Does Cultural Anthropology Undermine its Reputation?

When I was younger, 'anthropology' was often divided into 'cultural anthropology' and 'physical anthropology.' However, with the advancement of DNA and medical science, 'anthropology' now primarily refers to cultural anthropology. This is due to the evolving nature of the field, where physical aspects are often studied through archaeological remains rather than direct observation. Therefore, the only reputation associated with anthropology is that of cultural anthropology.

One might ask whether misreporting bias and over-involvement by anthropologists when visiting tribal people has damaged the reputation of the field. The answer is 'no' in that the discipline has merged with archaeology in most American universities today. With few uncontacted tribes and cultures heavily influenced by urbanization, modern anthropological studies have a more limited scope. For instance, there isn't much room for groundbreaking research in 'tribal' cultures, given the spread of Western and national cultures and diseases.

A Closer Look at Cultural Relativism in Anthropology

From an anthropologist's perspective, cultural relativism is a vital principle that neither undermines nor supports bias. Instead, it provides a way to understand and appreciate cultural practices within their own contexts rather than through Western ethical standards. Cultural relativism means that human practices and beliefs can only be properly understood within the specific cultural and social context in which they are embedded. It does not imply an "anything goes" approach to morality. In fact, cultural anthropologists often champion human rights and contribute significantly to understanding and resolving global issues.

Contrary to popular belief, cultural relativism does not equate to moral relativism. Moral relativism suggests that there are no universal standards of right and wrong, whereas cultural relativism simply means that cultural norms and practices should be understood on their own terms. Ethnocentrism, or the belief in the automatic superiority of one's own cultural norms, can be a significant barrier to understanding other cultures. Cultural anthropologists aim to overcome ethnocentrism by suspending their own cultural biases and understanding others on their own terms.

John F. Boas: A Pioneering Figure in Cultural Anthropology

Thomas Worthington "Tom" Boas, a champion of four-field anthropology, was a key figure in the development of cultural anthropology. Boas was instrumental in promoting the idea that anthropology should encompass not only cultural but also biological, archaeological, and linguistic aspects of human studies. He was a strong advocate for cultural relativism and a critical voice against ethnocentrism. Boas' work laid the foundation for modern anthropology, emphasizing the importance of understanding different cultures on their own terms and not through the lens of Western values.

It is important to recognize that while there have been ethical and moral missteps in the field of anthropology, there have also been many dedicated anthropologists who have maintained respectful and ethical relationships with the communities they studied. These individuals have worked to protect and preserve the cultural heritage of communities often threatened by rapid modernization. Unfortunately, the negative actions of a few are often highlighted, overshadowing the numerous positive contributions made by the majority.

In conclusion, cultural anthropology does not undermine its reputation. While the field has faced its challenges, it continues to play a vital role in understanding the rich diversity of human cultures and the complex ways in which they interact with each other and their environment.