Unit Two
Unit Two
SUB-FIELDS OF ANTHROPOLOGY
Blen Yetnayet
2.1 Archaeological Anthropology
2.2 Linguistic Anthropology
2.3 Socio-Cultural Anthropology
2.4 Physical/Biological Anthropology
2.4.1. Evolutionary and Paleo-anthropological
perspectives on human origin
2.4.2 Anthropological perspectives on racial
types and human physical variation.
• It’s the largest sub-fields of anthropology. It deals with human society and
culture.
• Society is the group of people who have similar ways of life, but culture is a
way of life of a group of people.
• Society and culture are two sides of the same coin.
These changes have been Genes are characteristics that carry Physical anthropology is
accumulated and passed through biological traits of an organism, essentially concerned with two
genes. including human beings. broad areas of investigation:
Human evolution and Human
genetics.
CONT. • Human evolution is the study of the gradual
processes of simple
forms into more differentiated structures in hominid.
• Human evolution is also divided into three
specialties:
• Paleoanthropology,
• Primatology and
• Anthropometry.
• But Darwin’s ideas and the many it fertilized set the foundation for a
new study: the study of humans as living, evolving creatures in many
ways no different from the rest of animal life.
•Meaning and causes of human variation
CONT.
Human beings in the world exhibit
certain variation in the way they see
things, dressing, food preference,
belief system, value etc…
Cultural variation refers to the
deference in social behaviors w/c d/t
culture exhibit around the world.
• Indicators of cultural variation are:-
Ethnicity
Race
Language
Religion
WHAT •So do human races exist? Very strictly speaking, yes. Homo sapiens does feature
ANTHROPOLOGISTS geographically based differences within the species. However, you must consider
CAN SAY FOR SURE two very important points.
ABOUT HUMAN
•First, these genetic differences don’t mean a lot, biologically. Because all healthy
RACES?
humans can mate and have healthy offspring, we’re all in Homo sapiens,
biologically speaking. Don’t let anyone tell you different. Not only is it inaccurate to
say “the female species” when talking about significant sex differences between
males and females, but it’s also inaccurate to say “the African race” or the “European
race” when speaking of deep differences in these peoples. A look at the genes shows
no significant species-level differences that is only very minor visible ones such as
skin color, shape of nose, or hair texture.
•Rather than talk about races, physical anthropologists more commonly talk today of
ancestry, (decent, origin) a more general term that recognizes the reality of some
geographically specific human adaptations but doesn’t turn them into loaded, black-
and-white races (pun intended.) Ancestry may be important, for example, when
considering someone’s genetic health because different human populations have
developed slightly different genetic characteristics over time.
•Second and most important is that cultural behavior isn’t genetically linked to
those geographical differences. This disconnect is one of anthropology’s most
important discoveries and lessons for humanity.
•Most of human behavior isn’t biologically determined or filtered in through
the natural environment but most of it is culturally learned.
•E.g. an infant from Japan can be raised in the Kalahari of Southern Africa
and won’t automatically remove his shoes when going into a home unless his
culture specifically teaches him to do so.
•Like any human can acquire any language, any infant can acquire any
culture; it’s culture that really drives behavior, not the genes. The ancient
belief that human races have innate behavioral traits that is like industrious
Asians or hot-blooded Mediterranean’s is simply wrong.
•One of the main reasons the race concept really doesn’t apply to humans is
CONT. that defining human races is almost impossible: To what race do you assign
a person born from a Native American and a native African marriage? Do you
create a new race in this case? Although some of these designations do exist,
to come up with a race for every possible combination of ancestries would be
an infinite job. Plus, it would just be another exercise in drawing lines where
they don’t really exist. And what’s “black” or “white”? Is a Greek person
black or white? Of course, they’re in between. Assigning people to a race
based on skin color becomes an exercise in holding up paint chips to the
skin.