Greenfield, P. M. (2000). What Psychology Can Do for Anthropology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
!"#$%&'()"*+*,(%-#.%/*%0*1%2.$"1*3*+*,(4%*1%!"(%2.$"1*3*+*,(%5**6%&*'$7*891.:'7%*. $"9%-":. 2;$"*1<'=>%&#$1:):#%?@%A199.0:9+8 B*;1)9>%2791:)#.%2.$"1*3*+*,:'$4%C9D%B91:9'4%E*+@%FGH4%C*@%I%<B93@4%HGGG=4%33@%JKLMJNK &;O+:'"98%O(>%P+#)6D9++%&;O+:'":.,%*.%O9"#+0%*0%$"9%2791:)#.%2.$"1*3*+*,:)#+%2''*):#$:*. B$#O+9%QRS>%http://www.jstor.org/stable/683412 2))9''98>%FGTGKTHGGU%FK>JK Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Blackwell Publishing and American Anthropological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Anthropologist. http://www.jstor.org PATRICIAM. GREENFIELD Departmentof Psychology Universityof California,Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90095 What Psychology Can Do for Anthropology, or Why Anthropology Took Postmodernism on the Chin T he dictatesof postmodernismrequire that I specify with empiricism,scientific generalization is also an object my own perspective.Obviously, there are an infi- of derision.In the courseof this essay, I hope to convince nite numberof statusesthat influence anyone's per- my readersthat the babies of Empiricismand Generaliza- sonal perspectiveon anything.This is partof the postmod- tion havebeen thrownout with the bathwatersof Objectiv- erndilemma. However, there is a restrictedset of historical ity, CulturalHomogeneity, Fact, Truth, Otherness,and conditionsthat are relevantto a particulartask. What is Science as an Apolitical Enterprise.In short, to accept relevantabout my historyto the task thatI have set myself these lattersix assumptionsas valid targets of the postmodern in this essay is my relationto the disciplinesof psychology critique does not necessarily entail a turningaway from em- and anthropology.Therefore, in talking about what psy- pirical methodology;it does not necessarily entail the redefi- chology has to offer anthropology,I want to makeit clear nition of anthropologyas literaturerather than science. thatI am not a psychologisttalking about anthropology as An analysisof psychology'sapproach to some of the ex- someoneelse's discipline.Although I am in a department tremelyimportant problems identified by postmodernism of psychology,I receivedboth my degreesfrom the Depart- may provideideas for how culturalanthropology can re- ment of Social Relations at Harvard,an interdisciplinary turnto itself as an empiricalenterprise, stronger and wiser mix of social psychology,social anthropology,and sociol- than before the buffets of the postmoder critique.How- ogy. Forme, bothpsychology and anthropology have always ever, before beginningmy argument,I must addresstwo been partof my tool kit. In fact, I am revisingthis essay major issues that complicateit in interestingways. The from the School of AmericanResearch in SantaFe, an in- firstissue has to do with the fact thatsome of the potential stitutefor advancedstudy in anthropology.In discussing inputsand insightsfrom the field of psychologyhave al- whatpsychology has to offer anthropology,I am therefore readybeen integratedinto the anthropologicalsubfields of talkingto myselfas well as to my colleaguesin anthropology. psychologicalanthropology, linguistic anthropology, biolog- Until quite recently,I, like Fish (2000), had given con- ical anthropology,and applied anthropology.Many em- siderablethought to what anthropologyhad to offer psy- pirical methodsfrom psychology are well entrenchedin chology (Greenfield1996). Like many culturaland cross- psychologicalanthropology (Bock 1999; Hollanand Wel- culturalpsychologists (Jessor, Colby and Shweder 1996; lenkamp1994, 1996). Linguisticanthropology offers ex- Triandisand Berry 1980), I was particularlyimpressed plicit methodologyand a new arrayof techniquesthat pre- with the ethnographicmethod. How to reconcilethis admi- serve concretedata and subjects'voicing in the face of the rationfrom the field of psychologywith the breast-beating postmoder critique(Duranti 1997). In biological anthro- and self-flagellationgoing on in culturalanthropology? In pology, anthropologymakes common cause with psychol- thinkingabout this problem,it suddenlyoccurred to me ogy, remindinganthropology of the biologicalsubstrate of that the methodologyof psychology had successfullyad- human behaviorand challengingthe dualism of biology dressed some of the principalproblems identified by the andculture (issues that will not be pursuedin this essay).In postmodemcritique of anthropology.I now believe that appliedanthropology, a series of books (Schensuland Le- this may be why psychology has weatheredpostmod- Compte1999) treatsethnography as an empiricalmethod- ernismbetter than anthropology. By "weatheringpostmod- ology thatcan be described,learned, and taught.Many of ernismbetter" I referto an optimisticsense thatthe tradi- these inputsfrom within anthropology also constitutecon- tion of empirical research will continue to yield rich structiveempirical responses to the postmodemcritique. rewardsin ourknowledge of humannature. However,within anthropology these are minorityvoices, Of course,my premisemay be instantlyrejected by cul- and it is not clear whetherthese voices have always been turalanthropologists, for empiricismitself is of courseun- heardby thepostmodem majority of culturalanthropologists; der attackin the postmoder critique(Geertz 1973). Along in addition, even within the subfields of psychological, AmericanAnthropologist 102(3):564-576. Copyright? 2000, AmericanAnthropological Association GREENFIELD / WHAT PSYCHOLOGY CAN DO FOR ANTHROPOLOGY 565 linguistic,biological, and appliedanthropology, there are Just as no source is given for her historicalstatements, many for whom empiricalresearch has been derailedby no evidenceis given for hercontemporaneous conclusions. the postmoder critique(D'Andrade 1999). If the minority Thus,when talkingabout intercultural relations, she states, voices had been moreheeded by culturalanthropology and "Tradingand the hiringof laborfor the fields areresponsi- anthropologyas a whole, the postmoder critiquemight ble for most relations"(Guiteras-Holmes 1961:17-18), but well have done less damageto the empirical,scientific in- we are given no indicationof the evidence for this state- vestigationof cultureand cultures.In this essay, I hope to ment.This conventionof the generalstatement without his- give new ammunitionto these minorityvoices within the toricalsource or ethnographicevidence is followedthrough- field of anthropology. outthe book and is generallytrue of classicethnography. The second issue stems from the fact that psychology The methodologicalimplications of the general state- has hadits own postmoder critiques(Gergen 1990, 1995). ment withoutevidence is that methodsdo not matterbe- Althoughthey have been a minormode withinthe field of cause thereis an objectivetruth, homogeneous throughout the culture.The never scientific,empirical psychology (and in this sense psychol- underlying(but spoken)assumption is thatit does not matterhow the ogy has weatheredpostmoderism betterthan anthropol- you get yourinformation; conclusionwill be the same because it ogy), they merit serious consideration.Also, where Ger- always is, objec- true. gen's (1985, 1991a, 1991b)postmoderism has been most tively, influentialin psychology-in family therapy(Nichols and Schwartz1995)-his postmoder influencehas had a con- Critique of the Objectivity Assumption structiveeffect on practice,without having any negative in Anthropology impacton the scientificenterprise. This of an or outsidelook at a ho- I also what thinice I am on as a assumption objective recognize psychologist. mogeneous cultural system receives harsh criticism in In "Thick Towardan of Description: InterpretiveTheory postmoder anthropology.Clifford (1986:22), in the intro- Culture,"the first block of Geertz building postmodernism, duction to a classic work of postmodernanthropology, is not he is also (1973) only antiscientific, antipsychological, WritingCulture, writes, "Thereis no longerany place of and so. Geertz's between unabashedly However, dichotomy overview (mountaintop)from which to map humanways the science in searchof law" and "an "experimental inter- of life, no Archimedeanpoint from which to representthe in pretiveone searchof meaning"(1973:5) is a false one. world."Postmoder criticismhas drawnattention to gen- Culturalpsychology, not to mentionlinguistic anthropol- derand political positions as influenceson the way dataare ogy and psychological anthropology,have shown them- collected and conclusionsdrawn,