DOCSLIB.ORG

Ecology & Anthropology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ecology & Anthropology University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Ecological and Environmental Anthropology Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center (University of Georgia) for 2005 Ecology & Anthropology: A Field Without Future? Gerald Schmidt Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmeea Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Schmidt, Gerald, "Ecology & Anthropology: A Field Without Future?" (2005). Ecological and Environmental Anthropology (University of Georgia). 33. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmeea/33 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Ecological and Environmental Anthropology (University of Georgia) by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Vol. 1, No. 1 Ecological and Environmental Anthropology 2005 Notes and queries Ecology & Anthropology: A Field Without Future? Dr. Gerald Schmidt Positive Ecology Project (www.positive-ecology.org) Many disciplines take part in the discourse Environmental(ist) analyses, focusing on on sustainability. Sustainability science tends to sustainability as a global issue, have led to focus on the side of nature and to misunderstand expanded fields of anthropological inquiry. Yet the human condition; social sciences tend to focus prominent eco-anthropological studies rarely on their respective specialties and on “nature” as address situations outside of traditional concept, but rarely take ecological reality into anthropological settings. Research meant to account. Environmental and ecological inform potential futures, in particular, is hardly anthropology as disciplines that address both sides ever undertaken – the more salient lack of "future" are in a peculiar position. They move beyond the in the discipline. For ecology, Palmer et al. (2004) dualism of nature-culture to a holistic view on have argued that the discipline could no longer be ecological and cultural realities in their intrinsic the science of nature without human involvement, connectedness. Their input will become more but needs also to be the science that informs important as sustainability is considered in sustainability, i.e. shows how we can manage abstracted discussion (e.g. academic and activist nature in ways that do not threaten ecological discourse), but not in individually and (inter-) functioning. Their "ecology for a crowded planet" culturally relevant terms, as sustainability still misses the necessity of considering how discourse looks towards practice as an issue of humanity can ‘manage itself’ in order to achieve a “the economy” and technology, but not as an transformation to sustainability. After all, we aspect of culture (as world view and as normal cannot only manage the environment while way of life, of which the economy is only a placing ever-increasing demands on it. subset). Anthropological and psychological findings Like conservation biology, eco-anthropology will also have to be brought to bear on how we tends to be a crisis discipline. However, whereas it approach the cultural change of humanity towards is species threatened with extinction that make up sustainability (culture meant in its inclusive sense, the crisis that requires conservation, from what are considered normal ways of life and ethnoecologies are the ‘threatened species’ of of making a living to economics and technology, ecological anthropology. The challenge that the and the accompanying cognitive shifts). Eco- “objects” of eco-anthropology present is even anthropology could greatly contribute to the more complicated than that of species analysis and actions towards such a conservation. After all, we encounter both forms transformation, in regards both to aspects of of traditional environmental management that nature (local environmental management) and to appear to be sustainable and forms of aspects of culture (“cultural resources for management that do not appear to be so – where sustainability,” ways of living and of making a there is a willing motion towards a Western, living). After all, it is a discipline that has been “modern” way of life and resistance to such analyzing both of these sides, but only in terms of development(s) – as well as combinations thereof. what has been going on heretofore. It will yet be Whatever the exact situation, the result is that the necessary for eco-anthropology to expand its crisis discipline provides a detailed chronicle of perspective towards “futures.” the problems, but not much more. As such, it The relevant backdrop to this argument lies could not have a future, certainly not a very with the question of motivation for change. Or, interesting and important one. For example, it put the other way around, it lies with the two shares this fate with linguists’ studies of challenges that support business-as-usual: First, languages in a world of ever-decreasing linguistic the issue of denial versus involvement – the diversity. question “What do I need your environment for?” 13 Vol. 1, No. 1 Ecological and Environmental Anthropology 2005 (I have actually been asked that) – and secondly, appear to have played a large part alongside the issue of positive visions of sustainable futures. societal reactions to their change (Diamond 2005). Denial is apparent in how environmentalist Motivation by positive, sustainability- issues are oftentimes considered to be separate oriented, visions for futures is a more complex from the normal affairs of – “modern” (Western) issue still. The sustainable alternative, or rather: – daily life. (As the “Cartesian” dualism of nature- set of alternatives (e.g. with differential cultural culture, this separation is foundational to Western and local-environmental ‘fittedness’), is not thought.) Each individual’s personal role and commonly presented as modern, progressive, and responsibility, as well as other stakeholders’ promising – in contrast to the alluring, even if involvement, fall prey to denial as well (Opotow “virtualist” (Carrier and Miller 1998), vision of & Weiss 2000). In contrast, a transformation to cornucopian economists. Rather, it appears to sustainability will involve everyone, requiring entail the abandoning of amenities of modern life deep cultural changes as involvement progresses. (for ‘developed’ countries) or the inability to ever Secondly, on the flip side of denial as described attain them (for ‘developing’ countries), in favor above, environmentalist issues are considered a of “the planet,” “the next generation(s),” or the luxury that only the “modern,” well-off can afford like, thus fomenting de-motivation (Kaplan 2000). to concern themselves with. ‘Developing’ Anthropology, at the very least, points out countries supposedly needn’t pay attention to the diversity of salient aspects of life supported by them, and if you wanted to be rich(er), you different cultures. As Trouillot (2003:138f.) shouldn’t either. Actually, in varying concludes, the capitalist(-only) ideology is configurations, sustainability is an issue that “actually a choice” rather than a necessity, and involves both ‘modern’ and ‘developing’ societies "we owe it to ourselves and to our interlocutors to – it is ultimately a necessity for the poor say loudly that we have seen alternative visions of (Martinez-Alier, 2002). humankind ... and that we know that this one may The actual fallacy of such denial is easily, not be the most respectful of the planet we share, and has repeatedly been, shown (although it is not nor indeed the most accurate nor the most very popular to admit it, let alone reconsider practical ... not the most beautiful nor the most economics on that basis). A case in point optimistic.” Among other things, elements of (particularly interesting because of its futuristic Western culture as well as of other cultures tinge): Were humanity to attempt longer-term support non-material aspects of a good life that space exploration (or terraforming, for that may yet become instrumental in a shift away from matter), it will require knowledge of ecological consumerism, to ways of life which could easily functioning and a 'co-evolution' of technology and be more conducive to happiness, as well as more ecology to provide for the astronauts' needs. Both amenable to sustainability (Kasser and Kanner, NASA and the ESA actually do have departments 2004). performing ecological research. Points such as this lie at the core of a Staying on earth, examples for the possible “positive ecology” (Schmidt 2005), an inextricable linkage of human beings to this world approach oriented on the synergies between abound. At the most basic level, the provision of human long-term survival, short and long-term basic sustenance stands in a dynamic relationship chances for a good life, and ecological between ecosystem services, agriculture, and sustainability, that arise with the deep biodiversity. Water availability and quality is relationships between human needs and global influenced by land cover and usage, not only ecology. These make for the likelihood that geophysical conditions (and even these are sustainability-oriented ways of life – humanity in influenced by life). Even for cultural identity, an coexistence/coevolution with a biodiverse, increasingly important issue as globalization sustainable ecosphere – are actually not encroaches upon it, natural features play a role. detrimental to quality of life, but promising. Anthropology
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Environmental Anthropology Engaging Ecotopia an Introduction
    Environmental Anthropology Engaging Ecotopia An Introduction Joshua Lockyer and James R. Veteto We are living in a utopian moment. The majority of humans are already be- ing negatively affected by a number of coupled social and environmental crises. These conditions are created in large part by hegemony of thought and practice that ontologically separates humans from nature, rationalizes the externalization of the social and environmental costs of production and consumption, justifi es extreme inequality, and sees solutions only in a continuation of the same systems that generated the problems in the fi rst place. Together these and other problems constitute a crisis that demands imaginative responses and viable alternatives. We contend that anthropol- ogy must fi nd ways to engage with such existing possibilities. The present crises are not new; the fundamental idea that the current situation cannot continue was recognized decades ago with the rise of international discourse on the topic of sustainable development (Brundt- land 1987). The widely promoted concept of sustainability is ultimately utopian in nature; it is the good state that we must strive for but may not actually exist except in theory. Despite our best efforts, we do not know exactly what a sustainable society looks like. This has been the paradox of utopianism since Sir Thomas More ([1516] 1906) coined the term “utopia” in 1516, and it is the paradox of sustainability today. The premise underlying this volume is the basic belief that, at its best, anthropology has always
    [Show full text]
  • How Do Aesthetics Affect Our Ecology?
    Journal of Ecological Anthropology Volume 10 Issue 1 Volume 10, Issue 1 (2006) Article 5 2006 How do Aesthetics Affect our Ecology? Zsuzsi I. Kovacs Northern Arizona University Carri J. LeRoy Northern Arizona University Dylan G. Fischer The Evergreen State College Sandra Lubarsky Northern Arizona University William Burke Northern Arizona University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/jea Recommended Citation Kovacs, Zsuzsi I.; LeRoy, Carri J.; Fischer, Dylan G.; Lubarsky, Sandra; and Burke, William. "How do Aesthetics Affect our Ecology?." Journal of Ecological Anthropology 10, no. 1 (2006): 61-65. Available at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/jea/vol10/iss1/5 This Crib Notes is brought to you for free and open access by the Anthropology at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Ecological Anthropology by an authorized editor of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Vol. 10 2006 Kovacs et al. / Aesthetics and Ecology 61 CRIB NOTES How do Aesthetics Affect our Ecology? Zsuzsi I. Kovacs, Carri J. LeRoy, Dylan G. Fischer, Sandra Lubarsky and William Burke Abstract Beauty is a powerful force that affects both our emotions and our ecological practices, yet aesthetic values remain understated and under-discussed in ecology. Here we invite discussion about the influence of beauty on ecological research by outlining: 1) how aesthetics affect the practice of ecology, and 2) how aesthetics affect the implementation of ecological research on the landscape. The aesthetic sensibilities of ecologists develop through personal experiences and are enriched by professional training, including ecological coursework, fieldwork, research and discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Humanities
    Teksty Drugie 2015, 1, s. 186-210 Special Issue – English Edition Ecological Humanities Ewa Domańska http://rcin.org.pl 186 the humanities and posthumanism Ewa Domańska Ecological Humanities DOI: 10.18318/td.2015.en.1.12 Ewa Domańska is associate professor of theory and history of historiography in the Department of History, Adam Mickiewicz University his article strives to make a preliminary attempt at in Poznan, Poland and defining specific features of ecological humanities1 since 2002 visiting T associate professor at as a symptom of the emergence of a new paradigm. I am the Department of particularly interested in the trend of ecological hu- Anthropology, Stanford manities which has been developing at an accelerated University. Her rate since the late nineties in the frame of posthumanist teaching and research interests include comparative theory 1 In the literature of the subject, ecological humanities is often also of the humanities defined as environmental humanities or sustainable humanities un- and social sciences, derstood as a domain that is actively involved in the sustainable de- history and theory velopment and future oriented conviviality (Stephanie LeMenager of historiography, and Stephanie Foote, “The sustainable humanities”, PMLA, vol. 127, posthumanities and no. 3 (May 2012): 572-578.). In this article I will be using the term eco- ecological humanities. logical humanities (or ecoposthumanities), in order to distinguish She is the author and it from both postmodernist movements of „deep ecology” (which editor of many books, I am referencing), and from „social ecology” tied to the left-wing recently: Existential movements and Marxism, and from technocratic understanding History (in Polish, of environmental and sustainable research, which, according to the 2012); History and critics, are conserving a destructive development of the global the Contemporary capitalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Culture and Sustainability: Environmental Anthropology in the Anthropocene
    PERSPECTIVES: AN OPEN INTRODUCTION TO CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY SECOND EDITION Nina Brown, Thomas McIlwraith, Laura Tubelle de González 2020 American Anthropological Association 2300 Clarendon Blvd, Suite 1301 Arlington, VA 22201 ISBN Print: 978-1-931303-67-5 ISBN Digital: 978-1-931303-66-8 http://perspectives.americananthro.org/ This book is a project of the Society for Anthropology in Community Colleges (SACC) http://sacc.americananthro.org/ and our parent organization, the American Anthropological Association (AAA). Please refer to the website for a complete table of contents and more information about the book. Perspectives: An Open Introduction to Cultural Anthropology by Nina Brown, Thomas McIlwraith, Laura Tubelle de González is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted. Under this CC BY-NC 4.0 copyright license you are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. 1414 CULTURE AND SUSTAINABILITY: ENVIRONMENTAL ANTHROPOLOGY IN THE ANTHROPOCENE Christian T. Palmer, Windward Community College [email protected] Learning Objectives • Identify the methods and theories anthropologists use to examine human interactions with the environment. • Define political ecology and explain its relationship to anthropology. • Describe the Anthropocene and discuss how anthropology contributes to understanding the human role in environmental destruction.
    [Show full text]
  • NEW ECOLOGY and the SOCIAL SCIENCES: What Prospects for a Fruitful Engagement?
    Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1999. 28:479–507 Copyright © 1999 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved NEW ECOLOGY AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCES: What Prospects for a Fruitful Engagement? I. Scoones Environment Group, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9RE, UK Key Words: nonequilibrium ecology, environmental change, environmental social science n Abstract This review asks the question: What new avenues of social sci- ence enquiry are suggested by new ecological thinking, with its focus on non- equilibrium dynamics, spatial and temporal variation, complexity, and uncertainty? Following a review of the emergence of the “new ecology” and the highlighting of contrasts with earlier “balance of nature” perspectives, work emerging from ecological anthropology, political ecology, environmental and ecological economics, and debates about nature and culture are examined. With some important exceptions, much social science work and associated popular and policy debates remain firmly wedded to a static and equilibrial view. This review turns to three areas where a more dynamic perspective has emerged. Each has the potential to take central elements of new ecological thinking seri- ously, sometimes with major practical consequences for planning, intervention by CAPES on 10/27/05. For personal use only. design, and management. First is the concern with spatial and temporal dynam- ics developed in detailed and situated analyses of “people in places,” using, in particular, historical analysis as a way of explaining environmental change across time and space. Second is the growing understanding of environment as both the product of and the setting for human interactions, which link dynamic structural analyses of environmental processes with an appreciation of human agency in environmental transformation, as part of a “structuration” approach.
    [Show full text]
  • New Perspectives on Organism-Environment Interactions in Anthropology Emily Schultz St
    St. Cloud State University theRepository at St. Cloud State Anthropology Faculty Publications Department of Anthropology 2013 New perspectives on organism-environment interactions in anthropology Emily Schultz St. Cloud State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/anth_facpubs Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Schultz, Emily, "New perspectives on organism-environment interactions in anthropology" (2013). Anthropology Faculty Publications. 2. https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/anth_facpubs/2 This Chapter in a Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Anthropology at theRepository at St. Cloud State. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of theRepository at St. Cloud State. For more information, please contact [email protected]. New perspectives on organism-environment interactions in anthropology Emily A. Schultz St. Cloud State University [email protected] Abstract Anthropologists contend that the organism-environment connections responsible for human evolution are indirect—mediated by culture. This chapter reviews influential twentieth-century anthropological interpretations of the cultural mediation of human adaptations to environments, arguing that ethnography and other qualitative forms of analysis reveal important phenomena overlooked by quantitative analysts committed to methodological individualism. It highlights work by post-positivist
    [Show full text]
  • Routledge Handbook of Environmental Anthropology
    This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 27 Sep 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK Routledge Handbook of Environmental Anthropology Helen Kopnina, Eleanor Shoreman-Ouimet Ethnobiology and the New Environmental Anthropology Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315768946.ch3 E. N. Anderson Published online on: 12 Aug 2016 How to cite :- E. N. Anderson. 12 Aug 2016, Ethnobiology and the New Environmental Anthropology from: Routledge Handbook of Environmental Anthropology Routledge Accessed on: 27 Sep 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315768946.ch3 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. 3 ETHNOBIOLOGY AND THE NEW ENVIRONMENTAL ANTHROPOLOGY E. N. Anderson Introduction Ethnobiology has moved through several stages: descriptive, cognitive-analytic, ecological, widely inclusive, and multidisciplinary. The field has rapidly evolved from one concerned with the ancient traditions of small-scale societies to one concerned with all aspects of environmental knowledge and wisdom.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Syllabus for M.Sc. in Anthropology
    Syllabus for M. Sc. in Anthropology From Academic session 2020-21 onwards Department of Anthropology Central University of Orissa Koraput Page 0 of 70 M.Sc. in ANTHROPOLOGY As per UGC Gazette notification dated 4th July, 2018; ‘Credit’ means the Unit award, gained as learning outcome, by a learner by study efforts required to acquire the prescribed level of learning in respect of that Unit; Explanation: It is hereby clarified that a study effort for one credit means time required by a learner to understand the contents equivalent to 15 hours classroom teaching., or one hour teaching in a week. In this syllabus some courses are 4 credit weightage, and some are 2 credit weightage. For the easy assessment to calculate percentage, though all courses are marked 100 marks, but the weightage of course content is more for 4 credit course then two credit course. Semester-I Semester-I: General Anthropology Course Course Code Title Credits Full Mark No. 1 ANT – C 311 Biological Anthropology -I 4 100 2 ANT – C 312 Socio-Cultural Anthropology 4 100 3 ANT – C 313 Archaeological Anthropology 4 100 & Museology 4 ANT – C 314 Research Methods 4 100 5 ANT – C 315 Tribes in India 2 100 6 ANT – C 316 General Practical – I 2 100 Semester-II Semester-II: General Anthropology Course Course Code Title Credits Full Mark No. 7 ANT – C 321 Biological Anthropology -II 4 100 8 ANT – C 322 Theories of Society and 4 100 Culture 9 ANT – C 323 Pre- and Proto- History of 4 100 India, Africa and Europe 10 ANT – C 324 Indian Anthropology 4 100 11 ANT – C 325 Peasants in India 2 100 12 ANT – C 326 General Practical – II 2 100 Students can perform summer internship programme during summer vacation, which will be treated as Audit Course and will be reflected in the Grade Sheet.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Anthropology.Pdf
    Ecological Anthropology Author(s): Benjamin S. Orlove Source: Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 9 (1980), pp. 235-273 Published by: Annual Reviews Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2155736 Accessed: 08-02-2017 10:17 UTC REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2155736?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of Anthropology This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Ann. Rev. Anthropol. 1980. 9:235-73 Copyright i 1980 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved ECOLOGICAL +9656 ANTHROPOLOGY Benjamin S. Orlove Division of Environmental Studies and Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis, California 95616 INTRODUCTION Ecological anthropology may be defined as the study of the relations among the population dynamics, social organization, and culture of human popula- tions and the environments in which they live. It includes comparative research as well as analyses of specific populations from both synchronic and diachronic perspectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Development Team
    Paper No. : 11 Ecological Anthropology: Cultural and Biological Dimensions Module : 21 Role of Ecological Anthropologists in the Debate of Environmentalism Development Team Principal Investigator Prof. Anup Kumar Kapoor Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi Dr. K. R. Rammohan Paper Coordinator Department of Anthropology, Sikkim University, Sikkim Dr. Ajeet Jaiswal Content Writer Department of Anthropology, Pondicherry University, Puducherry, India Prof. A. Paparao Content Reviewer Department of Anthropology, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati 1 Role of Ecological Anthropologists in the Debate of Environmentalism Anthropology Description of Module Subject Name Anthropology Paper Name Ecological Anthropology: Cultural and Biological Dimensions Module Name/Title Role of Ecological Anthropologists in the Debate of Environmentalism Module Id 21 Glossary Carrying Capacity- According to Moran (1979:326), carrying capacity is "[t]he number of individuals that a habitat can support" (Moran 1979:326). This idea is related to population pressure, referring to the demands of a population on the resources of its ecosystem (Moran 1979:334). If the technology of a group shifts, then the carrying capacity changes as well. An example of the application of carrying capacity within ecological anthropology is demonstrated in Rappaport’s study of the Tsembaga Maring. Cultural Ecology- Cultural ecology is the study of the adaptation of human societies or populations to their environments. Emphasis is on the arrangements of technique, economy, and social organization through which culture mediates the experience of the natural world (Winthrop 1991). Culture Core- Julian Steward (1955) defined the cultural core as the features of a society that are the most closely related to subsistence activities and economic arrangements.
    [Show full text]
  • From Science to Art and Back Again: the Pendulum of an Anthropologist
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Aberdeen University Research Archive 2016 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 5, N° 1, GIUGNO 2016: 5-23 From science to art and back again: The pendulum of an anthropologist Tim INGOLD University of Aberdeen ABSTRACT: In this paper I look back over four decades of my career as a professional anthropo- logist, starting with an orientation that was heavily weighted towards the natural sciences, and ending in a project that seeks to integrate anthropology with the practices of art, architecture and design. This was also a period during which science increasingly lost its ecological bear- ings, while the arts increasingly gained them. Tracing the journey in my own teaching and re- search, I show how the literary reference points changed, from foundational texts in human and animal ecology, now largely forgotten, through attempts to marry the social and the ecological inspired by the Marxian revival, to contemporary writing on post-humanism and the conditions of the Anthropocene. For me this has been an Odyssey – a journey home – to the kind of sci- ence imbibed in childhood, as the son of a prominent mycologist. This was a science grounded in tacit wonder at the exquisite beauty of the natural world, and in silent gratitude for what we owe to this world for our existence. Today’s science, however, has turned wonder and gratitude into commodities. They no longer guide its practices, but are rather invoked to advertise its res- ults. The goals of science are modelling, prediction and control.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Ecological Anthropology Anthsci 164/264 Winter Quarter 2005
    1 Ecological Anthropology AnthSci 164/264 Winter Quarter 2005 Tu Th 1:15-2:45 Essential Course Information Instructor: Rebecca Bird Office: 362a Building 360 (Anthro Sciences) Phone: 723-8839 E-mail: [email protected] Consultation hours: Tuesday 3-4, Wednesday & Thursday 11-12 Course web page: http://www.stanford.edu/~rbird/page3.html Required work: 3 10-page research papers due by March 10; 10 1-2 page summaries of the electronic readings, one due at the beginning of each week; 1 10-20 minute Powerpoint lecture/discussion presentation. Course Objectives Ecological Anthropology is a synthetic field of study that aims at a systematic understanding of variability in culturally-inherited human behavior and its relationship to specific social and physical environments. In my course, we take four ideas as fundamental: 1) that humans and environments interact dynamically in the process of adaptation, 2) that both subsistence and non-subsistence related cultural traits and behaviors can be adaptive, 3) that to understand the interaction between culture and ecology we must incorporate study of individual behavior and decision-making within a cultural and environmental context and 4) culturally inherited behaviors become adapted to their environments (physical and social) through a number of processes, including individual learning, cultural evolution, and natural selection on individual decision-making. The topics we will focus on this year include subsistence variability, subsistence intensification, feasting and ritual, nutrition and disease, warfare, indigenous resource management, and resource conservation/environmental degradation. We will examine some specific case studies on the socio-environmental dynamics of subsistence variability in the Great Basin, Australia, East Africa, and Amazonia; agricultural intensification in New Guinea; the ecology of feasting and ritual in the Pacific Northwest; the ecology of nutrition and disease in Africa; warfare in Amazonia; resource management in Australia; and resource conservation and environmental degradation worldwide.
    [Show full text]