Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Anthropology
Samenvatting
Taking Sides volumes present current controversial issues in a debate-style format designed to stimulate student interest and develop critical thinking skills. Each issue is thoughtfully framed with Learning Outcomes, an Issue Summary, an Introduction, and an Exploring the Issue section featuring Critical Thinking and Reflection, Is There Common Ground?, and Additional Resources. Taking Sides readers also offer a Topic Guide and an annotated listing of Internet References for further consideration of the issues. An online Instructor’s Resource Guide with testing material is available for each volume. Using Taking Sides in the Classroom is also an excellent instructor resource. Visit www.mhhe.com/takingsides for more details.
Specificaties
Inhoudsopgave
arranted projection of some women’s utopian longings onto the past. She regards Gimbutas’s interpretation of the archaeological evidence as biased and speculative.</P><p><STRONG>Unit: Linguistic Anthropology</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>Can Apes Learn Language?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: E. S. Savage-Rumbaugh</STRONG>, from “Language Training of Apes,” in Steve Jones, Robert Martin, and David Pilbeam, eds., <EM>The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Evolution</EM>, Cambridge University Press, 1999<BR><STRONG>NO: Joel Wallman</STRONG>, from <EM>Aping Language</EM>, Cambridge University Press, 1992</P><p>Psychologist and primate specialist E. S. Savage-Rumbaugh argues that, since the 1960s, there have been attempts to teach chimpanzees and other apes symbol systems similar to human language. These studies have shown that although apes are not capable of learning human language, they demonstrate a genuine ability to create new symbolic patterns that are similar to very rudimentary symbolic activity. Linguist Joel Wallman counters that attempts to teach chimps and other apes sign language or other symbolic systems have demonstrated that apes are very intelligent animals. But up to now these attempts have not shown that apes have any innate capacity for language.</P><p><STRONG>Does Language Shape How We Think?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: John J. Gumperz and Stephen C. Levinson</STRONG>, from “Introduction: Linguistic Relativity Re-Examined,” and “Introduction to Part 1,” in John J. Gumperz and Stephen C. Levinson, eds., <EM>Rethinking Linguistic Relativity</EM>, Cambridge University Press, 1996<BR><STRONG>NO: Steven Pinker</STRONG>, from “Mentalese,” in <EM>The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language</EM>, 2000</P><p>Sociolinguists John Gumperz and Stephen C. Levinson contend that recent studies of language and culture suggest that language structures human thought in a variety of ways that most linguists and anthropologists had not believed possible. They argue that culture through language affects the ways that we think and the ways that we experience the world. Cognitive neuropsychologist Steven Pinker draws on recent studies in cognitive science and neuropsychology to suggest that Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf were wrong when they suggested that the structure of any particular language had any effect on the ways human beings thought about the world in which they lived. He argues that previous studies have examined language but have said little, if anything, about thought.</P><p><STRONG>Is Black American English a Separate Language from Standard American English, with Its Own Distinctive Grammar and Vocabulary?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: Ernie Smith</STRONG>, from “What Is Black English? What Is Ebonics?” in Theresa Perry and Lisa Delpit, eds., The <EM>Real Ebonics Debate: Power, Language, and the Education of African-American Children</EM>, Beacon Press, 1998<BR><STRONG>NO: John H. McWhorter</STRONG>, from “Wasting Energy on an Illusion,” <EM>The Black Scholar</EM>, 2001</P><p>Linguist Ernie Smith argues that the speech of many African Americans is a separate language from English because its grammar is derived from the Niger-Congo languages of Africa. Although most of the vocabulary is borrowed from English, the pronunciations and sentence structures are changed to conform to Niger-Congo forms. Therefore, he says, schools should treat Ebonics-speaking students like other non–English-speaking minority students. Linguist John McWhorter counters that Black English is just one of many English dialects spoken in America that are mutually intelligible. He argues that the peculiar features of Black English are derived from the dialects of early settlers from Britain, not from African language. Because African American children are already familiar with Standard English, he concludes, they do not need special language training.</P><p><STRONG>Unit: Cultural Anthropology</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>Should Cultural Anthropology Stop Trying to Model Itself as a Science?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: Clifford Geertz</STRONG>, from “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture,” in <EM>The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays</EM>, 1973<BR><STRONG>NO: Robert L. Carneiro</STRONG>, from “Godzilla Meets New Age Anthropology: Facing the Postmodernist Challenge to a Science of Culture,” <EM>EUROPÉA</EM>, 1995</P><p>Cultural anthropologist Clifford Geertz views anthropology as a science of interpretation, and he argues that anthropology should never model itself on the natural sciences. He believes that anthropology’s goal should be to generate deeper interpretations of cultural phenomena, using what he calls “thick description,” rather than attempting to prove or disprove scientific laws. Cultural anthropologist Robert Carneiro argues that anthropology has always been and should continue to be a science that attempts to explain sociocultural phenomena in terms of causes and effects rather than merely interpret them. He criticizes Geertz’s cultural interpretations as arbitrary and immune to disconfirmation.</P><p><STRONG>Was Margaret Mead’s Fieldwork on Samoan Adolescents Fundamentally Flawed?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: Derek Freeman</STRONG>, from <EM>Margaret Mead and Samoa: The Making and Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth</EM>, Harvard University Press, 1983<BR><STRONG>NO: Lowell D. Holmes and Ellen Rhoads Holmes</STRONG>, from “Samoan Character and the Academic World,” in <EM>Samoan Village: Then and Now</EM>, 2nd ed., Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1992</P><p>Social anthropologist Derek Freeman argues that Margaret Mead was wrong when she stated that Samoan adolescents had sexual freedom. He contends that Mead went to Samoa to prove anthropologist Franz Boas’s cultural determinist agenda and states that Mead was so eager to believe in Samoan sexual freedom that she was consistently the victim of a hoax perpetrated by Samoan girls and young women who enjoyed tricking her. He contends that nearly all of her conclusions are spurious because of biases she brought with her and should be abandoned. Cultural anthropologists Lowell Holmes and Ellen Holmes contend that Margaret Mead had a very solid understanding of Samoan culture in general. During a restudy of Mead’s research, they came to many of the same conclusions that Mead had reached about Samoan sexuality and adolescent experiences. They accept that Mead’s description of Samoan culture exaggerates the amount of sexual freedom and the degree to which adolescence in Samoa is carefree but these differences, they argue, can be explained in terms of changes in Samoan culture since 1925 and in terms of Mead’s relatively unsophisticated research methods compared with field methods used today.</P><p><STRONG>Do Men Dominate Women in All Societies?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: Steven Goldberg</STRONG>, from “Is Patriarchy Inevitable?” <EM>National Review</EM>, 1996)<BR><STRONG>NO: Kirk M. Endicott and Karen L. Endicott</STRONG>, from “Understanding Batek Egalitarianism,” in <EM>The Headman Was a Woman: The Gender Egalitarian Batek of Malaysia</EM>, Waveland Press, 2008</P><p>Sociologist Steven Goldberg contends that in all societies’ men occupy most high positions in hierarchical organizations and most high-status roles, and they also tend to dominate women in interpersonal relations. He states that this is because men’s hormones cause them to compete more strongly than women for status and dominance. Cultural anthropologists Kirk and Karen Endicott argue that the Batek people of Peninsular Malaysia form a gender egalitarian society in the sense that neither men nor women as groups control the other sex, and neither sex is accorded greater value by society as a whole. Both men and women are free to participate in any activities, and both have equal rights in the family and camp group.</P><p><STRONG>Does the Distinction Between the Natural and the Supernatural Exist in All Cultures?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: Roger Ivar Lohmann</STRONG>, from “The Supernatural Is Everywhere: Defining Qualities of Religion in Melanesia and Beyond,” <EM>Anthropological Forum</EM>, 2003<BR><STRONG>NO: Frederick P. Lampe</STRONG>, from “Creating a Second-Storey Woman: Introduced Delineation Between Natural and Supernatural in Melanesia,” <EM>Anthropological Forum</EM>, 2003</P><p>Cultural anthropologist Roger Ivar Lohmann argues that a supernaturalistic worldview or cosmology is at the heart of virtually all religions. For him, the supernatural is a concept that exists everywhere, although it is expressed differently in each society. For him, supernaturalism attributes volition to things that do not have it. He argues that the supernatural is also a part of Western people’s daily experience in much the same way that it is the experience of the Papua New Guineas with whom he worked. Lutheran pastor and anthropological researcher Frederick (Fritz) P. Lampe argues that “supernatural” is a problematic and inappropriate term like the term “primitive.” If we accept the term “supernatural,” it is all too easy to become ethnocentric and assume that anything supernatural is unreal and therefore false. He considers a case at the University of Technology in Papua New Guinea to show how use of the term “supernatural” allows us to miss out on how Papua New Guineans actually understand the world in logical, rational, and naturalistic terms that Westerners would generally see as illogical, irrational, and super naturalistic.</P><p><STRONG>Is Conflict Between Different Ethnic Groups Inevitable?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: Sudhir Kakar</STRONG>, from “Some Unconscious Aspects of Ethnic Violence in India,” in Veena Das, ed., <EM>Mirrors of Violence: Communities, Riots, and Survivors in South Asia</EM>, Oxford University Press, 1990<BR><STRONG>NO: Anthony Oberschall</STRONG>, from “The Manipulation of Ethnicity: From Ethnic Cooperation to Violence and War in Yugoslavia,” <EM>Ethnic and R
acial Studies</EM>, 2000</P><p>Indian social researcher Sudhir Kakar analyzes the origins of ethnic conflict from a psychological perspective to argue that ethnic differences are deeply held distinctions that from time to time will inevitably erupt as ethnic conflicts. Ethnic anxiety arises from preconscious fears about cultural differences. In his view, no amount of education or politically correct behavior will eradicate these fears and anxieties about people of differing ethnic backgrounds. American sociologist Anthony Oberschall considers the ethnic conflicts that have recently emerged in Bosnia to conclude that primordial ethnic attachments are insufficient to explain the sudden emergence of violence among Bosnian ethnic groups. He adopts a complex explanation for this violence, identifying circumstances in which fears and anxieties were manipulated by politicians for self-serving ends. It was only in the context of these manipulations that ethnic violence could have erupted.</P><p><STRONG>Do Native Peoples Today Invent Their Traditions?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: Roger M. Keesing</STRONG>, from “Creating the Past: Custom and Identity in the Contemporary Pacific,” <EM>The Contemporary Pacific</EM>, 1989<BR><STRONG>NO: Haunani-Kay Trask</STRONG>, from “Natives and Anthropologists: The Colonial Struggle,” <EM>The Contemporary Pacific</EM>, 1991</P><p>Cultural anthropologist Roger M. Keesing argues that what native peoples in the Pacific now accept as “traditional culture” is largely an invented and idealized vision of their past. He contends that such fictional images emerge because native peoples are largely unfamiliar with what life was really like in pre-Western times and because such imagery distinguishes native communities from dominant Western culture. Hawaiian activist and scholar Haunani-Kay Trask asserts that Keesing’s critique is fundamentally flawed because he only uses Western documents. She contends that native peoples have oral traditions, genealogies, and other historical sources that are not reflected in Western historical documents. Anthropologists like Keesing, she maintains, are trying to hold onto their privileged position as experts in the face of growing numbers of educated native scholars.</P><p><STRONG>Unit: Ethics in Anthropology</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>Should the Remains of Prehistoric Native Americans Be Reburied Rather Than Studied?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: James Riding</STRONG>, from “Repatriation: A Pawnee’s Perspective,” <EM>American Indian Quarterly</EM>, 1996<BR><STRONG>NO: Clement W. Meighan</STRONG>, from “Some Scholars’ Views on Reburial,” <EM>American Antiquity</EM>, 1992</P><p>Assistant professor of justice studies and member of the Pawnee tribe James Riding In argues that holding Native American skeletons in museums and other repositories represents a sacrilege against Native American dead. Non-Native Americans would not allow their cemeteries to be dug up and their ancestors bones to be housed in museums. Thus, all Indian remains should be reburied. Professor of anthropology and archaeologist Clement W. Meighan believes that archaeologists have a moral and professional obligation to the archaeological data with which they work. Such field data are not just about Native Americans and their history but about the heritage of all humans. He concludes that such data are held in the public good and must be protected from destruction.</P><p><STRONG>Did Napoleon Chagnon’s Research Methods Harm the Yanomami Indians of Venezuela?</STRONG></P><p><STRONG>YES: Terence Turner</STRONG>, from <EM>The Yanomami and the Ethics of Anthropological Practice</EM>, Cornell University Latin American Studies Program, 2001<BR><STRONG>NO: Edward H. Hagen, Michael E. Price, and John Tooby</STRONG>, from <EM>Preliminary Report</EM>, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara, 2001</P><p>Anthropologist Terence Turner contends that journalist Patrick Tierney’s book Darkness in El Dorado accurately depicts how anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon’s research among the Yanomami Indians caused conflict between groups and how Chagnon’s portrayal of the Yanomami as extremely violent aided gold miners trying to take over Yanomami land. Anthropologists Edward Hagen, Michael Price, and John Tooby counter that Tierney systematically distorts Chagnon’s views on Yanomami violence and exaggerates the amount of disruption caused by Chagnon’s activities compared to those of such others as missionaries and gold miners.</P>