Nature/nurture and the anthropology of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead as an agenda for revolutionary politics

There is much more involved in the nature/nurture debate than an abstract theoretical disagreement among dispassionate scientists. Each side of the debate leads logically to significantly different views of the social order and holds different implications for social policy. In this paper I shall ar...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Sidney M. Greenfield
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul 2001-12-01
Series:Horizontes Antropológicos
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-71832001000200003
id doaj-50fbf76d5018415aba794b5eb458adc2
record_format Article
spelling doaj-50fbf76d5018415aba794b5eb458adc22020-11-24T23:44:04ZengUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do SulHorizontes Antropológicos0104-71831806-99832001-12-01716355210.1590/S0104-71832001000200003Nature/nurture and the anthropology of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead as an agenda for revolutionary politicsSidney M. GreenfieldThere is much more involved in the nature/nurture debate than an abstract theoretical disagreement among dispassionate scientists. Each side of the debate leads logically to significantly different views of the social order and holds different implications for social policy. In this paper I shall argue that Boas' Anthropology with its emphasis on cultural relativism was as much a social and political agenda as it was a scientific theory. The positions on public policy issues he opposed were informed (and rationalized) by what its advocates claimed to be science. To be able to counter the discriminatory policy proposals that followed from this science, it was necessary for Boas both to challenge its validity and then replace it with an alternative that would support a more liberal political agenda. This chapter of anthropology's history gains relevance in today's context as neoevolutionary, reductionist theories once more provide "scientific" support for conservative, separatist and often discriminatory social policies.<br>O debate natureza/cultura é muito mais do que um desentendimento teórico e abstrato entre cientistas desapaixonados. Cada lado do debate leva a visões diferentes da ordem social e traz implicações diferentes para políticas sociais. Neste artigo, sugiro que a Antropologia de Boas, com sua ênfase no relativismo cultural, tanto quanto uma teoria científica, foi um programa social e político. As posturas de política pública às quais ele se opunha eram informadas (e racionalizadas) por algo apresentado por seus proponentes como ciência. Para combater as propostas discriminatórias que decorriam desta ciência, cabia a Boas desafiar sua validade e substituí-la por uma alternativa que daria apoio a uma agenda política mais liberal. Esse capítulo da história da antropologia assume maior relevância no contexto atual em que teorias néo-evolucionistas e reducionistas mais uma vez fornecem uma base "científica" para políticas sociais conservadoras, separatistas e freqüentemente discriminatórias.http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-71832001000200003Franz Boashistória da antropologiapreconceito racialrelativismo culturalcultural relativismFranz BoasHistory of Anthropologyracial prejudice
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sidney M. Greenfield
spellingShingle Sidney M. Greenfield
Nature/nurture and the anthropology of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead as an agenda for revolutionary politics
Horizontes Antropológicos
Franz Boas
história da antropologia
preconceito racial
relativismo cultural
cultural relativism
Franz Boas
History of Anthropology
racial prejudice
author_facet Sidney M. Greenfield
author_sort Sidney M. Greenfield
title Nature/nurture and the anthropology of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead as an agenda for revolutionary politics
title_short Nature/nurture and the anthropology of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead as an agenda for revolutionary politics
title_full Nature/nurture and the anthropology of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead as an agenda for revolutionary politics
title_fullStr Nature/nurture and the anthropology of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead as an agenda for revolutionary politics
title_full_unstemmed Nature/nurture and the anthropology of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead as an agenda for revolutionary politics
title_sort nature/nurture and the anthropology of franz boas and margaret mead as an agenda for revolutionary politics
publisher Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
series Horizontes Antropológicos
issn 0104-7183
1806-9983
publishDate 2001-12-01
description There is much more involved in the nature/nurture debate than an abstract theoretical disagreement among dispassionate scientists. Each side of the debate leads logically to significantly different views of the social order and holds different implications for social policy. In this paper I shall argue that Boas' Anthropology with its emphasis on cultural relativism was as much a social and political agenda as it was a scientific theory. The positions on public policy issues he opposed were informed (and rationalized) by what its advocates claimed to be science. To be able to counter the discriminatory policy proposals that followed from this science, it was necessary for Boas both to challenge its validity and then replace it with an alternative that would support a more liberal political agenda. This chapter of anthropology's history gains relevance in today's context as neoevolutionary, reductionist theories once more provide "scientific" support for conservative, separatist and often discriminatory social policies.<br>O debate natureza/cultura é muito mais do que um desentendimento teórico e abstrato entre cientistas desapaixonados. Cada lado do debate leva a visões diferentes da ordem social e traz implicações diferentes para políticas sociais. Neste artigo, sugiro que a Antropologia de Boas, com sua ênfase no relativismo cultural, tanto quanto uma teoria científica, foi um programa social e político. As posturas de política pública às quais ele se opunha eram informadas (e racionalizadas) por algo apresentado por seus proponentes como ciência. Para combater as propostas discriminatórias que decorriam desta ciência, cabia a Boas desafiar sua validade e substituí-la por uma alternativa que daria apoio a uma agenda política mais liberal. Esse capítulo da história da antropologia assume maior relevância no contexto atual em que teorias néo-evolucionistas e reducionistas mais uma vez fornecem uma base "científica" para políticas sociais conservadoras, separatistas e freqüentemente discriminatórias.
topic Franz Boas
história da antropologia
preconceito racial
relativismo cultural
cultural relativism
Franz Boas
History of Anthropology
racial prejudice
url http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-71832001000200003
work_keys_str_mv AT sidneymgreenfield naturenurtureandtheanthropologyoffranzboasandmargaretmeadasanagendaforrevolutionarypolitics
_version_ 1725500165213650944