Quotessence
Home / Topics / Anthropology Quotes

Anthropology Quotes

Browse 323 quotes about Anthropology.

Related topics

Anthropology Quotes

“...I cannot conceive that a day will come when science will be complete and achieved. There will always be new problems, and exactly at the same pace as science is able to solve problems which were deemed philosophical a dozen years or a century ago, so there will appear new problems which had not hitherto been not perceived as such.”

“These hapless lovers were probably not always mere myths, and these legends which traced their spilt blood in the purple bloom of the violet, the scarlet stain of the anemone, or the crimson flush or the rose were no idle poetic emblem of youth and beauty fleeting as the Summer flowers.”

“Art, mythology, religion, philosophy, history, anthropology, science, and medicine along with literature, autobiographies, biographies, essays, memoirs, poetry, and other works of fiction and nonfiction serve as a vast library for us to scour in search of the hidden keys to attaining knowledge and happiness. We glimpse individual revelation along with selective rays of radiance from every person’s conscientious act of documenting their long-term commitment to achieving a gleaming living testament to enlightenment.”

“I did not see Pirahã teenagers moping, sleeping in late, refusing to accept responsibility for their own actions, or trying out what they considered to be radically new approaches to life. They in fact are highly productive and conformist members of their community in the Pirahã sense of productivity (good fishermen, contributing generally to the security, food needs, and other aspects of the physical survival of the community). One gets no sense of teenage angst, depression, or insecurity among the Pirahã youth. They do not seem to be searching for answers. They have them. And new questions rarely arise.”

“Only from our position of power can we afford to ignore where things really come from, because we know that all things drain, like syrup through a pipeline, from the edges of the world into the centre. What we want will appear, as if by magic, on the shelves of our supermarkets because were have the money to pay for it. We don’t have to know - other people grow it and process it, and buy it and sell it until all we see is the brand, a language we understand without effort. All those strange substances are fuzed together for our convenience, our health, our pleasure.”

“Cooking gave us not just the meal but also the occasion: the practice of eating together at an appointed time and place. This was something new under the sun, for the forager of raw food would have likely fed himself on the go and alone, like all the other animals. (Or, come to think of it, like the industrial eaters we've more recently become, grazing at gas stations and eating by ourselves whenever and wherever.) But sitting down to common meals, making eye contact, sharing food, and exercising self-restraint all served to civilize us.”

“Biomedicine locates sickness in a specific place in an individual body: a headache, a stomachache a torn knee, lung cancer. Medical anthropologists instead locate sickness and health in three interconnected bodies: the political, the social, and the physical. The prevailing political economy impacts the distribution of sickness and health in a society and the means available to heal those who are sick. For example, poor individuals worldwide are more exposed to toxins that make them sick, while the rich stay healthier. The social body constructs the meanings and experiences surrounding particular physical states. It determines the ideal physical body, legitimizing biomedical practices like plastic surgery to attain it. The social body also determines the boundaries of the physical body. Some cultures locate sickness not in individuals but instead in families or communities. As any caregiver knows, we live the sickness too. And while biomedicine can cure diseases it flounders with permanent hurts, troubles of the mind, states present from birth or that are incurable or progressive. In biomedicine, these states are stigmatized and feared. We medical anthropologists have a term for this: social death.”

“We must not conclude that morals are worthless because they differ according to time and place, and that it would be wise to show our historic learning by at once discarding the moral customs of our group. A little anthropology is a dangerous thing. [...] Social order is none the less necessary; the game must still have rules in order to be played; men must know what to expect of one another in the ordinary circumstances of life. Hence the unanimity with which the members of a society practise its moral code is quite as important as the contents of that code. Our heroic rejection of the customs and morals of our tribe, upon our adolescent discovery of their relativity, betrays the immaturity of our minds; given another decade and we begin to understand that there may be more wisdom in the moral code of the group—the formulated experience of generations of the race—than can be explained in a college course. Sooner or later the disturbing realization comes to us that even that which we cannot understand may be true.”

“Irani, la madre di Kulìa, si avviò a passo deciso verso il centro del villaggio, portando una coppa di infuso del mattino, bollente. Si sedette a fianco alla Madre, la salutò con gentilezza e le offrì la bevanda. - Ti sei svegliata presto, Madre. Bevi. - Avrei voluto svegliarmi prima, figlia. - Perché? - Avrei smesso di sognare. Non era un buon sogno. Tutto era alla rovescia e nessuno rimetteva le cose a posto. - Alla rovescia? Cosa? - Tutto, Irani, tutto era alla rovescia. Le persone, la vita, gli alberi. Le persone giacevano a terra ferite e morte, le donne venivano portate via per i capelli, i bambini sudavano tutto il giorno costretti a lavorare, gli alberi erano grigi e morti, il fumo era dappertutto. - La Madre continuava a stringersi la testa con le mani. Irani non l’aveva mai vista così - Cosa pensi che significhi, Madre? Intorno tutto era così verde, le persone erano in giro per il villaggio o sulla spiaggia, i bambini giocavano, a nessuno sarebbe passato per la testa di trascinare una donna per i capelli. La visione della Madre era la visione dell’impossibile. - Non lo so. Sembra impossibile ma pareva che tutti fossero abituati a vivere alla rovescia, come se fosse normale. Ho visto persone riccamente che davano ordini a persone vestite di stracci e queste si inchinavano. Ho visto donne chiuse da maschi in luoghi da cui non si poteva uscire. Bambini che non avevano cibo. - Madre, ciò è impossibile. Le donne sono le creatrici rispettate da tutti, i bambini mangiano sempre per primi, nessuno si inchina a nessun altro, siamo un popolo di gente libera. - Non capisci, era tutto alla rovescia. Tutto, ti dico. I villaggi non erano villaggi, non finivano mai, continuavano sempre. La campagna era lontana giorni e giorni di marcia. Non c’era un fiume in cui lavarsi, non c’erano orti da coltivare, le persone morivano e altre persone gli passavano accanto senza vederle, le persone non si salutavano, Irani. Le persone non si conoscevano. - Hai sognato ciò che non può essere, Madre. Hai sognato il contrario della vita, della libertà, della gioia. Perché dovrebbe succedere una cosa simile? Chi vorrebbe vivere così? Nessuno, Madre, e non può succedere. - Succederà, l’ho visto e l’ho sentito, le ossa mi fanno male da quanto sto soffrendo. La testa mi scoppia per quello che sto pensando. Non credo che vivrò ancora a lungo, non credo che potrò più dormire. Convoca il consiglio.”

“- Hai parlato con qualcuna di loro? La vecchia chinò il capo, quella Irani vedeva lontano, sarebbe stata la prossima Madre. Questo la rasserenò un poco. - Sì, ho parlato con una donna. - E cosa ti ha detto? - Le ho chiesto cosa fosse successo al suo popolo. «Ha dimenticato», mi ha risposto. «Ha dimenticato che la vita viene prima della morte, che le donne vengono prima degli uomini, che la natura viene prima ancora». Le ho chiesto da quanto tempo avesse dimenticato. «Alcune migliaia di anni», mi ha risposto. «Può la tua gente recuperare la memoria?» le ho chiesto. «Certo, quelli come me non l’hanno mai persa». «Perché non glielo insegni?». «Lo faccio, ma è difficile. L’abbiamo sempre fatto, ma è stato difficile. Tante donne, meno uomini. Siamo stati isolati, perseguitati, uccisi, bruciati, ma l’abbiamo fatto e continueremo a farlo». «Chi ha fatto perdere la memoria a tutta questa gente?». «La paura, la violenza, la pigrizia, l’abitudine. Ci furono uomini che hanno pensato di poter possedere altri uomini, anzi prima di tutto di poter possedere donne e bambini, e se li presero con la forza bruta. Gli altri protestarono ma finirono col subire. Persino le donne accettarono, non tutte ma la maggioranza. La storia è lunga ma vedi tu stessa come viviamo adesso». «State vivendo alla rovescia. Come fate a vivere alla rovescia?». «Con molta sofferenza, rincorrendo la felicità, cercando la gioia anche dove sembra ci sia solo dolore, affannosamente, sapendo in qualche modo che tutto potrebbe essere diverso». «La Dea ha permesso tutto ciò?». «Gli umani l’hanno permesso. La Dea è stata scelta dagli umani. Ora è pieno di Dei maschi». «Come andrà a finire?». «Ritroveremo la memoria, ma non basterà, dobbiamo inventare un nuovo modo di vivere». «Non è sufficiente rimettere semplicemente le cose a posto, come sono per il mio popolo?». Mi ha sorriso e ha scosso la testa. Poi mi sono svegliata.”

“For over a century, an evolving microcosm of Anthropology’s turbulent history has hidden behind the staid façade of the American Museum of Natural History. From an insider’s perspective, the well-known ethnologist Stan Freed engagingly introduces us to an amazing cast of explorers, eccentrics, idealists, pranksters and forbidding intellectual - an unlikely mix that played a key role in establishing the science of Anthropology as we know it today.”

“Anthropology studies the phenomenon of man, not simply man's mind, his body, evolution, origins, tools, art, or groups alone, but as parts or aspects of a general pattern, or whole. To emphasize this fact and make it a part of their ongoing effort, anthropologists have brought a general word into widespread use to stand for the phenomenon, and that word is culture.”

“...Seasonality is still with us -- even if it is a pale, contracted shadow of its former self. In the Christian world, for instance, there is still the midwinter ´holiday season´ in which values and forms of organization so, to a limited degree, reverse themselves: the same media and advertisers who for most of the year peddle rabid consumerist individualism suddenly start announcing that social relations are what´s really important, and that to give is better than to receive...”

“In years past, a person died, and eventually all those with memories of him or her also died, bringing about the complete erasure of that person's existence. Just as the human body returned to dust, mingling with atoms of the natural world, a person's existence would return to nothingness. How very clean. Now, as if in belated punishment for the invention of writing, any message once posted on the Internet was immortal. Words as numerous as the dust of the earth would linger forever in their millions and trillions and quadrillions and beyond.”

“A culture, like an individual, is a more or less consistent pattern of thought and action. [...] Each people further and further consolidates its experience, and in proportion to the urgency of these drives the heterogenous items of behaviour take more and more congruous shape. [...] Such patterning of culture cannot be ignored as if it were an unimportant detail. The whole, as modern science is insisting in many fields, is not merely the sum of all its parts, but the result of a unique arrangement and interrelation of the parts that has brought about a new entity. Gunpowder is not merely the sum of sulphur and charcoal and saltpeter, and no amount of knowledge even of all three of tis elements in all the forms they take in the natural world will demonstrate the nature of gunpowder.”

“People often ask, Why is infidelity such a big deal today? Why does it hurt so much? How has it become one of the leading causes of divorce? Only by taking a brief trip back in time to look at the changes of love, sex and marriage over the last few centuries can we have an informed conversation about modern infidelity. History and culture have always set the stage for our domestic dramas. In particular, the rise of individualism, the emergence of consumer culture, and the mandate for happiness have transformed matrimony and its adulterous shadow. Affairs are not what they used to be because marriage is not what it used to be.”

“These people know the reality and laugh at it. Such laughter has little concern with what is funny. It is often bitter and sometimes a little mad, for it is the laugh under the mask of tragedy, and also the laughter that masks tears. They are the same. It is the laughter of people who value love and friendship and plenty, who have lived with terror and death and hate." - , Return to Laughter (1954)”

“Marriage," "mating," and "love" are socially constructed phenomena that have little or no transferable meaning outside any given culture. The examples we've noted of rampant ritualized group sex, mate-swapping, unrestrained casual affairs, and socially sanctioned sequential sex were all reported in cultures that anthropologists insist are monogamous simply because they've determined that something they call "marriage" takes place there. No wonder so many insist that marriage, monogamy, and the nuclear family are human universals. With such all-encompassing interpretations of the concepts, even the prairie vole, who "sleeps with anyone," would qualify.”

“Le Guin has a point. Obviously, we have no idea how relatively happy the inhabitants of Ukrainian mega-sites like Maidenetske or Nebelivka were, compared to the lords who constructed kurgan burials, or even the retainers ritually sacrificed at their funerals; or the bonded labourers who provided wheat and barley to the inhabitants of later Greek colonies along the Black Sea coast (though we can guess), and as anyone who has read the story knows, Omelas had some problems too. But the point remains: why do we assume that people who have figured out a way for a large population to govern and support itself without temples, palaces and military fortifications – that is, without overt displays of arrogance, self-abasement and cruelty – are somehow less complex than those who have not?”

“Wittgenstein wrote a comprehensive critique of the Scottish anthropologist J. G. Frazer's masterpiece "The Golden Bough" (1890), a comparative study of religion and mythology. One of Wittgenstein's main objections was that Frazer ascribes the natives he discusses with irrational beliefs for which there is no evidence: for example, that a certain ritual will make it rain. The problem is that Frazer is unable to see what the natives are actually doing. Wittgenstein states: "Frazer is much more savage than most of his savages... His explanations of primitive practices are much cruder than the meaning of these practices themselves." While Frazer believes that the natives' actions are based on mistaken beliefs about causal relationships, Wittgenstein suggests that they are not based on such beliefs at all. Once, after a very bad game, I smashed my tennis racket. Had my opponent thought like Frazer, he would have believed that my action was a ritual sacrifice aimed at changing the outcome of the tournament for me. But my action was not based on any such expectation. It was simply an immature expression of anger and disappointment. The most reasonable understanding of the natives' ritual practices involves considering them as expressions of hope, among other things, not as irrational notions of causal relationships. Our idea of causation stems from us observing regularities. We will have repeatedly seen that A is followed by B. What regularities would have led the natives to see a causal relationship between a specific ritual and a specific natural phenomenon such as rain? Is is unlikely that rain was usually brought about by a specific dance, and the natives must have seen that it sometimes rains despite no ritual being performed. Not least, the natives should have danced a lot during the driest parts of the year, but they didn't. So it's far more plausible to consider this dance an expression of hoping for rain. From that perspective there is nothing irrational about the natives' actions. The dancing is a shared expression of their understanding that the desired rain might come.”

“One could imagine that a group of anthropologists and scientists sent off to study a previously uncontacted Amazon tribe today might be bound by similar strictures [not to reproduce with natives]. But suppose some of them disagreed? Suppose some of them "went native"--as used to be said of colonialists in the days of the British Empire who allowed themselves to get too close to indigenous populations they interacted with. Is that perhaps what happened to the troop of two hundred "Watchers" on Mount Hermon? Somewhere around 10,900 BC, did they break the commandments of their own culture and "go native" among the hunter-gatherers of the Near East? And were the first chance encounters with the fragments of a giant comet a century later in 10,800 BC--encounters that devastated the world--somehow blamed upon their moral lapse?”

“When sovereignty first expands to become the general organizing principle of a society, it is by turning violence into kinship. The early, spectacular phase of mass killing in both China and Egypt, whatever else it may be doing, appears to be intended to lay the foundations of what Max Weber referred to as a ‘patrimonial system’: that is, one in which all the kings’ subjects are imagined as members of the royal household, at least to the degree that they are all working to care for the king. Turning erstwhile strangers into part of the royal household, or denying them their own ancestors, are thereby ultimately two sides of the same coin. Or to put things another way, a ritual designed to produce kinship becomes a method of producing kingship.”