Wednesday) 30 October 2019 STRUCTURALISM > INTRODUCTION: Structuralism in anthropology emerged as a reaction to debate over what the parts of society and culture are, and whether they are real or abstract.According to , social structure is an abstract term. He siigyésts that, human thought process reflects in culture, and structufe of human thought process is same in all culture. - HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: + The term was coined by H + Emile Durkheim gave the organism analogy to explain social structure + Inspired from him Levi-Strauss gave theory of structuralism - BASIC PREMISES: + Society has a + Basic/ Social structure is a)product of mind + Variation in basic structure from society to society is due to permutation and combination of human thought + Social structure has nothing to do with empirical reality, but with models built after it + Job of structuralist is to, unravel the various layers of human mind ~ BOOK: +The Raw and the cooked (1964) + Structural study of myth (1963) + Political systems oh highland Burma (1934) - METHODOLOGY: “ eayerfie unity of mankind: : eg. Hot and cold. Every culture takes these concepts and make them specific to their cultureWednesday, 30 October 2019 + Model of language: to understand buman thought process he studied products of mind. And one of the products i$ language. Strauss said that society can be conceptualised as communication, hence he emphasised on language which consists of: () Parts/ Units: Words or phonemes i) Arrangement of parts: Grammatical rules + He applied this idea to study of kinship, mythology and totemism to explain society and socialistréeture = CRITICISM: + Lack of proof: Did not give any proof of psychic unity + Ignored individual differentiation + Ahistorical: This synchronic approach, which advocates a “psychic unity” of all human minds, has been criticised because it does not account for individual human action, historically. + Structuralists method are imprecise and dependent on the observer + Does not address dynamie aspects of culture ~ MERITS: + Concept is still used in cognitive anthropology + It continued the idea that there were universal structuring elements in the human mind that shape culture + Work‘of post structuralist Pierre Bourdieu particularly his idea of Habilisylaid the groundwork for agency theorists ~ CONCLUSION: Although the theory of structuralism was criticised on several grounds, but the theory is not totally redundant. Itis stil useful for the study of human mind and influenced literature as literature is also it's product. moreover, the idea ishelpful for socio-economic developmentWednesday, 30 O¢tober 2019 LEACH: ~ INTRODUCTION Edmund Ronald Leach was a social anthropologist who belonged to British school of structural functionalism BOOKS ‘Political systemof highland Burma’ (1934) ‘Rethinking anthropology’ (1961) CONTRIBUTION: + Definition of structure: Social structure in practical situations consists of a set of ideas about the distribution of power between persons and group of persons. «Changes occur in society in two forms: change in structure and change of Structure + Change in structure- means change like Indian family or change in status of women in society « Change of structure- itis fadical or structural change. Eg, change of feudal hierarchical system to democratic one and SLAN aristocracy CRITICISM: « Hisdefinition of structure only included a discussion on power distribution, ~~ EVALUATION: « He was concerned with particular society whereas Levi Strauss was concemed with entire human society ~ CONCLUSION Although criticised, he gave immense contribution to the:stiidy of culture in anthropologyTuesday, 29 October 2019 NEO-EVOLUTIONISM > INTRODUCTION + New-evolutionism emerged as a strong reaction against functionalism - HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: + By the late 1930s, functionalism came under criticism because it studied only social order, not social change’ + In this backdrop, n¢d=evalutionists aimed to eliminate the short comings of classical evolutionism - BOOKS + ‘Man makes Himself’ (1959) - V.G. Childe + ‘theory of Culture change‘(1956) - J. Steward + ‘The Science of Culture’ (1949) - L. White ~ BASIC PREMISES: + Evolution is a gradual process + Evolution is a ceaseless and ubiquitous process + Culture develops not in unilinear sequence but as a parabolic curve (diagram) + It is the job of evolutionists\ta trace origin and sequence of evolution of society and culture = ' oa © Watermarkly¢ aye “Soon as These gabe 2019 2° - APPROACHES: pie & + Diachronic approach + Study based on facts and evidences, no conjectures + Study of material culture only since, evidence of only those could be found. Did not study non-material culture due to lack of evidence + Included $gpeBESF cutural change x as 7 HOLARS: ps BRITISH SCHOOL: | |. V.G.Childe (write from bhuvanesh patil) + INTRODUCTION: tee Childe was a British archaeologist who was linked with spite of o\\tinaterial cutture. \ Ka Kas + BOOK: 5 pr Man makes himself AIR 2° N + CONTRIBUTION: 1. He showed the evolution of society as given by L.H. Morgan, through evidences. CHALCO sTM@ES => NEOLITHIC ————> BRONZE @ROUND, POLISHED NRTAL? 4 ask THOS 5 Al Reoaasune HUNTER - ReMnET EATON 2 Kars COND” QATHERER of PUNTS § TRRIGA™ ANIMAIS METALLURGY serie ery 2. He gid not consider any particular society and thus it is termed as universal *Volutionism as 3. Tried to explain evolution from hunter gatherer ti (agriculture began around scare nile) pik © © Watermarkly 1Ave Tt ‘cbtober 2019 gas Gave 3 stages of revolution : ya = rural (neolithic) 29 pt ; : + inp ALE B ~ Industrial revolution of 19th century With this he aimed to decouple his theory from the earlier classical evolutionism, which was implicitly racist aie fiXGKary ideas with archaeology by focussing Thus, he substantgatety \ ‘on the material asnenl opt ecause evidence for only those could be was presenjad-T)Y « 5 pr: pier ‘AN SCHOOL: AIR 2 Il. Leslie A. White + INTRODUCTION + He was an American anthropologist who belonged to the neo evolutionist S¢ff061. He has also been associated with symbolism. mit € kas + He was initially influenced by Boas, but late gure rds L.H, Morgan and E.B. Tylor 25 : + BREIF HISTORY: Aik BS + Leslie Alvin White (1900-1975) +BOOKS: + The science of culture ’ (1949), + ‘The Evolution % coec\ ni) ‘ + BASIC PI Ss? D pV Reise on universal standard of measurement of ogo a technology . ****Energy can be measured in terms of HaPHSSSing]HEFESBIta) BEYER; with passage of time quality and quantity of harnessed energy increases s\ . ¥8 + Energy is not harnessed by itself. It requires technology. See hnique, y remains free floating : 7 4a ch AIR 2 @ Watermarkly » wash + METHODOLOGYAre Tu Sbtéber 2019 as rca of energy and technology give rise ‘8 angooe™ + Energy x Technology= oye). + "3 possibilities: ps + Low Energy x high Technology = low Culture + High Energy x low technology = low Culture + High Energy x High Tachnologwe Gilgh Culture + Formulated 2 taugz gS C- yas ‘1st : Other things being constant, degree of cultural sewer pik Wirery proportional to the energy harnessed Aik + "2nd law: other things being constant, degree of cultural development is directly proportional to efficiency of technology + CONTRIBUTION: : jave the : Culture advances as ount of gash nergy harnessed per capita per year increases gpa cy of technology increases or both. Here, energy.is: moteimportant as energy is, the living force, whereas tec! ology ehicle. + White’s stages of devetd ne 5 B Energy revolution + He gave the definition of culture: Similar to definition given by E. B. Tylor, but emphasised on extra-somatic temporal continuum + Gave the definition for AA Jafisation which is a product of nutrition, protection and repro f " N¥PXR=S yas’ : the ation of property as a product of things and labour 5 pr . pie eae Ase + Amount of energy harnessed in simple society is far less than in complex society + Technology has also grown from simple to complex “(¢Giiticism: was 29 x. BAF ASR @ Watermarkly »eee © garni’ Tussin 8 Obober 2019 a + According to J. Steward, White’s law of Zor Mecfoiment, considered other factors as constant. Butet yon never constant. This 01 contradicts the premise: 9. nism. A +» He was macro-cultural Bs nature, as he did not refer to any particular society. So his evolution is called ‘Universal evolution’ pir 2° ase Ill. Julian Steward: +HISTORICAL BACKGROUND nn Haynes Steward (1902-1972) ee ost anthropologist who was a student of ari i He studied the Shoshone of the aupaer + BASIC PREMISES: INV A + Evolution is a gradual process + Evolution is a ceaseless and ubiquitous process + Emphasis on relationship between culture and environment + METHODOLOGY: man- technology relationship—> technology has Economic value—>therefore, Kas economy is directly related ironment—>forms culture core + Political, kinship, religion are secondary—>superstructure politcal iw — Cerrar ee wusnidp VE SReut Ke asn™ ye + CET - 5 pt: RUdeRing to Andrew Rappapert, in Melanesian commu Poe is pie practiced which has a direct correlation to religious as| 1 ang economic aspect cannot always be considered as culture core. Book ‘PIG FOR ANCESTORS’ + Marvin harris has not accepted mult linear evolution as a methodology. To link between cultural ecology and cultural rate cane us. wast Kas 95 © © Watermarkly ) wastTuesday, 29 wan, 2019 6 i ‘é has griticized his confusion between history and carte ANiSory is has concerned with particulars, evolution seeks es segefalien CONCLUSION: Although criticised 2° grounds, stewards emphasis on culture ecology gave anthropology a viable alternative to traditional approaches. Professor L.P. Vidvarthi applied this concept of cult ecology in his study of gas Mie INTRODUCTION: Aik They were students and colleagues of steward and white. They gave theories of general and specific evolution to fill the gaps in the theory of steward and white. PREMISES: not ae ornits was ~ Evolution moves simultaneously in two spheres :wér specific. + Specific: a particular society evs ie a ea of environment in a specific manner. This is peace lution. + General evolution: notin of lower forms (simple society) to higher forms {complex society) + They are two sides of the same coin > METHODS: mire ‘ Specific evolution scaSkirn of descent for a short périod of time SU ikeyiote of specific evolution is cultural diversity brought paPe Bs factors (environment, diffusion, etc.) ——> development of local culture General evolution — ——> emphasis on character of progress ———> stages of development without referring to evolutionary descent — — —>study of suncaasve forms through which human being has passéd (Hunting, athering, Ko All aspects merge into larger pattern that eiRe ini Posie pattern 95 OY asl 7 pie a @ Watermarkly 1Tuesday, 29 October 2019 | - criticism: ~ MERITS - CONCLUSION: Although, the work of negevalutionist was criticised, yet they have studied the change aspect —>through idea of evolution with evidences and also incorporated idea of diffusion. Therefore they are still relevant © Watermarkly