Picking up where I left off last week, I will now present the different approaches and methodologies of anthropology as a discipline.<\/p>\n
We have already seen that social and cultural anthropology \u2013 also known as ethnography \u2013 as a discipline endeavours to answer the questions of what is unique about human beings, or how are social groups formed, etc. This clearly overlaps with many other social sciences. For all the authors reviewed, what distinguishes anthropology from other social sciences is not the subject studied, but the discipline\u2019s approach to it. For Peoples and Bailey (2000, pp. 1 and 8), anthropological approach to its subject is threefold:<\/p>\n
The holistic perspective means that \u2018no single aspect of human culture can be understood unless its relations to other aspects of the culture are explored\u2019. It means anthropologists are looking for connections between facts or elements, striving to understand parts in the context of the whole.<\/p>\n
The comparative approach, for Peoples and Bailey (2000, p. 8) implies that general theories about humans, societies or cultures must be tested comparatively- ie that they are \u2018likely to be mistaken unless they take into account the full range of cultural diversity\u2019 (Peoples & Bailey 2000, p. 8).<\/p>\n
Finally the relativistic perspective means that for anthropologists no culture is inherently superior or inferior to any other. In other words, anthropologists try not to evaluate the behaviour of members of other cultures by the values and standards of their own. This is a crucial point which can be a great source of debate when studying global issues, such as the topic we will discuss on the global digital divide.\u00a0 And it is why I will spend one more week reviewing literature on anthropology before moving on to the other discipline of management \u2013 to see how anthropology is general applied to more global contexts. I will then try to provide a discussion on the issues engendered by the approaches detailed above.<\/p>\n
So for Peoples and Bailey these three approaches are what distinguish anthropology from most other social sciences. For Monaghan and Just, the methodology of anthropology is its most distinguishable feature. Indeed they emphasise fieldwork \u2013 or ethnography \u2013 as what differentiates anthropology from other social sciences (Monaghan & Just 200, pp. 1-2). For them \u2018participant observation\u2019 is \u2018based on the simple idea that in order to understand what people are up to, it is best to observe them by interacting intimately over a longer period of time\u2019 (2000, p. 13). Interview is therefore the main technique to elicit and record data (Monaghan & Just 2000, p. 23). This methodological discussion is similarly found\u00a0 in Peoples & Bailey and Eriksen (2010, p.4) defines anthropology as \u2018the comparative study of cultural and social life. Its most important method is participant observation, which consists in lengthy fieldwork in a specific social setting\u2019. This particular methodology also poses the issues of objectivity, involvement or even advocacy. I will address these next week after further readings on anthropological perspectives in global issues, trying to assess the tensions between the global and particular, the universal and relative and where normative endeavour stand among all these.<\/p>\n
References<\/span><\/p>\n Eriksen, T. H. (2010) Small Places, Large Issues: An Introduction to Social and Cultural Anthropology<\/em> 3rd<\/sup> edition, New York: Pluto Press<\/p>\n Monaghan, J. and Just, P. (2000) Social and Cultural Anthropology: A Very Short Introduction<\/em>, Oxford: Oxford University Press<\/p>\n Peoples, J. and Bailey, G. (2000) Humanity: An Introduction to Cultural Anthropology<\/em>, 5th<\/sup> ed., Belmont: Wadsworth\/Thomson Learning<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Picking up where I left off last week, I will now present the different approaches and methodologies of anthropology as a discipline. We have already seen that social and cultural anthropology \u2013 also known as ethnography \u2013 as a discipline endeavours to answer the questions of what is unique about human beings, or how are […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":92993,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[443,16580,8893],"class_list":["post-1768","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-anthropology","tag-digital-divide","tag-management"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1768","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/92993"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1768"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1768\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1775,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1768\/revisions\/1775"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1768"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1768"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/comp6044\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1768"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}