Anthropology Optional (Culture and personality) by Sourabh Mishra

Model Answer

Question #1. Write short notes on the Psychic unity  10 marks (150 words)

Approach

1. Introduce the Psychic unity.
2. The emergence of the psychic unity
3. Thinkers' perspectives regarding the Psychic unity
4. Conclude with the example of the psychic unity of humankind

Hints:

Introduction:

Anthropology, the study of human beings in their bedazzling variety, eternally provokes questions about what human beings share, about their similarity, unity, or identity. The doctrine of the psychic unity of humankind is an answer to that question. Humans, it claims, are characterized by something more than merely biological unity and spiritual unity.

The emergence of the psychic unity:

• The psychic unity of humankind enters the anthropological lexicon in the work of Adolf Bastian (1826-1905).
• The idea itself is too large to belong to any single person. An intimation that there is a humanity and that it is one regardless of differences in caste, age, sex, or nation, is ethnographically rare but not unique.
• Eric Voegelin (1901-1985), suggests that the roots of this notion go back to the era of the ancient Mesopotamian city-states and the conviction they subsequently furnished that, standing as we do beneath the same sun, we are all equal.

The Jewish image of the one God into a universal God for all peoples in Pauline Christianity, along with the radicalization of this idea in numerous peasant revolts and ecclesiastical reform movements, right up to the utopian socialism of the early 19th century and beyond. Popular within anthropology from its mid-19th-to early 20th-century beginnings, the psychic unity of humankind was a scientific postulate that fed on all these general influences.

Thinkers’ perspectives regarding the Psychic unity:

 Edward Burnett Tylor (1832-1917): • He argues the psychic unity of humankind to progressivist and evolutionary theories in anthropology. World War I dealt harshly with all varieties of progressivist optimism.

 Franz Boas (1858—1942): • The hugely influential cultural particularism of Franz Boas dealt equally harshly with evolutionism in anthropology. • Boas himself endorsed the idea of psychic unity, arguing persuasively that all peoples had essentially equal intellectual capacities and moral faculties.

• Nonetheless, with everything distinctively human elucidated by reference to discrete cultures, psychic unity became an explanatory empty set.

Bastian’s doctrine on Psyche:

• The fact that an emphasis on cultural particulars has made many anthropologists suspicious of human universals provides one reason for the eclipse of Bastian’s doctrine.
• A further reason is that when 20th-century anthropologists did swim against the Boasian tide to seek generalizations applicable to all cultures.
• They more commonly swam “downstream” in search of social, economic, ecological, and biological regularities than “upstream” to the psyche

The psychic unity of humankind as having a programmatic value for anthropology is to indicates that it is more than a curiosity-driven search for human universals. The world-historical process by which human unity comes to exist in a new sense in virtue of being known to exist.

The psychic unity of humankind also has a reverse ethical significance. It is a telling fact that on first acquaintance the phrase may sound dystopian, a perfect doctrine for a Kentucky Fried world striving all too successfully to become one unified place.

Conclusion:

The evolutionists assumed that cultural parallels or cultural similarities come into existence due to the psychic unity of humankind, suggesting that human minds share similar characteristics all over the world and react and think in similar ways in similar environmental conditions. This means that all people and their corresponding societies go through the same process of development. As pointed out before, the invention of ‘zero’, simultaneously in Indian, Babilonian, and Mayan cultures is cited as an example of the psychic unity of humankind.

Question #2. Discuss various anthropological approaches to the study of personality and culture. 15 marks (250 words)

Approach

1. Introduce the personality and culture
2. The emergence of the Concept
3. Characteristics of the Personality
4. Culture and Personality School of thought
5. Conclusion

Hints:

Introduction:

 Culture according to this school of thought is acquired, imitated, and learned. It gives rise to character formation or development of personality traits before the period of adolescence.

Personality refers to the integrated and dynamic organisation of physical, mental, and social qualities of an individual as that manifests itself to the other people in the give and take of social life. It is a more or less consistent behaviour pattern of an individual.

The emergence of the Concept:

The Culture and Personality movement was at the core of anthropology in the first half of the 20th century. It examined the interaction between psychological and cultural forces at work on the human experience.

Culture and Personality were too divided to really be considered a school of thought. It had no orthodox viewpoint, centralized leadership, or coherent training program (LeVine 2001).

However, there were also some basic ideas with which most practitioners would agree. At a minimum, these would include:

• Adult behaviour is culturally patterned.
• Childhood experiences influence the individual’s personality as an adult.
• Adult personality characteristics are reflected in cultural beliefs and social institutions, such as religion (LeVine 2001).

Characteristics of the Personality:

While we talk about personality, we have certain notions that it is related to the outward appearance and performance of an individual. But personality has certain other characteristics: • Personality is acquired

• Every personality is unique
• Personality is influenced by social interaction
• Personality refers to the persistent qualities of an individual
• Personality is not a mysterious phenomenon
• Personality is not related to body structure alone

Culture and Personality School of thought:

• American anthropologists such as Ruth Benedict, Margaret Mead, Ralph Linton, and Abram Kardiner are the pioneers of the Culture and Personality School of thought or Psychological anthropological theories.
• There are three approaches that had emerged from the contributions of these scholars to study and examine the inter-relationship between culture and personality. These include:

– Personality builds culture.

– Culture determines the formation of personality.

– Culture and personality are inseparable and influence each other.

Personality Builds Culture- Ruth Benedict:

• According to Ruth Benedict, culture is personality writ at large. Culture is not self-created but personality builds culture. Human beings are the creators of culture in order to fulfil their various kinds of needs.
• It is the individual (personality) who plays a significant role in handling the culture from one generation to another. He says culture is a gift of personality. According to Benedict, there are two kinds of genius (personality) found in human society.

Apollonian: The word apollonian is from the Greek god Apollo, the peaceful sun deity. Apollo is regarded as the god of peace, discipline, kindness, and humanity by the Greek people. Thus, in theapollonian pattern of culture, one finds the existence of peace, kindness, and discipline. Benedict cites the example of the Pueblo of New Mexico as the representative of Apollonian culture.

Dionysian: The word Dionysian is derived from the name of the Greek god Dionysius. Dionysius is the symbol of luxurious life and drinking. In the Dionysian culture, a lot of storms and changes are experienced. Benedict cites the example of Dobu and Kwakiutl cultures of the North West coast of America as the representatives of Dionysian genius.

Dobu of Melanesia is exactly in contrast with the Pueblo in character and temperament. Among them occurred frequently conflict, competition, and violence. They usually used magic to harm others. People of Kwakiutl do not believe in religious practices.

Conclusion:

 In their culture, wealth determines status and prestige. Everyone becomes busy earning money in one way or another. Those with less money feel ashamed on account of it. Benedict’s study clearly reveals the influence of personality on culture. The cultures of these groups differ because their members have different characters and personalities. Accordingly, they behave in cultural groups.