Anthropology In Sociology

In what ways does anthropology facilitate a better understanding of cultural difference?

ANTHROPOLOGY is a relatively new discipline in the academic field of social science; concerning itself with the examination of humankind and the comparative study of cultures and societies within our race. Eriksen defines the parameters of anthropological disciplines in juxtaposition to the similar study of sociology in his book 'Small places, Large issues’ (Pluto press 2001).

“Anthropology has traditionally distinguished itself from sociology through the great emphasis placed on participant observation and fieldwork…

Sociology has concentrated on understanding, criticising and managing modern societies, whereas the historical task of anthropology

Borne of a fundamental desire for survival; generally we follow the rules of conduct in our society with the desire for inclusion, acceptance and ultimately protection.

Culture and correctness

Birds of a feather do indeed flock together, yet it is when this pattern is disturbed or when we note that the behaviours of another group within our society are estranged from our own that we are forced to examine the reasons and rational behind the unfamiliar activity.

The American anthropologist, Franz Boaz, attempted to explain this human intrigue through reference to the ideology of cultural relativism, a notion which was later to become a key principle in the field of anthropology. In 1887 Boaz wrote :

"...civilization is not something absolute, but ... is relative, and ... our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes."

(1887: "Museums of Ethnology and their classification" Science 9: 589)

Simply put, cultural relativism is the principle that an individual’s beliefs and activities should only be understood by others in terms of that individual 's own

At the first stage of simply trying to name the topic for purpose of study, it becomes evident that the greatly accepted and Western term ‘Female Genital Mutilation’ is too emotive and engages straight away in the ‘politics of names’. The term invokes a negative response from all, anger and pity from the ethnocentricists of the Western world, mirrored by the anger of misrepresentation from women who actually undergo the procedure willingly as part of a sacred ritual or celebration to be embraced.

As Fedorak begins to touch on the range of responses to the practice of female circumcision, it is apparent that a truly factual and anthropological approach is required in order to handle the delicate issue with respect for those who uphold the practice in reverence and bring to light the otherwise muted celebrants of the