The concept of "culture" as an epistemological obstacle for Anthropology

In the development of anthropology as a scientific discipline, the question of what we study has always been a problem. The point is that the debate does not make sense for the discipline. One could combine meanings with the material world, but that would imply, at least in some cases, using sophisticated tools of quantitative methods, which the verstehen tradition despises (Reyna, 1994). Culture, as a concept, is not important; what we are studying is the main problem. This paper aims to show that there is a consensus on what culture is. However, I will discuss the different approaches to culture in anthropology, how each project has failed and a possible solution to this complicated labyrinth. The point is that culture is confused with ontology and gnoseology, creating a confusing mix that leads researchers down dubious scientific paths.
References:
Benedict, R. (1934). Patterns of culture. Boston; New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Bloch, M. (2005). Where did anthropology go?: or the need for human nature' (pp. 1-20). Berg Publishers.
Boas, F. (1912). Changes in the bodily form of descendants of immigrants. American Anthropologist, 14(3), 530-562.
Boas, F. (1938) [1911] . The mind of primitive man, Rev.
Carneiro, R. L. (2018). Evolutionism in cultural anthropology: a critical history. Routledge.
Clifford, J., & Marcus, G. E. (Eds.). (1986). Writing culture: the poetics and politics of ethnography: a School of American Research advanced seminar. Univ of California Press.
Descola, P. (2003). Constructing natures: symbolic ecology and social practice. In Nature and Society (pp. 92-112). Routledge.
Douglas, M. (2004). Natural symbols: Explorations in cosmology. Routledge.
Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1976) [1937]. Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic among the Azande. Londres: Oxford University Press.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. Basic books.
Godelier, M. (2011). Bodies, kinship and power (s) in the Baruya culture. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 1(1), 3-5-344.
Harris, M. (2001). Cultural materialism: The struggle for a science of culture. AltaMira Press.
Herskovits, M. J. (1948). Man and his Works, New York. and Frances C.
Ingold, T. (1983). The Architect and the Bee: Reflections on the Work of Animals and Men. Man, pp. 1-20.
Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. Psychology Press.
Ingold, T. (2005). Epilogue: Towards a politics of dwelling. Conservation and Society, pp. 501-508.
Kuper, A. (2011). 14 Great Britain: Functionalism at home A question of theory. Anthropology: Ancestors and Heirs, pp. 5, 293.
Malinowski, B. (1960) [1944]. A Scientific Theory of Culture and Other Essays: Planet Book.
Malinowski, B. (2002) [1922]. Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An account of native enterprise and adventure in the archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. Routledge.
Morgan, L. H. (1877). Ancient society: Or, researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization. Good Press.
Reynoso, C. (1991). Seis nuevas razones lógicas para desconfiar de Lévi-Strauss. Revista de Antropología, Buenos Aires, 6(10), 3-17.
Turner, V. (1986). Body, brain, and culture. CrossCurrents, 36(2), 15--178.
Turner, V.(1991). The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. Cornell University.
Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive culture: Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, art and custom. J. Murray.
Van der Grijp, P. (1997). Pioneer of untaught anthropology: recontextualizing Lewis H. Morgan and his kinship perspective. Dialectical Anthropology, 22(2), 103-136.
Viveiros de Castro, E. (2002). A inconstância da alma selvagem e outros ensaios de antropologia. São Paulo: Cosac & Naify, 11.
Vol. 27, no. 3, Feb. 1980 of social problems on JSTOR. (n.d.). www.jstor.org/...
White, L. A. (1959). The concept of culture. American Anthropologist, 61(2), 2-7-251.
Winkelman, M. (2001). Alternative and traditional medicine approaches for substance abuse programs: a shamanic perspective. International Journal of Drug Policy, 12(4), 337-351.
Whorf, B. L. (1938). Some verbal categories of Hopi. Language, 14(4), 275-286.

[@cedricherrera8866]

Interesantísimo análisis, esta intención crítica por la valoración de la cientifidad de la antropología me parece una idea que es importante discutirla ahora más que nunca. Por otro lado, me parecería importante en este sentido, de repente ver casos como estas teorías se tratan en la realidad, sobre todo en nuestro contexto latinoamericano, y hay muhísimos ejemplos de ello, como en el Estado Mexicano Indigenista y su relación con la antropología, o posrevolucionario también, interesante leer las discuciones que canaliza Cynthia Hewitt en su "Imágenes del campo" para ver como la antropología aplicada cambia de parámetros para plantearse en torno al estudio del campesinado, y ya no de la etnicidad, por múltiples razones, prácticas y teóricas. Saludos desde Perú

[@hectordiabuno5716]

Estos temas deben ser tratados por intelectuales no por un troglodita improvisado..