Methods of Ethnology Summary free essay sample

Specifically, Boas, in  The Methods of Ethnology, argued against the various traditional evolutionary theories proposed by Morgan, Marx, Tylor and Spencer. Stating simply that these theories had a particular resilience, but lacked any sort of empirical evidence, Boas argued that the evolutionary theory was based on the counterfactual assumption that our culture was the most advanced and all others were merely following us (Boas, 134). After attacking the diffusionists by noting that their data was not competent enough, methodological difficulties, he responded to the view that historical particularism (Historical particularism argued that each society is a collective representation of its unique historical past. It showed that societies could reach the same level of  cultural development  through different paths) was atheoretical. How things are and how they come to exist can give only broad outlines of chronological events. Hence cultures are dynamic and in constant flux; every phenomenon is not only an effect, but also a cause. We will write a custom essay sample on Methods of Ethnology Summary or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Boas, 137) A point, taken to the extreme by Kroeber, but also put forth by Boas was that certain problems may be solved in only particular ways. Because humans are similar in their infrastructure, they would tend to solve these problems in similar ways, leading towards the creation of similar traits. Hence, it is not about cultural achievement, but rather about particular conditions that exist at the moment when the new effect is obtained In his 1920 essay on the â€Å"The Methods of Ethnology,† Franz Boas clearly made the case for human societies’ dynamism and the need to study history and change. Thus, recognition of this fact arose early in the history of anthropology and ethnography, but it did not become central to general practice until later. In Boas’ article, â€Å"Methods of Ethnology†, he argues the hypotheses of hyper-diffusion and linear evolution is flawed, and lack supportive evidence. He provides an alternative anthropological perspective, cultural holism. Boas points out that the hypotheses of diffusion and evolution are similar in that ideas start in one spot and spread from there. He asserts that for these theories to be valid, all societies would have to climb a ladder of development in order to reach the ultimate title of â€Å"civilization†. For instance, a society can’t reach â€Å"civilization† without first developing a written language. Boas argues against both points, stating that if diffusion was valid, one would have to believe there is no variation and that all things have the same meaning and hold the same value. To support his argument against evolution, one would have only to look at the Egyptian and Inca societies, neither of which had an alphabet but are great â€Å"civilizations† in ancient times. Boas suggests understanding history is to â€Å"not only know how things are, but to know how they have come to be†. However, this is not the shared belief of all anthropologists and for that reason Boas asserts that our perception of cultural history is skewed. He also questions how a person is affected by their social environment as well as how that social environment is effected by them, resulting in inevitable change. The result of this process is the introduction of invention and change on the individual level, rather than diffused through group/societal channels.