Anthropological theories 2.pdf

FUNCTI ONALI SM Earl y t went iet h cent ur y t heor eti cal posi ti on, associ atedw...

FUNCTI ONALI SM Earl y t went iet h cent ur y t heor eti cal posi ti on, associ atedwi thBroni slawMal i nowski. Malinowskiwastheson ofapr of essor ,and lat er became a prof essorhimselfatLondon Schoolof Economicsandpoli ti cal Science. Trai nedi nPolandasaMat hemat ici an, aft eraPh. D.i n Physics and Mat hematics;obtai ned a Ph. D. i n SociologyandAnthropol ogy. Lat erst udi edSoci ologyandAnt hropol ogyi nEngl and His Ph. D.was super vised by C.G.Sel i gman,an Anthr opologi st. Hebel i evedi nthesy stemat iccol l ect ionofdat a. Accor ding t o Mal i nowski( 1922) ,the et hnogr apher hadtoconsi der “Thef ullext entofthephenomenai neachaspectof tri balcul t urestudi ed,makingnodi fferencebet ween whati scommonpl ace,ordrab,oror dinary,andwhat stri keshi m asastoni shingandout -of-t he-way.Atthe samet i me,t hewholear eaoft ribalcul t urei nallit s aspects has t o be gone ov eri nr esearch.The consistency,thelaw andor derwhi chobt ainwi thi n each aspectmake al so forj oining them i nto one coherentwhol e”( 1922:11). Theabovequotat ionmeanst hatt heanthropol ogi st car ryi ngoutaresearchmustpayatt ent iontodetai ls oft hecult ureunderstudy.Beari ngt hesubjectmatt er 1  oft he research in mi nd,the ethnogr aphermust col lectev er ything,whet hermeaningfulorother wise tohim/her. Malinowskicar ri ed out anthropol ogicalfiel dwork amongt heTrobriandIsl ander s,andbel i evedthatan et hnogr aphi cr esearchmustbecar r iedoutf r om the i nsiders’per spective. Postulates t hat ev ery cultural trait perf or ms a parti cularf unction wi t hinthe i nterr elat ed whol ei n meet i nghumanpur posesorneeds,andt hatist he reason f ori ts existence.Thi s means t hatev ery elementofa cul turei si nterconnected t o other element softhatcul tureorculturalsystem asawhol e, andcont r ibutei nmeet ingtheneedsofmember sof thatsoci ety.Humans hav e bi ological ,soci aland psychological needs. Function,inthissimplestandmostbasicaspectof humanbehav ior,canbedefinedas“t hesat i sfact ion ofanor gani ci mpulsebytheappropr iat eact ”.Form andf uncti on,obv i ousl y,ar einext ri cabl yrel atedtoone another. Tohi m asoci et yisani ntegr atedwhol e,requiri ngan anthropol ogistt o exami ne the int erconnections of diff erentculturaldomai ns.To engage i n scient if ic study,theanthropologistmusti nquir eoff uncti onas everycult uralinsti tuti onsar eintegrat edr esponsest o vari etyofneeds. Hei dent if ied3t ypesofneeds/ imper ati ves: 2 (a)Pr i mary/basi c need ( the prev enti on ofbodi ly i njur iesbymechani calaccident,attackf r om ani mals or other human bei ngs’(bi ological needs) e. g. nutr it ion,pr ocreat ion,defence,protection. (b)Derivedorinst rumentalneedse. g.Organi sat ionof acti vit ies,l aw and education,fi nance,economic organi zat i on – hel ps humans meet t hei r fundament al/ basi cneeds. (c)I ntegrat iveorsynt heti cneeds–appli estohuman feel i ngs, that is, mental ly and emot ional l y eg knowledge,magic, rel igi on,ar t,pl ay. Malinowskibel ievedt hathistheory(Functionalism) wouldhel pant hropologi stsunderstandpr i mi ti veor other i sol ated soci et ies, to under stand t he i mpor tanceofcust oms,andhow t hey‘dov et aili nto eachot her’.Hebel ievedthatmissionari es,col oni al authori ti es,andt hosei nt erest edinsav agelabourf or economi c pur poses woul dfind hisf unctional i st approachusef ul. He proposed t hat allaspect s of a cul tur e ar e i nter rel atedandi nter playt omakeawhol e. He studi ed Trobr iand Isl ander s, and publ i shed Ar gonautsoft heWest er nPacif ic( 1922). Malinowski made gr eat cont ri but ions to t he developmentofant hr opologicalr esearcht hroughhis useofpar ti cipantobser vationasar esear chmet hod i nant hropol ogicalr esear ch. Mal i nowski obser ved t hat “ …ev ery cul tur e must 3  satisf yt hebiol ogicalsy st emsofneeds”andsecond, “thateverycult uralachi ev ementthati mpl i estheuse of ar t ifact s and sy mbol ism is an instr umental enhancementofhumananat omy,andrefer sdir ectly ori ndir ectl yt othe satisfacti on ofa bodil yneed” (1944:171). I nsum, cult ureisuti li tari an, adapti ve, andfunct ionall y i ntegrat ed,andtheexplanat ionofcul tur einv olv est he del ineat ionoffunct ion. Cr it ici sm I tisnotal waysthecaset hatanet hnogr apherisable toidenti fythefuncti onsofal lcul turalpractices.What functi on does gay mar riage perf or m i n meet i ng human needs? On t he cont r ary,some cul tural practi cesaremal - adapt ive. Besi des,functi onal i sm tendstopresentsoci eti esas st ati c,andav oi dedthedynami caspectsofsoci alli fe. STRUCTURAL- FUNCTI ONALI SM Associ atedwi thA.R.Radcl i ffe- Brown,Mey erFor tes, MaxGluckmanet c. StudentsofRadcl if fe-br owni ncl udeEvans- Pri tchard whost udi edtheNuerofSudan.For t eswhost udied theTall ensi ,andPaulBohannanwhostudi edtheTiv. 4 To Radcli ffe- Brown, a soci etyi s a sy stem of rel ati onshi p. Radcli ffe- Brown has descri bed himsel f as ‘anti - funct ional ist’ ,depi cti nghisrej ect ionoffunct ionali st schoolofthoughtt houghmanyscholar shavetri edt o grouphim withMal inowski ’ sfunct ional i sm. Hewasi nterest edincr eati ng“ asoci alanthropology thatwasgener ali singandt husascience”( Moor e, 2009:149).Tohim, ‘socialanthr opol ogy’i samet hod, andapproachandanewwayofl ooki ngatpr obl ems. Heconductedf i eldworkont heAndamanI slands(a chainofisl andsof ft hesout herncoastofMy anmar (Burma).His Ph. D.was an accountoftradit ional cult ure. Hewasi nfl uencedbythewor ksofEmil eDurkhei m andMarcelMauss.Oneofhismajorwor sThe ksi AndamanIsl anders( 1922). Establ i sheddepartmentofanthropol ogyinUni ver sit y ofCapeTown, Sout hAfrica( 1921-1926) ,Uni ver sit yof Sydney,Uni ver sit yofChicagoetc. Taughti nCai ro, Sout hAf ri ca, anddi edi n1955. To Radcl if f-Br own,soci alant hr opologybot hers on “t he study of discov erable regular iti es i n the devel opmentofhumansocietyinsof arasthesecan be il l ustr ated or demonstr ated by t he study of pri mit ivepeopl es”( Radcli ff e-Brown,1977:54). Hi s soci alant hropol ogy i s char act eri sed by t he 5  obser vat ion ofr egul ari ti es and sear ch f orgener al l aws. His1951lect ur ewasar esponset oFranzBoas’‘ The Limit ati onsofCompar ati veMet hodofAnt hropol ogy’ whichBoaspr esented55y earsear l i er.Hecl ai med thatcompar ati vemet hod wasal so necessaryand that libr ary r esear ch was usef ul when i t supplementedethnographi cfi eldwork. Accor ding t o Moor e ( 2009), Radcl iff e-Brown compl ainedt hatt hemoder nant hropol ogygr aduate student sset tingoutf orfi eldwork“ i stoldthathemust consi deranyf eatureofsoci alli feinitscontext ,i nits relationt ot heot herf eat uresoft hepar ti cularsocial syst em i nwhi chi tisfound.Buthei softennott aught tol ookati ti nt hewi dercontextofhumansoci et i esin gener al ”( Moor e,2009:151).ThisiswhatRadcl i ff e- Brownpr oposedt odo.Hesawsoci alanthropologyas a sub- di scipline of Compar ati ve Soci ology,a discipl i ne t r aced t o Mont esquieu and Comt e and mor edir ect l yt oDur kheim. Socialant hropol ogywas grounded i n comparat ive method,anditsgoalwastheeluci dati onoflaw-l ike general i zati onsabouthumansoci ety. Radcliff e-Brown env isi oned an anthropol ogy t hat coulddi scoverscientif iclawsabouthumansociety, cross-cult uralregularit ies bet ween “st ruct ure”and “f unction”.Tohim,“ thecomponentofuni t sofsocial struct urear epersons,andaper soni sahumanbei ng considered notas an or gani sm butas occupyi ng 6  posit ioninasocialstructure”( Radl iffe- Brown,1965: 9).Socialst ruct urei s aboutt he ar r angementof persons i ninsti tuti onal l y-define relati onshi ps e.g. husbandandwi f e,whi l eor ganisat ioni saboutt he arr angementofacti vit ies. To hi m astructuralsystem isasyst em ofsocial posi ti ons, notsystem ofroleswhi chi sorgani sat ion. Socialst r uctur et ohimi st hatcompl exnet workof soci alr el ati ons,whi ch includes “al li nt erpersonal rel ations,thedif fer entiat ionofi ndi vi dualsandgr oups bytheirsocialrol es,andt her el ati onshipsbetweena part iculargroupofhumans,andal ar gernet workof connections”(Moore,2009:153). He act uall y protest ed againstfunct ional i sm ina publ i cati ontit led, ‘Funct ional i sm: Aprot est’( 1949). Hei snotsomuchi nter estedininstant iat ionsbut ‘ generalornormal ’for ms.Accordingtohim“ Iregar d soci alstruct ureasar eal it y”(Radcl if fe-Br own,1977: 42). “WhenIpi ckupapar ticul arseashellonthebeach,I recogni zeitashav ingapar t icul arstruct ure.Imay fi ndot hershellsoft hesamespeci eswhi chhavea similarst r uct uresot hatIcansayt hereisaform of structurecharacter isticofthespeci es”(see,‘ Let terto Lev i -Strauss’ ,1977:42). To hi m socialst ructur esar enotabst ract ionsl i ke cul tur ebutcanbedirect lyobser ved. For Radcl i ffe- Brown, t he f unct ion of cul tur al 7  i nsti tut ionswastheroletheypl ayedinmaintai ning soci ety ,notthesat isf acti onofindi vi dual s’needsas Mali nowskiar gued. Li kemanyt heor iesofhumansociet y ,t henot ionis basedontheorgani canal ogy,ref err ingtoact ivi ti es meeti ngt heneedsofthest ruct ure. “The cont i nuity ofst ructur ei s mai nt ained by t he processofsoci all ife,whichconsi stsoftheact ivi ties andi nt eractionsoft heindivi dualhumanbei ngsand oftheor gani zedgr oupsi nt owhi cht heyar euni ted. Thesoci allifeoft hecommuni t yi sher edef i nedas thefuncti oningoft hesoci alstr ucture.Thef unctionof acr i me,oraf uner alcer emony ,i st hepar titplaysi n the social l if e as a whol e and t herefore t he contri butionitmakest othemai ntenanceofst r uctur al conti nuity”(Radclif fe-Brown,1952: 180). Whi l e t he f uncti onal i st s attach i mpor tance t o obser vation oft he on- going behav i our s and dai ly activit iesi nsociet y, andt herolest heypl ayinmeet ing human’ sneeds( Bio-socialandpsy chologicalneeds of t he act ors and t hei r society),t he st r uctural- functional i sts proposed t hat f unctions must be rel atedt ost r uctureoft hesoci ety.Eg.Rel i giousr i tes promot e socialcohesi on and suppor tt he soci al structure. Whil eMal i nowskifocusedontheconceptofcult ure, Radcl if fe- Brownfocusedontheconceptofsoci ety. Radcli ff e-Br ownwasi nf luencedbyEmil eDurkhei m( a FrenchSoci ologi st)whowroteTheDiv isi onofLabour 8  i n Societ y( 1893)and The El ement ary For ms of Rel i giousLif e(1912). Durkheim al so noted t hat rel i gion functi ons t o maint ai nandunifythepeopl eina‘ moralcommunit y, createsandmai ntai nsocialsoli dari ty,andlast sas societylast s’. His societ yis made up of par ts wi th diff erent speci ali sati ons, andt heyall cooperatetoi ntegrat et he soci ety,andmaint ainsocialcohesi onandsolidar ity. Accordi ngt ot hestruct ural- functi onal istschool,uni ts ofasocietyar eint erdependent.Alt houghtheymaybe confl icttheysurv ive as there ar e majorar eas of agreement. Thest ruct uremaybechangi ngandadapt ing. Radcl if fe- Brown bel ievethatinst itut ions ofsoci al syst emsfit tedt ogetheri ntoafunct ionalwhole. LikeDur kheim,hebel i evedthatinst i tuti onsofsoci al systemsf it tedtogetherintoafunctionalwhole,t hatis thefunct i onofasoci alinsti tut ionis“ theparti tplays i nt he sociallif e as a whol e,and t heref oret he contribut ionitmakest ot hemaintenanceofst r uctural continuit y”(Radcl iff e-Brown,1935). Soci alst ruct ure,hear gued,i sli ket hest ruct ureofa sea- shel lonaseashor e. STRUCTURALI SM 9 Str uctur alism al soref erredt oasFr enchStr uct urali sm i s associated wit h Claude Lev i-St rauss,a French anthr opologist. Levi -St raussstudi edPhi l osophy ,Law,Soci ologyand thenanthr opol ogy. Hist heoryhasgr eati nfl uenceonthedev elopmentof anthropological theor yi n the t went ieth cent ury , parti cularl y i n t he 1940s. He bel ieved t hat anthropologists shoul d focus on t he under l ying patterns ofhuman t houghtsthatinf orm t he way peopl e str ucturet heirwor l d.This he bel i eved is uni v ersal. Hewasdescr ibedas‘ theant hropol ogi stasaher o’. Str uctur ali sm wasi ntensel ypopul ari nthe1960sand 1970s. The t heoryfocused on t he unconsci ousstr uct ure, deepstr uct ure,under lyi nghumanbehaviour. Hef ocusedonl anguageandment alpr ocesses. Hear guedt hathumansimposef or msoncont ent , andsaw i nsti tuti onsassyst emsofr epr esent ati ons. “Representat ions”her emeansbel i efs,att it ude, norms, valuesetc. Histheoret icalpositi onhasbeenexplai nedas“ the sear chf orstructur esoftheunconsci ousthatshape thef ormsofcul t urall i fe”( Moore, 2009:236). Bel iev ed t hat ant hropol ogi sts shoul d examine ‘ unconsci ous foundati ons of social l i fe’. His 10  theoret icalposi ti onbothersondiscov eri ngt helogi c thatunderlayscul tur alprocessesamongal lhuman groups. Radcliff e-Br ownar guedthatant hropol ogist sshould study the underl yi ng str uct ures ofsoci all i fe.He therefor est udi edsy st emsofclassi fi cati on,kinshi p, andt helogi cofmy th. Carri ed outfi eldwor ki nBrazi l ,study ing t heI ndi an tr ibesoftheMattoGrossoi nwester nBrazi l. Hewr oteTheSav ageMi nd( 1966). Rather t han l ooking at t he f unctioni ng of t he str ucture/ el ement soft hesoci etyaspost ul atedby Str uctural-functi onal istli ke Radcl i ffe- Brown,Cl aude Levi- Strauss ar gued t hat therei st he need t o understandt heor iginofthesy stemst hemsel ves,that i show t hesy stem comet obei nthef i rstplace.To him binar yopposi t ionunderlayhumant hough,and thi s det ermines who t o mar r y ornot ,hence t he enactmentofi ncestt abooacrosshumansoci eties. Forhim,cult ureasexpr essedinar t,r itual sandt he patt ernsofdail ylif eisj ustasur f acer epresent ati on ofdeeporunder l yi ngst ruct ureoft hehumanmi nd. Str uctur ali sm isthereforeinter ested in amodeof thi nki ngsharedbyal lhumans,i r respectiveoftime andspace. 11