1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Softa [21]
3 years ago
6

How different is the practice of anthropology in the 19th century with the 21st century

History
2 answers:
Roman55 [17]3 years ago
8 0

There are several ways in which the field of anthropology has evolved from the way it was practiced during the 19th century. However, I will discuss two factors that are particularly significant:

The first one is the fact that anthropology has expanded. In the 19th century, this category was only present in a few universities, and it generally included a small number of subjects and approaches. Anthropology nowadays has grown in popularity and complexity, particularly because of the presence of interdisciplinary approaches.

A second way in which anthropology has changed is by its less ethnocentric approach. At its origins, anthropology tended to judge other countries from a "Western" standard. However, this is much less common nowadays, as anthropologists try to implement cultural relativism.

nataly862011 [7]3 years ago
6 0

The anthropology of religion is the comparative study of religions in their cultural, social, historical, and material contexts.



The English term religion has no exact equivalent in most other languages. For example, burial practices are more likely to be called customs and not sharply differentiated from other ways of doing things. Early Homo sapiens (for example, the Neanderthals at Krapina [now in Croatia]) began burying their dead at least 130,000 years ago. To what end? And how and why have such practices changed over time? What might they have in common with the multitude of burial customs—known to be associated with differing conceptions of death and life—among people in the world today; for example, what might embalming practices in ancient Egypt and 19th-century Bolivia have in common with each other and with 21st-century embalming practices in North America? How do these relate to secondary burials, involving the exhumation and reburial of the corpse or its bones, as in Madagascar and Siberia, or rituals of cremation, as in Japan, India, or France? Paradoxically, anthropologists’ documentation of the enormous diversity of human customs, past and present, puts into question the very existence of “religion” as a single coherent system of practices, values, or beliefs. Indeed, what constitutes “religion” may be hotly debated even among coreligionists. The study of religion in anthropology requires consideration of all these matters, including anthropologists’ own terms of analysis.



Scholars of religion throughout the world have long recognized what the American philosopher and psychologist William James (1902) called “the varieties of religious experience.” Since the mid-19th century, one of the first and most important contributions of anthropologists has been to extend the study of those varieties beyond the formal doctrines and liturgies of established religious institutions to include related customs, regardless of when, where, and by whom they are practiced and whether they are celebrated, suppressed, or taken for granted. The anthropology of religion is the study of, in the words of the English anthropologist Edward Evans-Pritchard (Theories of Primitive Religion [1965]), “how religious beliefs and practices affect in any society the minds, the feelings, the lives, and the interrelations of its members…religion is what religion does.” Although Edward Burnett Tylor’s classic Primitive Culture (1871) documented the wide-ranging doings of his fellow Europeans, most anthropologists in the 19th and early 20th centuries focused on so-called primitive peoples living outside Europe and North America, on the grounds that religion, increasingly defined by contrast to reason, was a historically primitive form of behaviour that was already giving way to science. Subsequent research has proved these assumptions to be wrong. As anthropology has grown to include the study of all humans on an equal footing and the field of anthropology is practiced throughout the world, anthropologists continue to confront their parochial biases.




Over the next century, as museums with anthropological collections continued to develop as research institutions, many of the anthropologists who worked there turned away from collection-based work. Archaeologists and physical anthropologists continued to use collections for study, but, until a late 20th-century revival of interest in the history of anthropology and museums and in studies of material culture and the anthropology of art, few cultural anthropologists worked actively with collections.

The last quarter of the 20th century witnessed great change in the practice of anthropology in museums. The civil rights and decolonization movements of the 1960s increased awareness of the politics of collecting and representation. Ethical issues that had been ignored in the past began to influence museum practices. By the turn of the 21st century, most anthropologists working in museums had understood the need to incorporate diverse points of view in exhibitions and collections care and to rely on the expertise of people from the cultures represented as well as museum professionals. At the same time, many new museums—such as the U’mista Cultural Centre (1980) in Alert Bay, British Columbia, Canada—were established within the communities that created the objects on display. Anthropologists in museums also were concerned with issues such as the ethics of collecting, access to collections and associated data, and ownership and repatriation.


I just got a whole story for you to get it xD (I made some mistakes i think ;-;)

Hope this helps! ~ Kana ^^


You might be interested in
Which argument would have been used to justify increased government influence over American society during World War II?
zepelin [54]
The correct answer is <span>A. Government intervention is needed to guarantee that Americans will support the war. 

They faced similar problems like they did in world war one. The citizens thought a lot about being isolated and didn't want meddling in European affairs, while they also had many people of different ethnicity who felt differently about the war. The country needed to interfere to get support for participation in the war and they did get it eventually.</span>
5 0
3 years ago
How were Hitler's pact with Stalin and Germany's invasion of Poland direct causes of World War II?​
gayaneshka [121]

Explanation: The Allies told Hitler to stop expanding after they took Czechoslovakia. When They Invaded Poland. The British And French Declared War on Germany, starting WW2. The Soviets Joined and split Poland between them and Nazi Germany.

5 0
3 years ago
How does and american company do business with a communist regime .
lianna [129]

The trade happens through the trade blocs that were put in place.

Explanation:

Communist regimes that are not economically liberalized still trade with the world through their trading blocs.

These are governmental institutions designed so as to allow for trade to happen in the country and through the country.

These trade blocs deal directly with the companies of free trade nations where the government in itself trades very rarely as is the case with the US.

Thus the dealing is usually with the government directly.

8 0
3 years ago
1. What was the issue in the Supreme Court case of Plessy v. Ferguson? What did the court rule?
amid [387]

The judgment of the United States' Supreme Court in the trial Plessy V Ferguson resentfully transformed the living aspect of Blacks in the United States, as the ruling in the case made the state-sponsored segregation constitutional.

In the year 1896, the Supreme court commanded in a case Plessy v. Ferguson that the policy of the Whites of segregating the Blacks in the public facilities is fair. Therefore, the Plessy V. Ferguson verdict authorised the segregation sponsored by the state.

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
True or False: It is illegal to park on any bridge or overpass or in any tunnel.
Zinaida [17]
True: It is illegal to park on any bridge or overpass or in any tunnel.
7 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • According to the excerpt, who is most likely to be qualified
    9·1 answer
  • In 1996, a new federal welfare program called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) began assisting poor families. Whic
    14·2 answers
  • Need help on these questions ASAP
    14·1 answer
  • Which factor contributes to the collapse of both of the Roman Empire and the Han dynasty
    15·2 answers
  • What was the penalty for desertion
    11·1 answer
  • True or false the mayflower compact was a precedent for the founding fathers as they created the US constitution.
    8·2 answers
  • Round 4.778 to the nearest hundredth
    10·2 answers
  • List 2 actions of Andrew Jackson that supported Indian Removal?
    9·2 answers
  • The party in power tends to lose seats in off-year elections because
    14·1 answer
  • The ancient greeks considered themselves to be the center of the universe or "the measure of all things," a concept known as?
    7·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!