Download 1.What is Social Anthropology?

Group-A
5 MARKS;
1.What is Social Anthropology?
Social anthropology is the study of all peoples everywhere – what they make, what they do, what they
think and how they organise their social relationships and societies.
By living with people in different cultures and learning to talk and behave like them (‘fieldwork’), social
anthropologists produce in-depth descriptions of their customs and ways of life (‘ethnographies’). They
also compare different cultures and societies to explore their similarities and differences, to test the
generalisations of historians, social scientists and philosophers, and to produce theories of how best to
study and understand human nature.
Historians, sociologists, psychologists and philosophers have all drawn inspiration from anthropological
writings. The subject has had a major impact on the way we deal with cultural and political issues in the
contemporary world.
If you’re interested in finding out more about Social Anthropology, we recommend the following as
introductory reading:
2.Explain Social anthropology
Social anthropology is the dominant constituent of anthropology throughout the United Kingdom and
Commonwealth and much of Europe, where it is distinguished from Cultural Anthropology.[1] In the USA, Social
Anthropology is commonly subsumed within cultural anthropology (or under the relatively new designation
of sociocultural anthropology).
In contrast to cultural anthropology, culture and its continuity (including narratives, rituals, and symbolic
behavior associated with them) have been traditionally seen more as the dependent "variable" by social
anthropology, embedded in its historical and social context, including its diversity of positions and perspectives,
ambiguities, conflicts, and contradictions of social life, rather than the independent (explanatory) one.
Topics of interest for social anthropologists have
included customs, economic and politicalorganization, law and conflict resolution, patterns of consumption and
exchange, kinship and family structure, gender relations, childbearing and socialization, religion, while presentday social anthropologists are also concerned with issues of globalism, ethnic violence, gender studies, trans
nationalism and local experience, and the emerging cultures of cyberspace,[2]and can also help with bringing
opponents together when environmental concerns come into conflict with economic developments.[3] British
and American anthropologists includingGillian Tett and Karen Ho who studied Wall Street provided an
alternative explanation for theFinancial crisis of 2007–2010 to the technical explanations rooted in economic
and political theory
Differences among British, French, and American sociocultural anthropologies have diminished with
increasing dialogue and borrowing of both theory and methods. Social and cultural anthropologists, and some
who integrate the two, are found in most institutes of anthropology. Thus the formal names of institutional units
no longer necessarily reflect fully the content of the disciplines these cover. Some, such as the Institute of
Social and Cultural Anthropology[5] (Oxford) changed their name to reflect the change in composition, others,
such as Social Anthropology at the University of Kent[6] became simply Anthropology. Most retain the name
under which they were founded.
Long-term qualitative research, including intensive field studies (emphasizing participant observation methods)
has been traditionally encouraged in social anthropology rather than quantitative analysis of surveys,
questionnaires and brief field visits typically used by economists and sociologists.
3.Substantive focus and practice
Social anthropology is distinguished from subjects such as economics or political science by
its holistic range and the attention it gives to the comparative diversity of societies and cultures across the
world, and the capacity this gives the discipline to re-examine Euro-American assumptions. It is
differentiated from sociology, both in its main methods (based on long-term participant observation and
linguistic competence),[8] and in its commitment to the relevance and illumination provided by micro
studies. It extends beyond strictly social phenomena to culture, art, individuality, and cognition. [9] Many
social anthropologists use quantitative methods, too, particularly those whose research touches on topics
such as local economies, demography, human ecology, cognition, or health and illness.
Specializations
Specializations within social anthropology shift as its objects of study are transformed and as new
intellectual paradigms appear; musicology and medical anthropology are examples of current, welldefined specialities.
More recent and currently emt|cognitive development]]; social and ethical understandings of novel
technologies; emergent forms of 'the family' and other new socialities modelled on kinship; the ongoing
social fall-out of the demise of state socialism; the politics of resurgent religiosity; and analysis
of audit cultures and accountability.
The subject has been enlivened by, and has contributed to, approaches from other disciplines, such
as philosophy (ethics,phenomenology, logic), the history of science, psychoanalysis, and linguistics.
Group-B
20 MARKS
1.How does a social anthropologist study people?
A literature study is always the entry point for new research that helps one to review the
current state of understanding and the available explanatory frameworks for the issues to
be studied. The social anthropologist then makes use of her own experiences and
perceptions to understand the lives of other people during a period of intensive fieldwork.
This means that one is able to connect to other people and social processes on the basis of
one's own habits, ideas, social skills, memories and feelings, while addressing specific
research questions. Using one's self-understanding as a tool for studying other people in the
field is central to the primary research method of Social Anthropology: participant
observation.
Immersion over a relatively long time period in the social and cultural processes that are
studied, allows one to start to see the world through the eyes of the people amongst whom
one does research. Social anthropologists do research in many different sites: cities, rural
areas, business and civil society organisations, development projects, global corporate
institutions, music festivals, clinics and hospitals, sporting events, etc. During fieldwork,
researchers do systematic observations in order to write ethnographic texts in which the
social anthropologist gives a "thick description" (detailed understanding of various positions
and angles) and explains the issues studied in terms of their relevant contexts (e.g.
historical and political economy).
Social anthropology at Stellenbosch University
In 1926 the first permanent position in "Bantu-ology" was taken up by dr. Werner Eiselen.
He and his later colleagues developed an approach to the subject, known as "volkekunde",
that actively supported Afrikaner nationalism as well as the policies of apartheid. Dr. Eiselen
himself became a senior state official and advocate of Separate Development policies (as
apartheid was referred to). He became the Secretary of Native Affairs under Hendrik
Verwoerd, who had also been an academic in the social sciences at Stellenbosch University.
The ideological and intellectual rift between Afrikaans- and English-speaking streams of
anthropology in South Africa harmed the international recognition of the subject at
Stellenbosch, although some of the lecturers made their way into the international academic
world, e.g. Brian du Toit, who became the chair of anthropology at Florida State University,
USA.
In the mid-1990s the department was closed during a reorganisation and scaling down of
the faculty. Fortunately, the decision was made to retain the subject as Social Anthropology
and to place it with Sociology in one combined department. Since 1997, programmes in
Social Anthropology have been introduced on the postgraduate level, while undergraduate
courses for Social Anthropology as a major
BA subject are increasingly introduced (the third year major was introduced in 2007).
Research foci of the social anthropologists in the department are especially the
anthropology of health, identity politics, the social impact of nature conservation and the
anthropology of development. Typically, South African social anthropologists study their
own society as "citizen anthropologists" and are therefore often involved in research that
has policy implications. Apart from a focus on research-based teaching and publications,
staff members develop strong international networks to benefit the work of students and
lecturers.
2.Briefly explain Anthropology?
Anthropology is the study of humans, past and present. To understand the full sweep and complexity of
cultures across all of human history, anthropology draws and builds upon knowledge from the social
and biological sciences as well as the humanities and physical sciences. A central concern of
anthropologists is the application of knowledge to the solution of human problems. Historically,
anthropologists in the United States have been trained in one of four areas: sociocultural anthropology,
biological/physical anthropology, archaeology, and linguistics. Anthropologists often integrate the
perspectives of several of these areas into their research, teaching, and professional lives.
Sociocultural Anthropology
Sociocultural anthropologists examine social patterns and practices across cultures, with a special
interest in how people live in particular places and how they organize, govern, and create meaning. A
hallmark of sociocultural anthropology is its concern with similarities and differences, both within and
among societies, and its attention to race, sexuality, class, gender, and nationality. Research in
sociocultural anthropology is distinguished by its emphasis on participant observation, which involves
placing oneself in the research context for extended periods of time to gain a first-hand sense of how
local knowledge is put to work in grappling with practical problems of everyday life and with basic
philosophical problems of knowledge, truth, power, and justice. Topics of concern to sociocultural
anthropologists include such areas as health, work, ecology and environment, education, agriculture
and development, and social change.
Biological (or Physical) Anthropology
Biological anthropologists seek to understand how humans adapt to diverse environments, how
biological and cultural processes work together to shape growth, development and behavior, and what
causes disease and early death. In addition, they are interested in human biological origins, evolution
and variation. They give primary attention to investigating questions having to do with evolutionary
theory, our place in nature, adaptation and human biological variation. To understand these processes,
biological anthropologists study other primates (primatology), the fossil record (paleoanthropology),
prehistoric people (bioarchaeology), and the biology (e.g., health, cognition, hormones, growth and
development) and genetics of living populations.
Archaeology
Archaeologists study past peoples and cultures, from the deepest prehistory to the recent past, through
the analysis of material remains, ranging from artifacts and evidence of past environments to
architecture and landscapes. Material evidence, such as pottery, stone tools, animal bone, and remains
of structures, is examined within the context of theoretical paradigms, to address such topics as the
formation of social groupings, ideologies, subsistence patterns, and interaction with the environment.
Like other areas of anthropology, archaeology is a comparative discipline; it assumes basic human
continuities over time and place, but also recognizes that every society is the product of its own
particular history and that within every society there are commonalities as well as variation.
Linguistic Anthropology
Linguistic anthropology is the comparative study of ways in which language reflects and influences social
life. It explores the many ways in which language practices define patterns of communication, formulate
categories of social identity and group membership, organize large-scale cultural beliefs and ideologies,
and, in conjunction with other forms of meaning-making, equip people with common cultural
representations of their natural and social worlds. Linguistic anthropology shares with anthropology in
general a concern to understand power, inequality, and social change, particularly as these are
constructed and represented through language and discourse.
Addressing complex questions, such as human origins, the past and contemporary spread and
treatment of infectious disease, or globalization, requires synthesizing information from all four
subfields. Anthropologists are highly specialized in our research interests, yet we remain generalists in
our observations of the human condition and we advocate for a public anthropology that is committed
to bringing knowledge to broad audiences. Anthropologists collaborate closely with people whose
cultural patterns and processes we seek to understand or whose living conditions require amelioration.
Collaboration helps bridge social distances and gives greater voice to the people whose cultures and
behaviors anthropologists study, enabling them to represent themselves in their own words. An
engaged anthropology is committed to supporting social change efforts that arise from the interaction
between community goals and anthropological research. Because the study of people, past and present,
requires respect for the diversity of individuals, cultures, societies, and knowledge systems,
anthropologists are expected to adhere to a strong code of professional ethics.
3.Culture and quality: an anthropological perspective
Anthropologists study culture. As a medical anthropologist interested in the role of culture in health
care, I have been intrigued by the growing number of articles that point to organizational culture as an
important factor related to quality of care [1]. What has most caught my attention are the differing and
sometimes conflicting views as to just what is meant by ‘organizational culture’ and the best way to
study it. Apparently one review cited 15 different definitions [2]. In much of the literature I have seen,
culture is defined as ‘an “attribute”, something the organization “has”, along with other attributes such
as structure and strategy’ [3]. Culture is seen as an independent variable that can be manipulated
through management interventions in order to achieve organizational goals.
Research studies from this approach tend to reflect a positivist stance, using structured instruments
which pre-define the institutional attributes of interest and explore the correlation between these
attributes and the quality-related outcomes of interest. A number of studies have looked, for example,
at the relationship between a ‘teamwork culture’ and quality-related outcomes, such as hospital
performance indicators [4], nurse turnover [5], and patient satisfaction [6]. However, as Scott et al. [7]
point out, many of the studies that have suggested a link between culture and performance are
methodologically weak and have difficulty defining and operationalizing culture. In addition, such
studies contribute little to our understanding of how organizational cultures are created and
communicated, and the mechanisms through which culture influences performance.
Anthropology takes quite a different approach to culture. Most anthropologists would define culture as
the shared set of (implicit and explicit) values, ideas, concepts, and rules of behaviour that allow a social
group to function and perpetuate itself. Rather than simply the presence or absence of a particular
attribute, culture is understood as the dynamic and evolving socially constructed reality that exists in the
minds of social group members. It is the ‘normative glue’ [8] that allows group members to
communicate and work effectively together. It is an empirical question as to whether members of an
organization have a shared culture, and anthropologists have long pointed out that in fact virtually all
complex societies (including health care organizations) tend to have a number of co-existing,
overlapping and competing subcultures. In contrast with studies that attempt assign cultural ‘typologies’
to organizations, anthropological research would aim to identify groups with shared cultural knowledge,
and understand how subcultures co-exist and interact within the larger organizational environment.
4.Anthropologists have traditionally used a qualitative research approach to study culture, and such an
approach is well suited to many of the complex questions confronting researchers interested in quality
and culture. More than just a set of data collection methods, qualitative research is an approach which
seeks to understand events, actions, norms and values from the perspective of the people who are
being studied (what anthropologists refer to as the ‘emic’ approach). It emphasizes context and the
ways in which features of a specific situation or setting impact upon the phenomenon under study.
Because qualitative research tends to be flexible and iterative, it allows for the discovery of
unexpectedly important topics which may not have been visible had the researcher been limited to a
pre-defined set of questions or data collection methods.
Identifying a group’s culture—that shared reference system that guides and is reflected in group
members’ behaviour—is not a simple task, and requires a range of methodological tools. The classic
form of qualitative research, with roots in anthropology and sociology, is often known as ethnography or
naturalistic enquiry. Ethnography is in fact, a research strategy that draws on a range of both qualitative
and quantitative methods, and seeks to understand the ‘cultural lens’ through which members of a
group perceive their world. This kind of inquiry is most likely to be used when situations are novel or
complex and the researchers are not yet sure what questions to ask of whom. Examples of ethnography
in health care include a study of clinical reasoning among haematologists [9] and a study of the impact
of managed care on clinical decision-making for mental health [10]. In this issue, Waring [11] reports on
a qualitative study that explored the values, motivations and alliances that influence physicians’
attitudes and behaviour towards incident reporting. The study suggests the existence of professional
subcultures which present barriers to and opportunities for improving incident reporting.
Anthropologists also use a number of more structured data collection techniques to study culture. The
most common of these techniques include free listing, pile sorts and rank order methods [12]. These
techniques produce numerical, quantifiable data but are included in the qualitative research ‘toolbox’
because their purpose is to identify and analyse cultural domains from the point of view of respondents.
These methods have been used extensively in the field of international health, but much less so closer to
home. Cultural consensus analysis is another method used by anthropologists to identify groups with
shared values, and which may be especially useful to those interested in studying organizational culture.
Smith et al. [13] used this method to identify clinic subcultures with conflicting values that had potential
importance for clinic operations.
Culture is a complex and multi-faceted concept, and its study requires conceptual models and research
methods that can reflect this complexity and which acknowledge the existence of multiple views and
voices. Anthropology and qualitative research have much to offer those interested in culture and
quality, and I hope that more researchers in the future will be motivated to apply these approaches to
the understanding of organizational culture and its impact on the quality of health care.