-
The word culture, from the Latin colo, -ere, with its root meaning to cultivate, generally refers to patterns of human activity and the symbolic structures that give such activity significance. Different definitions of culture reflect different theoretical bases for understanding, or criteria for evaluating, human activity. Anthropologists most commonly use the term culture to refer to the universal human capacity to classify, codify and communicate their experiences symbolically. This capacity is taken as a defining feature of the genus Homo, though Jane Goodall (The Chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of Behavior, 1986) identified aspects of culture among our closest relatives.
Defining culture
Different definitions of culture reflect different theories for understanding - or criteria for evaluating - human activity.
Sir Edward B. Tylor wrote in 1871 that
- culture or civilization, taken in its wide ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society
while a 2002 document from the United Nations agency UNESCO states that culture is the
- set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features of society or a social group, and that it encompasses, in addition to art and literature, lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs. UNESCO, 2002
While these two definitions range widely, they do not exhaust the many uses of this concept - in 1952 Alfred Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn compiled a list of more than 200 different definitions of culture in their book, Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions [Kroeber and Kluckhohn, 1952].
The two definitions stated above, as well as many others, offer a laundry list of things that comprise culture. The list items are treated as objects with an existence and life-line of their own. For example, a law, a stone tool, a marriage, come into space-time at one set of coordinates and go out of it another. While here, they change, so that one may speak of the evolution of the law or the tool.
A culture, then, is by definition at least a set of cultural objects. Leslie White asked, what sort of objects are they? Are they physical objects? Mental objects? Both? Metaphors? Symbols? Reifications? In Science of Culture, published in 1949, he finally concluded that they are objects sui generis, of their own kind. In trying to capture what that kind is, he hit upon a previously unrealized aspect of symbolization, which he called the symbolate. He then defined culture as
- symbolates understood in an extra-somatic context.
The key to this definition is the discovery of the symbolate. The reader is invited to the article on symbol for further presentation.
Culture as values, norms, and artifacts
A common way of understanding culture sees it as consisting of three elements:
- values
- norms
- artifacts.
(See Dictionary of Modern Sociology, 1969, 93, cited at [1]) Values comprise ideas about what in life seems important. They guide the rest of the culture. Norms consist of expectations of how people will behave in different situations. Each culture has different methods, called sanctions, of enforcing its norms. Sanctions vary with the importance of the norm; norms that a society enforces formally have the status of laws. Artifacts things, or material culture derive from the culture's values and norms.
Julian Huxley gives a slightly different division, into inter-related mentifacts, socifacts and artifacts, for ideological, sociological, and technological subsystems respectively. Socialization, in Huxley's view, depends on the belief subsystem. The sociological subsystem governs interaction between people. Material objects and their use make up the technological subsystem. [2]
As a rule, archeologists focus on material culture whereas cultural anthropologists focus on symbolic culture, although ultimately both groups maintain interests in the relationships between these two dimensions. Moreover, anthropologists understand culture to refer not only to consumption goods, but to the general processes which produce such goods and give them meaning, and to the social relationships and practices in which such objects and processes become embedded.
Culture as civilization
Many people today use a conception of culture that developed in Europe during the 18th and early 19th centuries. This idea of culture then reflected inequalities within European societies, and between European powers and their colonies around the world. It identifies culture with civilization and contrasts the combined concept with nature. According to this thinking, one can classify some countries as more civilized than others, and some people as more cultured than others. Thus some cultural theorists have actually tried to eliminate popular or mass culture from the definition of culture. Theorists like Matthew Arnold (1822-1888) or the Leavises regard culture as simply the result of the best that has been thought and said in the world (Arnold, 1960: 6); Arnold contrasted culture with social chaos or anarchy. On this account, culture links closely with social cultivation: the progressive refinement of human behavior. Arnold consistently uses the word this way: ...culture being a pursuit of our total perfection by means of getting to know, on all the matters which most concern us, the best which has been thought and said in the world. Arnold, 1882 In practice, culture referred to lite goods and activities such as haute cuisine, high fashion or haute couture, museum-caliber art and classical music, and the word cultured described people who knew about, and took part in, these activities. For example, someone who used 'culture' in the sense of 'cultivation' might argue that classical music is more refined than music produced by working-class people such as punk rock or than the indigenous music traditions of aboriginal peoples of Australia.
People who use culture in this way tend not to use it in the plural as cultures. They do not believe that distinct cultures exist, each with their own internal logic and values; but rather that only a single standard of refinement suffices, against which one can measure all groups. Thus, according to this worldview, people with different customs from those who regard themselves as cultured do not usually count as having a different culture; but class as uncultured. People lacking culture often seemed more natural, and observers often defended (or criticized) elements of high culture for repressing human nature.
From the 18th century onwards, some social critics have accepted this contrast between cultured and uncultured, but have stressed the interpretation of refinement and of sophistication as corrupting and unnatural developments which obscure and distort people's essential nature. On this account, folk music (as produced by working-class people) honestly expresses a natural way of life, and classical music seems superficial and decadent. Equally, this view often portrays non-Western people as 'noble savages' living authentic unblemished lives, uncomplicated and uncorrupted by the highly-stratified capitalist systems of the West.
Today most social scientists reject the monadic conception of culture, and the opposition of culture to nature. They recognize non-lites as just as cultured as lites (and non-Westerners as just as civilized) - simply regarding them as just cultured in a different way. Thus social observers contrast the high culture of lites to popular or pop culture, meaning goods and activities produced for, and consumed by, non-lite people or the masses. (Note that some classifications relegate both high and low cultures to the status of subcultures.)
Culture as worldview
During the Romantic era, scholars in Germany, especially those concerned with nationalist movements - such as the nationalist struggle to create a Germany out of diverse principalities, and the nationalist struggles by ethnic minorities against the Austro-Hungarian Empire - developed a more inclusive notion of culture as worldview. In this mode of thought, a distinct and incommensurable world view characterizes each ethnic group. Although more inclusive than earlier views, this approach to culture still allowed for distinctions between civilized and primitive or tribal cultures.
By the late 19th century, anthropologists had adopted and adapted the term culture to a broader definition that they could apply to a wider variety of societies. Attentive to the theory of evolution, they assumed that all human beings evolved equally, and that the fact that all humans have cultures must in some way result from human evolution. They also showed some reluctance to use biological evolution to explain differences between specific cultures - an approach that either exemplified a form of, or segment of society vis a vis other segments and the society as a whole, they often reveal processes of domination and resistance.
The 20th century also saw the popularization of the idea of corporate culture - distinct and malleable within the context of an employing organization or of a workplace.
Culture as symbols
The symbolic view of culture, the legacy of Clifford Geertz (1973) and Victor Turner (1967), holds symbols to be both the practices of social actors and the context that gives such practices meaning. Anthony P. Cohen (1985) writes of the symbolic gloss which allows social actors to use common symbols to communicate and understand each other while still imbuing these symbols with personal significance and meanings. Symbols provide the limits of cultured thought. Members of a culture rely on these symbols to frame their thoughts and expressions in intelligible terms. In short, symbols make culture possible, reproducible and readable. They are the webs of significance in Weber's sense that, to quote Pierre Bourdieu (1977), give regularity, unity and systematicity to the practices of a group....
Culture as stabilizing mechanism
Modern cultural theory also considers the possibility that (a) culture itself is a product of stabilization tendencies inherent in evolutionary pressures toward self-similarity and self-cognition of societies as wholes, or tribalisms. See Steven Wolfram A new kind of science on iterated simple algorithms from genetic unfolding, from which the concept of culture as an operating mechanism can be developed, and Richard Dawkins The extended phenotype for discussion of genetic and memetic stability over time, through negative feedback mechanisms, such as Wikipdia.
Cultural change
Cultures, by predisposition, both embrace and resist change dependence of culture traits. For example, men and women have complementary roles in many cultures. One sex might desire changes that affect the other, as happened in the second half of the 20th century in western cultures.
Cultural change can come about due to the environment, to inventions (and other internal influences), and to contact with other cultures. For example, the end of the last ice age helped lead to the invention of agriculture, which in its turn brought about many cultural innovations.
In diffusion, the form of something moves from one culture to another, but not its meaning. For example, hamburgers, mundane in the United States, seemed exotic when introduced into China. Stimulus diffusion refers to an element of one culture leading to an invention in another. Diffusions of innovations theory presents a research-based model for why and when individuals and cultures adopt new ideas, practices, and products.
Acculturation has different meanings, but in this context refers to replacement of the traits of one culture with those of another, such as happened to certain Native American tribes and to many indigenous peoples across the globe during the process of colonization.
Related processes on an individual level include assimilation (adoption of a different culture by an individual) and transculturation.
Cultural invention has come to mean any innovation that is new and found to be useful to a group of people and expressed in their behaviour but which does not exist as a physical object.
Cultural studies
Cultural studies developed in the late 20th century, in part through the re-introduction of Marxist thought into sociology, and in part through the articulation of sociology and other academic disciplines such as literary criticism. This movement aimed to focus on the analysis of subcultures in capitalist societies. Following the non-anthropological tradition, cultural studies generally focus on the study of consumption goods (such as fashion, art, and literature). Because the 18th- and 19th-century distinction between high and low culture seems inappropriate to apply to the mass-produced and mass-marketed consumption goods which cultural studies analyses, these scholars refer instead to popular culture.
Today, some anthropologists have joined the project of cultural studies. Most, however, reject the identification of culture with consumption goods. Furthermore, many now reject the notion of culture as bounded, and consequently reject the notion of subculture. Instead, they see culture as a complex web of shifting patterns that link people in different locales and that link social formations of different scales. According to this view, any group can construct its own cultural identity.
Sample list of cultures
Cultures of contemporary countries and regions
Main article: List of national culture articles.
Contemporary local cultures
Other contemporary cultures
Historic cultures
References
- Arnold, Matthew, Culture and Anarchy, 1882. Macmillan and Co., New York. Online at [3].
- Bourdieu, Pierre. Outline of a Theory of Practice. 1977.
- Cohen, Anthony P. The Symbolic Construction of Community. Routledge: New York, 1995 (1985).
- Geertz, Clifford. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York. ISBN 0465097197.
- Hoult, Thomas Ford, ed. (1969). Dictionary of Modern Sociology. Totowa, New Jersey, United States: Littlefield, Adams Co.
- Keiser, R. Lincoln (1969). The Vice Lords: Warriors of the Streets. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. ISBN 0-03-080361-6. Keiser's quotation from Geertz (p. viii) is cited from Geertz, C., 1957, Ritual and Social Change: A Javanese Example, American Anthropologist, Vol. 59, No. 1. p. 33-34.
- Kroeber, A. L. and C. Kluckhohn, 1952. Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions. Peabody Museum, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States.
- Middleton, Richard (1990/2002). Studying Popular Music. Philadelphia: Open University Press. ISBN 0335152759.
- Cultural Anthropology Tutorials, Behavioral Sciences Department, Palomar College, San Marco, California, United States, as of December 12, 2004.
- UNESCO, UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, issued on International Mother Language Day, February 21, 2002.
See also
Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:
External links
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
