Culture has a unique dichotomy. Explain
Answers
Answer:
The nature–culture divide refers to a theoretical foundation of contemporary anthropology. Early[clarification needed] anthropologists sought theoretical insight from the perceived tensions between nature and culture. Later, the argument became framed by the question of whether the two entities function separately from one another, or if they were in a continuous biotic relationship with each other.
In eastern society nature and culture are conceptualized as dichotomous (separate and distinct domains of reference). Some consider culture to be "man's secret adaptive weapon"[1]:393 in the sense that it is the core means of survival. It has been observed that the terms "nature" and "culture" that can not necessarily be translated into non-western languages,[2] for example, the Native American scholar John Mohawk[year needed] describing "nature"[clarification needed] as "anything that supports life".[3]
It has been suggested that small scale-societies can have a more symbiotic relationship with nature[by whom?]. But less symbiotic relations with nature are limiting small-scale communities' access to water and food resources.[3] It was also argued that the contemporary Man-Nature divide manifests itself in different aspects of alienation and conflicts.[4] Greenwood and Stini argue that agriculture is only monetarily cost-efficient because it takes much more to produce than one can get out of eating their own crops,[1]:397 e.g. "high culture cannot come at low energy costs".[5]
During the 1960s and 1970s Sherry Ortner showed the parallel between the divide and gender roles with women as nature and men as culture.[6]
The nature–culture divide is deeply intertwined with the social versus biological debate, since it both are implications of each other. As viewed in earlier forms of Anthropology, it is believed that genetic determinism de-emphasizes the importance of culture, making it obsolete. However, more modern views show that culture is valued more than nature because everyday aspects of culture have a wider impact on how the humans see the world, rather than just our genetic makeup. Older anthropological theories have separated the two, such as Franz Boas, who claimed that social organization and behavior is purely the transmission of social norms and not necessarily the passing of hereditable traits.[7] Instead of using such a contrasting approach, more modern anthropologists see Neo-Darwinism as an outline for culture, therefore nature is essentially guiding how culture develops. When looking at adaptations. anthropologists such as Daniel Nettle believe that behavior associated with cultural groups is a development of genetic difference between groups.[8] Essentially, he states that animals choose their mates based on their environment, which is shaped by directly by culture. More importantly, the adaptations seen in nature are a result of evoked nature, which is defined as cultural characteristics which shape the environment and that then queue changes in phenotypes for future generations. To put simply, cultures that promote more effective resource allocation and chance for survival are more likely to be successful and produce more developed societies and cultures that feed off of each other.
Explanation:
Basic convictions, political regulations, the cultural behavior based on tradition and communication influence the management of the environment, and as such are an important corridor of power affecting natural habitats. It also depends on whether a disaster is observed as the blow of fate, natural and irremediable, or as a problem caused by humans (Culture Dichotomy).
What is right with the Culture Dichotomy:
Independent of the question of whether our behavior towards nature is respecting ecological conditions and ascribing the very right of existence of another bio data as well, we often feel and behave like beings outside of nature, and belonging to the inside of houses, civilizations, and cultural life.
What is wrong with the Culture Dichotomy:
Nowadays many scientific contributions on the cultural relationship argue against the dichotomy, attempting to overcome the divide with the goal of harmonization or describing to a trajectory beyond the dualism.
#SPJ2