision.
The Red Badge of Courage takes place during the Civil war and begins with a soldier named Jim Conklin returning back to his regiment to inform them that they might go into battle any day now. The main character of the story Henry Fleming who was recently recruited in the 304th regiment begins to worry about how brave he really is since he has never really been in battle before. The main reason he joined the army was for the honor and glory that came after the battle but he never really analyzed what it took to gain all the glory and honor that he wanted to obtain.
“The Red Badge of Courage.” Novels for Students, Ed. Marie Rose Napierkowski. Vol. 4. Detroit: Gale, 1998. 253-264. Print.
The Story “A Red Badge of Courage” is set at the time of the Civil War in America. Young Henry Fleming has always wanted to enlist, but his mother has warned him, and would state a hundred ways on why he would be more helpful on his family’s farm than on the field of battle for his country. When Henry makes the executive decision to enlist, his mother is torn. He wears his blue uniform proudly and has a lot of confidence until he arrives at the battlefield.
A newly enlisted rookie by the name of Henry Fleming battles his own wits as well as the attacking Confederate army in the fictional novel, The Red Badge of Courage by Stephen Crane. Tormented by doubts of his own bravery, his fears come true, and he flees from battle. He runs from the scene only to be taken away to a day of weariness and struggles whilst making it back to camp. As the story progresses, he learns from his mistakes, grows out of his fears, and later turns out to be one of the bravest soldiers of all. In The Red Badge of Courage, by Stephen Crane, Henry Fleming is determined, curious, and brave although first fearful.
Culture has been defined numerous ways throughout history. Throughout chapter three of, You May Ask Yourself, by Dalton Conley, the term “culture” is defined and supported numerous times by various groups of people. One may say that culture can be defined as a set of beliefs (excluding instinctual ones), traditions, and practices; however not all groups of people believe culture has the same set of values.
Kluckhohn explains the differences and similarities among people of the world as culture. Culture, in this instance, spans a variety of areas. To begin with, culture is the way a person was raised. In addition, it's the values a person was taught. Finally, culture is related to man's biological needs. Habits that a person is taught as a youngster will influence the rest of his life.
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.
Testing a theory typically means attempting to disprove the theory, and Popper would argue this is the only way to establish it as empirical or scientific. The history of science shows that theories are constantly being disproved and re-written, as we look back at theories such as the earth being the center of the universe, which was accepted as scientific knowledge at the time. The same process can be seen for nearly every piece of scientific knowledge. Popper would say this is an example of the unstable bedrock of science, with current theory simply being the highest point, but still made of this metaphorical swamp of human
Theories should be tested, and have efficient evidence in order to be considered as scientific. Isaac Newton’s prism experiment was a critical experiment in the physics community where Newton researched and tested white light to isolate the explain that white light was made of several colours of light.
As we have established, for a theory to be classed as scientific by Popper, it must be able to be falsified. This scientific theory would rule out something that can be expressed in a basic statement. An example of this would be the “theory that all swans are white, is incompatible with the basic statement, ‘[Look], a black swan’”. Popper calls this basic statement a potential falsifier (Newton-Smith, 1981, p49). Newton-Smith (1981, pp70-71) claims that no scientific hypotheses actually contain basic statements, he uses the example of Newtonian mechanics and their consequences, and that among these predictions we will not find any basic statements. To develop testable predictions the initial conditions and auxiliary hypotheses must be defined. If we find that after our test, the prediction and result do not match, has the theory been falsified? In fact, this is viewed as an anomaly, but does this anomaly prove the theory to be false? The short answer is no. There could be a number of reasons for an anomaly to be present in the
This is a result of a person’s cognitive limitations and technology’s limitations. It is for this reason, though, that it is not necessary of science to be beyond any possible doubt. That is not the purpose of it. As people further pursue their interests in characterizing the natural world, they build upon each other. Scientific inquiry is subject to change, yet it still amounts to knowledge. One should not be skeptical in this respect. If a theory is disproved, it is still a fact in the sense that it is not the case anymore. All experimentation whether wrong or right is knowledge. This is what scientists do in the sense of “building upon” one another; it amounts to progress. People are able to judge whether or not specific investigations into matters of fact are legitimate. Because people can evaluate their experiences (i.e. pick out what is truly characteristic of the external world on the basis of justified empirical inquiry), people can learn from their inquiry into matters of
As Kluckhohn describes, the technical term of culture has a broader meaning to the anthropologist than the "humble cooking pot", and the "people of culture." He implies that the anthropologist needs to be concerned with all aspects and biological conditions involved that have shaped a society. Humans can be easily understood just by studying their surroundings, and as Kluckhohn has stated, "they can also be easily predicted by knowing a people's design for living."
He urged that scientific theories could not be validated by confirming experiments, but rather could only be disproved by falsifying hypotheses. For example, if one were to hypothesize that it does not rain in Atlanta, and then if it were then to rain in Atlanta, the hypothesis would be deductively proved false. Conversely, a complete year or two without rain would not validate the hypothesis. Doctor Popper was strongly against a non-falsifiable deductive way of thinking (or what Simkin refers to as justificationism in his book Popper’s Views on Natural and Social Science) because of the aforementioned flaw with deductive reasoning: it is premised on validity, not truth. For Popper, as well as many other philosophers and scientists, the advancement of knowledge is dependent on the suggestion of new, probable ideas, not on bastardized ones derived from trite combinations of truth. According to Simkin, “Popper is against all forms of justificationism. They all involve a logical regress, as each justifying statement can be challenged, and the challenge has to be met by providing a justification for that statement itself” (Simkin 34). The reason that Popper was so against the practice of justificationism was that a scientist could exploit his data to confirm the hypothesis he