Unit 3 Levi-Strauss: Structure as a Model PDF

Function, System and Structure UNIT 3 LEVI-STRAUSS: STRUCTURE AS A MODEL Structure 3.0 Objectives 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Levi-Strauss: Life and Times...

Function, System and Structure UNIT 3 LEVI-STRAUSS: STRUCTURE AS A MODEL Structure 3.0 Objectives 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Levi-Strauss: Life and Times 3.3 Levi-Strauss and Structuralism 3.4 Structure as a model 3.5 Types of Models 3.5.1 Conscious vs. Unconscious Models 3.5.2 Mechanical vs. Statistical Models 3.6 Structure as Model: A Critique 3.7 Let Us Sum Up 3.8 References 3.9 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress 3.0 OBJECTIVES After studying this Unit, you should be able to: Give an account of Levi-Strauss’s contribution to the theory of structuralism; Elaborate on his understanding of Structures as Models; Explain the different classification of models given by Levi-Strauss; Provide a brief critique of Levi-Strauss’ classification of models. 3.1 INTRODUCTION In our previous unit 1 and 2 we tried to understand how structure is understood by Radcliffe-Brown in relation to observable relations and their functions. Parson on the other hand was trying to understand the very complex relationship between individual behaviour and their motivations in relation to larger systems of society. In this unit we look at how Claude Levi-Strauss who is known for his innovative look at structures.  Contributed by Dr. Gitanjali Atri, Research Consultant, Bridge Association for Social Initiative aiming ‘Change’, New Delhi 40  Levi-Strauss: We start with a brief look at his life and the times that he lived and the influences Structure as a Model of various scholars on his writing. Following this we discuss his idea of structure and structuralism. Following this in section 3.5 we explain how Levi-Strauss conceives of models as something that can be approximated from one’s understanding of structure. In section 3.6 we present a brief critique of his ideas by various scholars. 3.2 LEVI-STRAUSS: LIFE AND TIMES Claude Levi Strauss was born in Brussels, Belgium in the year 1908. He studied in France, like many of the Belgians of his time. He studied law and philosophy at the Sorbonne in Paris. But was drawn to anthropology and when he travelled to Sao Paulo University in Brazil, as a visiting professor, he then traveled to the Amazon forest and studied the indigenous tribes (pic credit:https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=8496339) of the area, which drew him further into anthropological field. His wife, Dina, as a professor (pic credit:ofWikipedia, ethnology fairatuse) the university and perhaps contributed to his growing fascination with the anthropology. This was when he became a part of a mission to Brazil, where he began his research of the primitive tribes, inspired by Lowie’s work Primitive Society (1920). He remained very keen on studying Indians, who were considered as ‘primitives’ at that time. During his four years in Brazil, however, he started by studying the Guaycuru and Bororo tribes, while staying among them for several days. It was this method of conducting research, which gradually, paved a way for his ideas on ‘structure as a model’. During World War II he was conscripted to the army and served France, after he fulfilled his commitment and was free he moved to New York where he taught at the New School of Research and at the Ecole Libre des Hautes Etudes which he co- founded with other French emigrates in New York. In early 1940s, when Levi Strauss moved to New York, he got heavily influenced by the works of linguistics like Roman Jakobson and Nikolai Trubetsky. Their concept of phonological oppositions had a huge impact on his ideas on structuralism. For instance: in Jakobson’s linguistic analysis, he argued for breaking down the complex units of speech into ‘morphemes’, which according to him were the ultimate constituent of the speech and the most meaningful part of it too. In this 41  Function, System and Structure way, he built a case for how morphemes could be differentiated from each other and could lay at the root of understanding complex linguistic compositions. Much in the same way, Levi-Strauss gave the idea of models, which according to him could be the identifying feature of the social structures. While in US he was influenced by the American Anthropologist Franz Boas, who believed that societies cannot be differentiated on the basis of the progression like evolutionary theorist did. Boas believed that all societies have histories and in order to treat illiterate and literate societies the same way one must focus on things other than texts. One can see that Levi-Strauss examines myths, among other things across cultures to understand the underlying structures or mental categories. He returned to Paris to receive his doctorate. Professor Levi-Strauss rose to prominence the next year when he published, ‘The Elementary Structures of Kinship’. This work turned out to be his magnum opus and was revered in the circles of Anthropology. He was born in the era when James George Frazer, who is considered as the founder of social anthropology in Great Britain, was working on discourses about primitive nations. On one hand, his method of research did not include anything like meeting or staying with his subjects, personally. On the other hand, Strauss’s approach was totally different and became a big milestone for social anthropology. According to his approach, society must be considered as a collection of given facts which must be observed in detail and by ethnologist himself. 3.3 LEVI-STRAUSS AND STRUCTURALISM Within sociology, structuralism is basically one of the approaches to study culture. Culture is nothing but the learned ideas and behaviours that characterise any society. According to Levi-Strauss, who is also considered as the developer of structuralism, human culture is just an expression of the underlying structures of the human mind. Thus, Levi-Strauss’s structuralism asserts humans act as we do, not because of where we live or other social factors, but because of the actual structure of the human mind. Furthermore, according to him mind of the primitive or what he calls as “savage” is the same as the structure of the minds of the civilized ones. Structuralism has been defined as "the search for the underlying patterns of thought in all forms of human activity"(Angela, 2009). He elaborates this with the help of an example. Humans like to eat their meat cooked. This is same for both - the “savage” and the civilized. It is not because they are directed by their respective cultures to do so, rather owing to the structures of their brain which tells them that cooked meat is better than the raw. Thus, according to Levi-Strauss the human beings think in binary opposites, owing to the structure of the human mind. For instance: to experience what is hot they must experience what is cold; to know light they must have experienced darkness, and so on. 42  Levi-Strauss: When Levi-Strauss refers to structure, it is not in the way of the overt structures Structure as a Model which are observable on the surface in a society, rather to the deeper abstract and unconscious logical structures that lie under the overt structures. These structures, as discussed above, remain abstract and conceptual. As a result of which, they remain inaccessible to the understanding of the people practicing them and can only be accessed by the analyst himself. For Levi-Strauss society is a system of logical structures. So basically, Levi-Strauss saw culture only as a means of communication. In other words, from his perspective, culture becomes a system of transmission of meanings. Such meanings function towards holding the society together as a system of exchange. These vehicles of transmission of meaning in any given social structure included all the myths, folklore, stories and even ritual practices and beliefs which together constituted the essential core of what he understood as a culture. Box 3.1 Influences on Levi-Strauss’s Structuralism Claude Levi-Strauss was strongly influenced by Ferdinand de Saussure and his concept of ‘Linguistic Structuralism’. It was Saussure who coined the ‘structuralism’ through his publications in the early twentieth century. In his concept of linguistic structuralism, Saussure argued that language is constructed on the basis of certain invisible rules. Those who speak the language know these rules but remain unable to articulate them. All the native speakers of the language, thus, speak it fluently and without investing any thought into the rules of that language. They may even have the understanding to correct if someone speaks their language incorrectly, yet they may not be aware about the grammatical rules of the language, just as efficiently as an expert linguist. This indicates to the fact, according to Saussure, that those speaking the language internalise it to the level of their unconscious without any clear or direct knowledge of its underlying rules. Levi-Strauss implements this same understanding to the case of culture. He argues that in the case of culture too, the practitioners are aware of the rules and resultant cultural practices, but they do not know the reasons that remain behind the surface of the rules. So, he underlines that an anthropologist must look deeper and unravel the reasons that guide certain rules on which a given culture operates. However, the most significant contribution of Claude Levi-Strauss to the study of social structure remains his cross-cultural analysis of myths and kinship systems. Based on which, in his acclaimed essay, ‘Social Structure’ (1953), he pointed out that social structure refers to the models that emerge from the empirical realities. He writes: “The term ‘social structure’ has nothing to do with empirical reality, but with models that are built up after it.” (1953: 279). Understood like this, all the components of a social structure, including myths, rituals, folklores, language 43  Function, System and Structure and cultural beliefs become a part of the models, on which a social structure is built. According to him, these models act as methods to study the social relations, that make up for a given social structure. By studying the models, one may understand the social relations in a given social structure. Check Your Progress 1 Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer. ii) Check your answer with those given at the end of the unit. 1) How does Levi-Strauss define human culture? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 2) What is Levi-Strauss’s idea of binary opposites? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 3) Who influenced Levi-Strauss’s ideas on structuralism? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 3.4 STRUCTURE AS A MODEL Levi-Strauss believed that there is a systematic relationship between the observable and structural realities. And, it is on the basis of the former that models emerge. While explaining the logic behind this, he asserts that “the model should be constructed so as to make intelligible all the observed facts.” (1953: 280). Let us try to understand this: According to Levi-Strauss, there is a difference between social structure and social relations. Social relations are the relationships between people, which are empirical, i.e. directly observable. It is through these observations of the social relations that models of social structure are developed. So, he understands social relations as basically the raw material out of which the models making up the social structure are built. This tells us what a model is not. Firstly, models are not the observable social relations. Secondly, models are the obvious ethnographic reality that an anthropologist observes in the field. Thirdly, models are also not the lived reality as explained by the respondents of the anthropologist, whom he interviews in the field. Then, Levi-Strauss also goes on to tell us what exactly are the models. According to him, models are the hidden and the unconscious reality, which according to him are the actual social structure of the society. To construct a model, Levi-Strauss guides that an anthropologist needs to conceptually articulate it through a process of abstraction. A model, even though reached through a process of abstraction, reflects the actual structure of any given society. Just like Saussure’s insistence on reaching the actual reasons guiding the grammatical rules of a language (Refer to Box 1). However, Levi-Strauss further 44 cautions that even though a model is a ‘true description ’of a society, it does not Levi-Strauss: Structure as a Model represent the entire society, but just its structure. In simpler terms, a model is an expression of how a society works and what determines the underlyingprinciples of it operation. In his vision the basic aim of anthropology is to construct such models. Box 3.2 Example of a Model: Munda Kinship Structure Each Munda village is divided into two social groups, known as paharkhut and mundakhut, respectively. While the religious chief of the village comes from the first, the secular chief came from the second. While the first is older and superior, the other khut is the contrary - younger and inferior. Yet, both belong to the same clan, known as kili. Both the khuts use the same totem, but they cannot inter-marry. Marriages are only allowed between khuts belonging to different clans and villages. However, certain rules are further prescribed for such marriages - firstly, if a marriage takes place between two khut of two different villages, other marriages of the same type are sanctioned within the limits of the same generation. But, a prohibition ensues for the following generations for such marriages, which lasts as long as the first couples live, and even as long as both khut preserve the social relations derived from the intermarriage. Secondly on the contrary, if a marriage has taken place between paharkhut of one village and mundakhut of another, this type of marriage is prohibited in the following generation, while that between two paharkhutand that between two mundakhut, are allowed (Levi-Strauss, 1969, p.426). Now, according to this model Levi-Strauss is trying to elucidate how the Munda society works. In this, the khuts are actually the lineages. While there may be more lineages within a village, the two discussed figure out to be the most dominant of all among the Mundas. Such a tendency of the villages to associate with just one dominant clan and/or lineage has led to the preference for village exogamy, making these clans strictly exogamous. This model is identified with patrilineal cross-cousin marriage. The model highlights a rule of ‘delay’ in ensuing generations. In this model of patrilineal alliance it is the reciprocity that is delayed, the return of the woman who is to replace that one taken in the previous generation. There is no question of the complete prohibition on the re- alliance in the following generation, which is the key feature of the actual Munda system, according to Levi-Strauss. His example of a structure as a model can also very well be employed to understand the basic features of a model, in Levi- Straussian understanding: A model describes structures that make a society. Not society as a whole, rather just to explain how a society works. A model aims at making intelligible the complex social interactions in a given structure. 45  Function, System and Structure The structure exhibits the characteristics of a system. It is made up of several elements, none of which can undergo a change without effecting changes in all the other elements. According to Levi-Strauss, there is more than one possible model to describe the given situation. Nevertheless, we must use the model that is the simplest and that meets two criterion: first, it is based on the empirical facts; second, it can explain all the situations in a satisfactory manner. He furthermore calls such a model as ‘real’ or ‘true’ model. After the identification of this model, the research must continue towards the second phase i.e., of experimentation, when the model is subjected to experiments and its behaviour is observed in order to elucidate the properties of a structure. These two phases of research - the observation phase and the experimentation phase, constitute the structural analysis of the models. By experimentation, Lévi-Strauss means the ‘controlled comparison ’of models of the same or of a different kind, with an intention to identify the model that accounts best for the observed facts. Check Your Progress 2 Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer. ii) Check your answer with those given at the end of the unit. 1) What is a model, according to Levi -Strauss? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 2) How do models emerge? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 3) What are the features of a model? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… Activity 1 Speak with the elderly in your family and in the extended community to understand the prescriptions and prohibitions in the domain of marriage in your community. Do this to conduct an in-depth analysis of your own social structure, the one in which you are located. On the basis of this, develop a ‘model’ in a Levi-Straussian sense. If possible, compare your model with the models developed by others at your study centre. This will give you sociological insight into universality or peculiarity of your social structure, as Levi-Strauss would say. 46  Levi-Strauss: 3.5 TYPES OF MODELS Structure as a Model Levi-Strauss provides two different ways of distinguishing between different types of models: 3.5.1 Conscious vs. Unconscious Models The models through which a society views itself are known as ‘conscious models’. These are the models that remain on the surface and are readily observable. These are also known as homemade models, norms or what Levi- Strauss calls as ‘insider’s models’. But under the conscious models, lie the ‘deeper structures’, with which a society is not directly or consciously aware of. These, he called as ‘unconscious model’. An anthropologist’s engagement with these deeper structures, lead to the construction of models in Levi-Straussian sense. Levi- Strauss strongly believed that observing conscious models is something that leads one to perpetuate the phenomena and not just to explain it. However, he cautions further that conscious models are not redundant in this process, as they are immediately observable and leads one to deeper structure that lie underneath. Levi-Strauss argued that the objective characteristics of a social fact, by which a society is governed forms the subjective consciousness of those inhabiting that society. He further guides that to explore these is a subject matter of the history discipline, while the anthropology must study what he called as the ‘unconscious foundation’ of these social facts. In this argument of Levi-Strauss, a clear influence of Boas can be observed, in which he argued that unless the knowledge of scientific grammar, the structure of a language, its phonetics, the very sound of each unit remains unknown to the consciousness of the speakers. A purposeful analysis is required to make them aware of all these elements of a language’s structure. Boas argues that is because language and its usage comes so naturally to a native speaker that seldom does he consciously feel the need to explore its deeper structures. Such structures or processes emerge at the level of ‘unconscious mental processes’ of a speaker. Similarly, Levi Strauss asserts that all types of social phenomena (language, beliefs, social prescriptions and prohibitions, and customs) have this in common, that their elaboration in the mind is at the level of unconscious thought. Thus, the elements of subjective consciousness of a society like religion, customs, tradition, beliefs and practices, among others are all conscious models, which are constructed by the society itself. They do not explain their structure or meaning, thus, they could mislead an anthropologist. Yet this does not undermine their significance as a part of social life. This is what leads Levi-Strauss to believe that they may lead to the deeper structures that exist underneath them. He calls them as ‘norms’. On the other hand, there are unconscious models. These are the models that are composed by the anthropologist himself to account for theunconscious structure that form the reason for the observable elements of the social structure. 47  Function, System and Structure Activity 2 Make a list of conscious and unconscious models that you observe in your immediate family, extended family and community at large. It would be interesting to compare your list with that of other students at your study centre. This would not only help you to understand the concept better, but also bring out the similarities and dissimilarities among your community and that of your fellow students. Hence, Levi-Strauss goes on to the level of calling conscious models as a nuisance, because they stand in-between the anthropologist and the actual structures of his concern. He even said that more the number of conscious models, lesser would be the possibility of achieving the accurate unconscious models. Since informants, according to him, have no understanding of the unconscious models, it remains the responsibility of the anthropologist to construct these for himself, by studying carefully the unconscious structures of the informant’s mind. Levi-Strauss’ distinction between the conscious and unconscious models has been both - accepted as well as critiqued - by his succeeding anthropologists and his contemporaries. So, for instance: Anthropologist David Goddard accepts Levi-Straussian distinction between these models. In which, he says conscious models are required as they direct individuals how to behave with each other in a given society. Thus, they impose what he called as ‘conceptual order’ on the affairs of man, on their dealings with one another and with nature. On the other hand, Hugo G. Nutini roughly critiqued this distinction. According to him, conscious models should not be called as models at all as they do not help anthropologist in revealing the underlying structures, he is looking to study. The conscious models do not even reveal why societies try to cover what Levi-Strauss saw as unconscious models. Thus, they lack any functional utility and thus, should become redundant to anthropologist’s observations. 3.5.2 Mechanical vs. Statistical Models Levi-Strauss defined mechanical models as those models, which exist on the ‘same scale ’as the phenomenon itself. And, when the models and the phenomenon lie of a ‘different scale’, they are called statistical model. Even though, he does not anywhere explicitly mentions as to what he meant by ‘scale’, something to make this distinction clearer can be observed through the subsequent examples that he gives in the further discussion. He gives an example of laws of marriage. When there is no difference between marriage rules and social groupings - the two are placed on the same scale - the model formed will be mechanical. And when several factors affect the type of marriage and people have no option but to deviate from the rule, the model formed will be statistical. 48 So, one can conclude that by scale - same or distinct - he meant when people do  Levi-Strauss: just as they say, it is a same scale; and on the contrary, when they do not do what Structure as a Model they say, it is a different scale. In other words, the relationship between the scale of the model and the scale of the phenomena determines whether a model is mechanical or statistical. According to Levi-Strauss, this differentiation remains significant for two reasons. Firstly, it enables one to map out similarities and differences between disciplines, contributing to a better understanding of various issues. Secondly, the distinction between mechanical and statistical models can be used to clarify the role of the comparative method in structural studies. With a knowledge of differences in scales, one is equipped to bring out a better comparative analysis of the social structure. A few underlying features of this distinction have been further highlighted by Levi-Strauss: 1) According to him, when same data is looked at through different perspectives, can lead to both statistical as well as mechanical models. To further explain this, he gives an example of suicide, which phenomenon can be studied at two different levels. It is possible to construct mechanical models through a study of individual cases. Each case of suicide is analysed according to the personality of the victim, his or her biography, the characteristics of the primary and secondary groups in which the victim participated, etc. But it is also possible to construct statistical models through calculating the frequency of suicide during a certain period in one or more societies and for different types of primary and secondary groups. 2) He also argues that both these kinds of models can be transformed into each other. To explain this further, he gives an example of elementary and complex kinship structures. In elementary structures one has to choose the prospective spouse within certain groups or categories. However, if the prescription is followed only to a limited extent, a statistical as well as a mechanical model is called for to explain the system properly. The classification of models between mechanical and statistical is considered as a one of the significant contributions of Levi-Strauss to the study of social structures. Providing this observation, Nutini (1965) points out that while mechanical models can be understood as ‘ideal form ’of human behaviour, statistical models show ‘the actual ’behaviour. He also agrees with Levi-Strauss that both the models are complementary to each other, as there can be no society which would always behave ideally without any aberrance, nor there can be a society which would not have any conception of ideal behaviour. 49  Function, System and Structure Check Your Progress 3 Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer. ii) Check your answer with those given at the end of the unit. 1) What are the two categories of a model, given by Levi-Strauss? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 2) What is the difference between conscious and unconscious models? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 3) What is the difference between statistical and mechanical models? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 4) How does Nutini interpret Levi-Strauss’ distinction between mechanical and statistical models? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 3.6 STRUCTURE AS MODEL: A BRIEF CRITIQUE Many have critiqued Levi Strauss' idea of constructing models to explain social structure for a very elementary reason that they are constructed by the anthropologist himself, purely based on his own understanding of the structure. According to them, in such a situation the primary concern remains that how well does such model represent the actual facts. Many including Edmund Leach have questioned the authenticity of the models hence constructed, as they believed such models could be fictional or trivial based on elementary logic. They also question Levi-Strauss’s total neglect of the empirical facts in illustrating his idea of model construction. As critiqued by Jerzy Topolski, “model is not subject to test by empirical data”. Similarly, according to Kaufman, the Straussian idea of structure as model remains unreliable. He further points out that reducing a model to anthropologist’s own construction is actually removing the structure from from to human dimension to some other. Another strong critic of Levi-Strauss’s models is Lewis Maybury. According to him, the analysis based on model is not relevant because the model does not represent the social interactions sufficiently. He argues that, social relations cannot be formally represented by symbols in the same way as mathematical relations can. Accordingly, sociological models are not manipulable in the sense 50 mathematical equations are. Conclusions drawn from such models without a  Levi-Strauss: simultaneous consideration of the data from which the models were constructed Structure as a Model run a serious risk of error.” (Maybury, 1960: 35) Thus, according to him, different models are not comparable to each other. Check Your Progress 4 Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer. ii) Check your answer with those given at the end of the unit. 1) Who said that, “model is not subject to test by empirical data”? a) Edmund Leach b) Jerzy Topolski c) Kauffman d) Lewis Maybury 2) What was Kauffman’s critique of Levi-Strauss’ model? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 3) How does Maybury critique Levi-Strauss? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 3.7 LET US SUM UP According to Levi Strauss, human culture is just an expression of the underlying structures of the human mind. Humans act as we do, not because of where we live or other social factors, but because of the actual structure of the human mind. He pointed out that such structures are actually the models that emerge from the empirical realities. The model should be constructed so as to make intelligible all the observed facts. Models refer to an unconscious and hidden reality which he believed to be the actual social structure of the society. To construct a model, Levi-Strauss guides that an anthropologist needs to conceptually articulate it through a process of abstraction. A model, even though reached through a process of abstraction, reflects the actual structure of any given society. However, Levi-Strauss further cautions that even though a model is a ‘true description ’of a society, it does not represent the entire society, but just its structure. In simpler terms, a model is an expression of how a society works and what determines the underlying principles of it operation. Levi-Strauss provides two different ways of distinguishing between different types of models -- conscious and unconscious models; and mechanical and statistical models. Conscious models are the ‘insider’s models’, i.e. those models according to which the society views itself. Underneath these models are ‘deeper 51  Function, System and Structure structures’, the unconscious models, which the society does not perceive directly or consciously. Mechanical models are those models which lie on the same scale as the phenomenon is. And, when they - the model and the phenomenon - lie on a different scale, they are called statistical models. However, the classification of models, as provided by Strauss has been critiqued by many thinkers. 3.8 REFERENCES Doland, Angela (4 November 2009). "Anthropology Giant Claude Levi-Strauss dead at 100". Seattle Times. Associated Press. Goddard, David.(1965). Conceptions of structure in Lévi – Strauss and in British anthropology. Social Research, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 408 - 427 Kaufman, Eleanor.(2013). In: Rethinking Claude Lévi – Strauss (1908-2009). United States: Yale University Press Leach, Edmund (ed.). (1967). The Structural Study of Myth and Totemism. London and New York: Routledge Leach, Edmund R. (1968). Social Structure. In International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, Volume 14. McMillan Co. and Free Press (pp. 482-489) Lévi-Strauss, Claude. (1953). Social Structure. In A.L. Kroeber (ed.) Anthropology Today. Chicago: Chicago University Press Levi-Strauss, Claude. (1963). The Elementary Structures of Kinship. Boston: Beacon Press Levi-Strauss, Claude. (1966). The Savage Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Nadel,S. F. (1957).The Theory of Social Structure.London: Cohen and West Nutini, Hugo G. (1965). Some considerations on the Nature of Social Structure and Model Building: A critique of Claude Lévi – Strauss and Edmund Leach. American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol.67, No.3 (Jun. 1965), pp. 707-731. 3.9 SPECIMEN ANSWER TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS Check Your Progress 1 1) Human culture is just an expression of the underlying structures of the human mind. Humans act as we do, not because of where we live or other social factors, but because of the actual structure of the human mind. 2) Human beings think in binary opposites, owing to the structure of the human mind. For instance: to experience what is hot they must experience what is cold; to know light they must have experienced darkness, and so on. 52  Levi-Strauss: 3) Ferdinand de Saussure. Write more about his idea of Linguistic Structuralism Structure as a Model and its impact on Levi-Strauss’ ideas on structuralism. Check Your Progress 2 1) According to Levi-Strauss, models are the hidden and the unconscious reality, which according to him are the actual social structure of the society. To construct a model, Levi-Strauss guides that an anthropologist needs to conceptually articulate it through a process of abstraction. A model, even though reached through a process of abstraction, reflects the actual structure of any given society. 2) Levi-Strauss believed that there is a systematic relationship between the observable and structural realities. And, it is on the basis of the former that models emerge. While explaining the logic behind this, he asserts, “the model should be constructed so as to make intelligible all the observed facts.” 3) Features of a model are: A model describes structures that make a society. Not society as a whole, rather just to explain how a society works. A model aims at making intelligible the complex social interactions in a given structure. The structure exhibits the characteristics of a system. It is made up of several elements, none of which can undergo a change without effecting changes in all the other elements. Check Your Progress 3 1) The two categories of models are - conscious and unconscious models; and mechanical and statistical models. 2) The models through which a society view itself are known as ‘conscious models’. These are the models that remain on the surface and are readily observable. These are also known as homemade models, norms or what Levi- Strauss calls as ‘insider’s models’. But under the conscious models, lie the ‘deeper structures’, with which a society is not directly or consciously aware of. These, he called as ‘unconscious model’. 3) Levi-Strauss defined mechanical models as those models, which exist on the ‘same scale ’as the phenomenon itself. And, when the models and the phenomenon lie of a ‘different scale’, they are called statistical model. Nutini (1965) points out that while mechanical models can be understood as ‘ideal form ’of human behaviour, statistical models show ‘the actual ’ behaviour. He also agrees with Levi-Strauss that both the models are complementary to each other, as there can be no society which would always 53  Function, System and Structure behave ideally without any aberrance, nor there can be a society which would not have any conception of ideal behaviour. Check Your Progress 4 1) Jerzy Topoloski. 2) According to Kaufman, the Levi-Straussian idea of structure as model remains unreliable. He further points out that reducing a model to anthropologist’s own construction is actually removing the structure from to human dimension to some other. 3) According to Maybury, the analysis based on model is not relevant because the model does not represent the social interactions sufficiently. 54