McGraw Hills GMAT 2013
...
Because the very subject matter of anthropology is so volatile, it’s no surprise that the discipline is frequently embroiled in controversy. Even when social commentators and outside observers fail to criticize the latest anthropological theory on human nature, the social science’s own practitioners are often up in arms over some study or another. Consider Ekman’s landmark study of human emotions in the 1960s.
At the time, the accepted movement in anthropology was relativism. In an effort to rid the discipline of accusations of bias, anthropologists attempted to study cultures as isolated systems. The norms, mores, and practices of each culture were analyzed only in terms of the internal consistency they possessed and any suggestion of judgment was met by howls of outrage by the anthropological establishment. Into this arena came Ekman with his startling heresy; emotions, argued Ekman, were not arbitrary cultural constructs but universal human traits. Ekman had spent years traveling the world, showing people around the globe photographs of other people expressing six basic emotions: happiness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust, and surprise. Not one person studied by Ekman failed to recognize these emotions, whether the person in the photograph was wearing the suit of a Western businessman or the tribal dress of the Fore foragers of New Guinea.
When Ekman presented his findings at an anthropological conference, he was denounced as a fascist and a racist. Some of his fellow scientists even took his research to prove not that human emotions were universal but that the hegemony of Western culture was so complete that even the most far-flung peoples were socialized into the Western mindset. Ekman was shocked at the reaction. He thought his findings would be evidence of the brotherhood of man, not of the subjugation of the world by the West. And yet, Ekman’s conclusions have been replicated again and again and are now generally accepted in the anthropology community, which apparently is like its subject matter: quick to anger but perhaps slow to admit mistakes.
At the time, the accepted movement in anthropology was relativism. In an effort to rid the discipline of accusations of bias, anthropologists attempted to study cultures as isolated systems. The norms, mores, and practices of each culture were analyzed only in terms of the internal consistency they possessed and any suggestion of judgment was met by howls of outrage by the anthropological establishment. Into this arena came Ekman with his startling heresy; emotions, argued Ekman, were not arbitrary cultural constructs but universal human traits. Ekman had spent years traveling the world, showing people around the globe photographs of other people expressing six basic emotions: happiness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust, and surprise. Not one person studied by Ekman failed to recognize these emotions, whether the person in the photograph was wearing the suit of a Western businessman or the tribal dress of the Fore foragers of New Guinea.
When Ekman presented his findings at an anthropological conference, he was denounced as a fascist and a racist. Some of his fellow scientists even took his research to prove not that human emotions were universal but that the hegemony of Western culture was so complete that even the most far-flung peoples were socialized into the Western mindset. Ekman was shocked at the reaction. He thought his findings would be evidence of the brotherhood of man, not of the subjugation of the world by the West. And yet, Ekman’s conclusions have been replicated again and again and are now generally accepted in the anthropology community, which apparently is like its subject matter: quick to anger but perhaps slow to admit mistakes.
...
.jpg)
