All Anthropologists Agree On The Definition Of Culture.

The Myth of a Unified Definition: Exploring the Diverse Understandings of Culture in Anthropology

The statement "all anthropologists agree on the definition of culture" is demonstrably false. While the concept of culture is central to anthropological inquiry, there's no single, universally accepted definition. Instead, the field boasts a rich tapestry of perspectives, each offering a nuanced and often subtly conflicting understanding of this complex phenomenon. This article will explore the historical evolution of cultural definitions within anthropology, highlighting the key disagreements and the ongoing debates that shape our understanding of culture today.

The Early Stages: Evolutionary and Diffusionist Approaches

Early anthropological approaches, heavily influenced by evolutionary and diffusionist theories, often viewed culture as a cumulative body of learned behaviors and beliefs. This perspective, prevalent in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, emphasized the transmission of cultural traits across generations and the gradual progression of societies towards greater complexity. Thinkers like Edward Burnett Tylor, in his influential work Primitive Culture, defined culture as "that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society." This definition, while broad, implicitly positioned cultures on a hierarchical scale, with some deemed more "evolved" than others.

This early, evolutionary framework led to a focus on identifying cultural universals – traits shared across all societies – and exploring how these traits diffused from one group to another. However, this approach often overlooked the internal diversity and dynamism within individual cultures, neglecting the agency of individuals and groups in shaping their own cultural practices.

The Rise of Cultural Relativism and Interpretive Anthropology

The mid-20th century witnessed a dramatic shift in anthropological thought with the rise of cultural relativism. Pioneered by figures like Franz Boas and his students, this perspective emphasized the importance of understanding cultures on their own terms, rather than judging them against external standards. This meant rejecting the evolutionary assumptions of earlier approaches and recognizing the unique historical and environmental factors that shape the development of each culture.

Cultural relativism, while groundbreaking, didn't resolve the definitional challenges. Instead, it broadened the scope of inquiry, leading to a diversity of perspectives on what constitutes "culture." Interpretive anthropology, championed by Clifford Geertz, further emphasized the importance of understanding culture as a system of shared meanings and symbols. Geertz famously described culture as "a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life." This approach prioritized understanding the subjective experiences and interpretations of cultural members, making the ethnographer a participant-observer deeply engaged in the process of meaning-making.

The Postmodern Turn: Deconstructing Culture

The latter half of the 20th century and beyond saw the emergence of postmodern anthropology, which challenged the very notion of culture as a coherent and bounded entity. Postmodernist thinkers argued that the concept of culture, as often defined and studied, was a construct used to impose order on the inherent complexities of human social life. They emphasized the fluidity and contested nature of cultural boundaries, highlighting the internal heterogeneity and contradictions within any given culture.

Postmodern anthropologists like James Clifford and George Marcus focused on the limitations of ethnographic representation, questioning the authorial voice and power dynamics inherent in the production of anthropological knowledge. They highlighted the inherently subjective and partial nature of ethnographic accounts, emphasizing the complexities and ambiguities of cultural interpretation. This led to a greater focus on reflexivity—anthropologists reflecting upon their own positionality and biases in their research—and a more nuanced approach to studying cultural processes.

Key Areas of Disagreement in Defining Culture:

Despite the shared commitment to studying human societies, significant disagreements persist amongst anthropologists concerning the precise definition of culture. These disagreements center on several key points:

• Boundedness vs. Fluidity: Is culture a clearly defined and bounded entity, or is it a fluid and permeable concept, constantly interacting and changing in response to internal and external pressures? Traditional approaches leaned toward boundedness, while postmodern approaches emphasize fluidity and the limitations of essentializing cultures.

• Material vs. Symbolic: Does culture encompass only the symbolic systems of meaning, or does it also include material objects, technologies, and practices? While most anthropologists acknowledge the importance of both, the emphasis varies significantly depending on the theoretical framework employed.

• Agency vs. Structure: To what extent are individuals and groups active agents in shaping their own cultures, as opposed to being passively shaped by existing social structures? While earlier approaches often emphasized structure, contemporary approaches increasingly recognize the importance of individual and collective agency in cultural change.

• Universals vs. Particularity: Are there universal aspects of culture shared across all societies, or is each culture unique and irreducible to overarching generalizations? The debate between cultural universals and cultural particularism remains a central point of contention within the field.

• Objectivity vs. Subjectivity: To what extent is it possible to study culture objectively, or is the act of studying culture inherently subjective and infused with the researcher's own biases and interpretations? Postmodern approaches particularly challenge the possibility of objective cultural analysis.

Contemporary Approaches and Synthesizing Perspectives:

Recent anthropological scholarship has moved away from rigid adherence to any single definition of culture, instead embracing a more nuanced and multi-faceted understanding. Many anthropologists utilize a combination of theoretical perspectives, integrating insights from both interpretivist and materialist approaches to understand the complex interplay of symbolic and material factors in shaping human societies.

Furthermore, there's a growing recognition of the importance of intersectionality, acknowledging the ways in which various social categories—such as race, class, gender, and sexuality—intersect to shape individual and collective experiences of culture. This approach highlights the fluidity and complexity of cultural identities, challenging essentialist views of culture as static and homogenous.

The Importance of Ongoing Debate:

The lack of a universally accepted definition of culture shouldn't be seen as a weakness of anthropology. Instead, the ongoing debate reflects the dynamism and intellectual vibrancy of the field. The diverse perspectives on culture continually enrich our understanding of human diversity and the complexities of social life. This allows anthropologists to approach various cultures and societies with a richer, more nuanced, and multi-layered understanding. The challenges of defining culture spur further investigation and ensure that anthropological studies maintain a critical and evolving perspective.

In conclusion, while there's no single, universally accepted definition of culture among anthropologists, the ongoing discourse surrounding this fundamental concept is what truly shapes and enriches the field. The variety of approaches, from evolutionary to postmodern, contributes to a richer, more comprehensive understanding of human societies and the dynamic, ever-evolving nature of culture itself. The very lack of a unified definition highlights the inherent complexity of culture and the importance of embracing multiple perspectives to fully appreciate its multifaceted nature.