Culture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about culture as used in the social sciences and humanities. For
uses in the natural sciences, see cell culture and tissue culture. For other us
es, see Culture (disambiguation).
Anthropology
Detail from Leonardo da Vinci's "Vitruvian Man"
Fields
Archaeological Biological Cultural Linguistic Social
Archaeological
Bioarchaeological Environmental Ethnoarchaeological Feminist Maritime Paleoethno
botanical Zooarchaeological
Social Cultural
Applied Art Cognitive Cyborg Development Digital Ecological Environmental Econom
ic Political economy Historical Feminist Kinship Legal Media Medical Musical Pol
itical Psychological Public Religion Science and technology Transpersonal Urban
Visual
Linguistic
Anthropological Descriptive Ethnological Ethnopoetical Historical Semiotic Socio
logical
Biological
Anthrozoological Biocultural Evolutionary Forensic Molecular Neurological Nutrit
ional Palaeoanthropological Primatological
Research framework
Anthropometry Ethnography Ethnology Cross-cultural comparison Participant observ
ation Online ethnography Holism Reflexivity Thick description Cultural relativis
m Ethnocentrism Emic and etic History of anthropology
Key theories
Actor-network / Alliance theory Cross-cultural studies Cultural materialism Cult
ure theory Feminism Functionalism Interpretive Performance studies Political eco
nomy Practice theory Structuralism Post-structuralism Systems theory
Key concepts
Evolution Society Culture Prehistory Sociocultural evolution Kinship and descent
Gender Race Ethnicity Development Colonialism Postcolonialism Value
Lists
Outline Bibliography Journals By years Organizations Anthropologists by national
ity
Portal icon Anthropology portal
v t e
Culture (Latin: cultura, lit. "cultivation"[1]) is a modern concept based on a t
erm first used in classical antiquity by the Roman orator Cicero: "cultura animi
" (cultivation of the soul). This non-agricultural use of the term "culture" re-
appeared in modern Europe in the 17th century referring to the betterment or ref
inement of individuals, especially through education. During the 18th and 19th c
entury it came to refer more frequently to the common reference points of whole
peoples, and discussion of the term was often connected to national aspirations
or ideals. Some scientists such as Edward Tylor used the term "culture" to refer
to a universal human capacity.
In the 20th century, "culture" emerged as a central concept in anthropology, enc
ompassing the range of human phenomena that cannot be directly attributed to gen
etic inheritance. Specifically, the term "culture" in American anthropology had
two meanings:
the evolved human capacity to classify and represent experiences with symbols, a
nd to act imaginatively and creatively; and
the distinct ways that people, who live differently, classified and represented
their experiences, and acted creatively.[2]
Hoebel describes culture as an integrated system of learned behavior patterns wh
ich are characteristic of the members of a society and which are not a result of
biological inheritance.[3]
Distinctions are currently made between the physical artifacts created by a soci
ety, its so-called material culture, and everything else,[4] the intangibles suc
h as language, customs, etc. that are the main referent of the term "culture".
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 Change
3 Early modern discourses
3.1 German Romanticism
3.2 English Romanticism
4 20th-century discourses
4.1 Anthropology
4.1.1 American anthropology
4.2 Sociology
4.2.1 Early researchers and development of cultural sociology
4.3 Cultural studies
5 See also
6 Notes
7 Sources
8 References
9 External links
Etymology[edit]
The modern term "culture" is based on a term used by the Ancient Roman orator Ci
cero in his Tusculanae Disputationes, where he wrote of a cultivation of the sou
l or "cultura animi",[5] using an agricultural metaphor for the development of a
philosophical soul, understood teleologically as the highest possible ideal for
human development. Samuel Pufendorf took over this metaphor in a modern context
, meaning something similar, but no longer assuming that philosophy was man's na
tural perfection. His use, and that of many writers after him "refers to all the
ways in which human beings overcome their original barbarism, and through artif
ice, become fully human".[6]
As described by Velkley: [6]
The term "culture," which originally meant the cultivation of the soul or mind,
acquires most of its later modern meanings in the writings of the 18th-century G
erman thinkers, who were on various levels developing Rousseau's criticism of ?m
odern liberalism and Enlightenment?. Thus a contrast between "culture" and "civi
lization" is usually implied in these authors, even when not expressed as such.
Two primary meanings of culture emerge from this period: culture as the folk-spi
rit having a unique identity and culture as cultivation of waywardness or free i
ndividuality. The first meaning is predominant in our current use of the term "c
ulture," although the second still plays a large role in what we think culture s
hould achieve, namely the full "expression" of the unique or "authentic" self.
Change[edit]
A 19th-century engraving showing Australian "natives" opposing the arrival of Ca
ptain James Cook in 1770
Cultural invention has come to mean any innovation that is new and found to be u
seful to a group of people and expressed in their behavior but which does not ex
ist as a physical object. Humanity is in a global "accelerating culture change p
eriod", driven by the expansion of international commerce, the mass media, and a
bove all, the human population explosion, among other factors.
Cultures are internally affected by both forces encouraging change and forces re
sisting change. These forces are related to both social structures and natural e
vents, and are involved in the perpetuation of cultural ideas and practices with
in current structures, which themselves are subject to change.[7] (See structura
tion.)
Social conflict and the development of technologies can produce changes within a
society by altering social dynamics and promoting new cultural models, and spur
ring or enabling generative action. These social shifts may accompany ideologica
l shifts and other types of cultural change. For example, the U.S. feminist move
ment involved new practices that produced a shift in gender relations, altering
both gender and economic structures. Environmental conditions may also enter as
factors. For example, after tropical forests returned at the end of the last ice
age, plants suitable for domestication were available, leading to the invention
of agriculture, which in turn brought about many cultural innovations and shift
s in social dynamics.[8]
Full-length profile portrait of Turkman woman, standing on a carpet at the entra
nce to a yurt, dressed in traditional clothing and jewelry
Cultures are externally affected via contact between societies, which may also p
roduceor inhibitsocial shifts and changes in cultural practices. War or competitio
n over resources may impact technological development or social dynamics. Additi
onally, cultural ideas may transfer from one society to another, through diffusi
on or acculturation. In diffusion, the form of something (though not necessarily
its meaning) moves from one culture to another. For example, hamburgers, fast f
ood in the United States, seemed exotic when introduced into China. "Stimulus di
ffusion" (the sharing of ideas) refers to an element of one culture leading to a
n invention or propagation in another. "Direct Borrowing" on the other hand tend
s to refer to technological or tangible diffusion from one culture to another. D
iffusion of innovations theory presents a research-based model of why and when i
ndividuals and cultures adopt new ideas, practices, and products.
Acculturation has different meanings, but in this context refers to replacement
of the traits of one culture with those of another, such as what happened to cer
tain Native American tribes and to many indigenous peoples across the globe duri
ng the process of colonization. Related processes on an individual level include
assimilation (adoption of a different culture by an individual) and transcultur
ation.
Early modern discourses[edit]
German Romanticism[edit]
Johann Herder called attention to national cultures.
The German philosopher Immanuel Kant (17241804) has formulated an individualist d
efinition of "enlightenment" similar to the concept of bildung: "Enlightenment i
s man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity."[9] He argued that this imm
aturity comes not from a lack of understanding, but from a lack of courage to th
ink independently. Against this intellectual cowardice, Kant urged: Sapere aude,
"Dare to be wise!" In reaction to Kant, German scholars such as Johann Gottfrie
d Herder (17441803) argued that human creativity, which necessarily takes unpredi
ctable and highly diverse forms, is as important as human rationality. Moreover,
Herder proposed a collective form of bildung: "For Herder, Bildung was the tota
lity of experiences that provide a coherent identity, and sense of common destin
y, to a people."[10]
Adolf Bastian developed a universal model of culture.
In 1795, the great linguist and philosopher Wilhelm von Humboldt (17671835) calle
d for an anthropology that would synthesize Kant's and Herder's interests. Durin
g the Romantic era, scholars in Germany, especially those concerned with nationa
list movementssuch as the nationalist struggle to create a "Germany" out of diver
se principalities, and the nationalist struggles by ethnic minorities against th
e Austro-Hungarian Empiredeveloped a more inclusive notion of culture as "worldvi
ew"(Weltanschauung). According to this school of thought, each ethnic group has
a distinct worldview that is incommensurable with the worldviews of other groups
. Although more inclusive than earlier views, this approach to culture still all
owed for distinctions between "civilized" and "primitive" or "tribal" cultures.
In 1860, Adolf Bastian (18261905) argued for "the psychic unity of mankind". He p
roposed that a scientific comparison of all human societies would reveal that di
stinct worldviews consisted of the same basic elements. According to Bastian, al
l human societies share a set of "elementary ideas" (Elementargedanken); differe
nt cultures, or different "folk ideas" (Vlkergedanken), are local modifications o
f the elementary ideas.[11] This view paved the way for the modern understanding
of culture. Franz Boas (18581942) was trained in this tradition, and he brought
it with him when he left Germany for the United States.
English Romanticism[edit]
British poet and critic Matthew Arnold viewed "culture" as the cultivation of th
e humanist ideal.
In the 19th century, humanists such as English poet and essayist Matthew Arnold
(18221888) used the word "culture" to refer to an ideal of individual human refin
ement, of "the best that has been thought and said in the world."[12] This conce
pt of culture is comparable to the German concept of bildung: "...culture being
a pursuit of our total perfection by means of getting to know, on all the matter
s which most concern us, the best which has been thought and said in the world."
[12]
In practice, culture referred to an lite ideal and was associated with such activ
ities as art, classical music, and haute cuisine.[13] As these forms were associ
ated with urban life, "culture" was identified with "civilization" (from lat. ci
vitas, city). Another facet of the Romantic movement was an interest in folklore
, which led to identifying a "culture" among non-elites. This distinction is oft
en characterized as that between high culture, namely that of the ruling social
group, and low culture. In other words, the idea of "culture" that developed in
Europe during the 18th and early 19th centuries reflected inequalities within Eu
ropean societies.[14]
British anthropologist Edward Tylor was one of the first English-speaking schola
rs to use the term culture in an inclusive and universal sense.
Matthew Arnold contrasted "culture" with anarchy; other Europeans, following phi
losophers Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, contrasted "culture" with "th
e state of nature". According to Hobbes and Rousseau, the Native Americans who w
ere being conquered by Europeans from the 16th centuries on were living in a sta
te of nature; this opposition was expressed through the contrast between "civili
zed" and "uncivilized." According to this way of thinking, one could classify so
me countries and nations as more civilized than others and some people as more c
ultured than others. This contrast led to Herbert Spencer's theory of Social Dar
winism and Lewis Henry Morgan's theory of cultural evolution. Just as some criti
cs have argued that the distinction between high and low cultures is really an e
xpression of the conflict between European elites and non-elites, some critics h
ave argued that the distinction between civilized and uncivilized people is real
ly an expression of the conflict between European colonial powers and their colo
nial subjects.
Other 19th-century critics, following Rousseau have accepted this differentiatio
n between higher and lower culture, but have seen the refinement and sophisticat
ion of high culture as corrupting and unnatural developments that obscure and di
stort people's essential nature. These critics considered folk music (as produce
d by "the folk", i.e., rural, illiterate, peasants) to honestly express a natura
l way of life, while classical music seemed superficial and decadent. Equally, t
his view often portrayed indigenous peoples as "noble savages" living authentic
and unblemished lives, uncomplicated and uncorrupted by the highly stratified ca
pitalist systems of the West.
In 1870 the anthropologist Edward Tylor (18321917) applied these ideas of higher
versus lower culture to propose a theory of the evolution of religion. According
to this theory, religion evolves from more polytheistic to more monotheistic fo
rms.[15] In the process, he redefined culture as a diverse set of activities cha
racteristic of all human societies. This view paved the way for the modern under
standing of culture.
20th-century discourses[edit]
Anthropology[edit]
American anthropology[edit]
Petroglyphs in modern-day Gobustan, Azerbaijan, dating back to 10 000 BCE and in
dicating a thriving culture
Main article: American anthropology
Although anthropologists worldwide refer to Tylor's definition of culture, in th
e 20th century "culture" emerged as the central and unifying concept of American
anthropology, where it most commonly refers to the universal human capacity to
classify and encode human experiences symbolically, and to communicate symbolica
lly encoded experiences socially.[citation needed] American anthropology is orga
nized into four fields, each of which plays an important role in research on cul
ture: biological anthropology, linguistic anthropology, cultural anthropology, a
nd archaeology. Research in these fields has influenced anthropologists working
in other countries to different degrees.[citation needed]
Sociology[edit]
Main articles: sociology and sociology of culture
The sociology of culture concerns cultureusually understood as the ensemble of sy
mbolic codes used by a societyas it is manifested in society. For Georg Simmel, c
ulture referred to "the cultivation of individuals through the agency of externa
l forms which have been objectified in the course of history".[16] Culture in th
e sociological field can be defined as the ways of thinking, the ways of acting,
and the material objects that together shape a people's way of life. Culture ca
n be any of two types, non-material culture or material culture.[17]
Cultural sociology first emerged in Weimar Germany, where sociologists such as A
lfred Weber used the term Kultursoziologie (cultural sociology). Cultural sociol
ogy was then "reinvented" in the English-speaking world as a product of the "cul
tural turn" of the 1960s, which ushered in structuralist and postmodern approach
es to social science. This type of cultural sociology may loosely be regarded as
an approach incorporating cultural analysis and critical theory. Cultural socio
logists tend to reject scientific methods, instead hermeneutically focusing on w
ords, artifacts and symbols. "Culture" has since become an important concept acr
oss many branches of sociology, including resolutely scientific fields like soci
al stratification and social network analysis. As a result, there has been a rec
ent influx of quantitative sociologists to the field. Thus there is now a growin
g group of sociologists of culture who are, confusingly, not cultural sociologis
ts. These scholars reject the abstracted postmodern aspects of cultural sociolog
y, and instead look for a theoretical backing in the more scientific vein of soc
ial psychology and cognitive science. "Cultural sociology" is one of the largest
sections of the American Sociological Association. The British establishment of
cultural studies means the latter is often taught as a loosely-distinct discipl
ine in the UK.
Early researchers and development of cultural sociology[edit]
The sociology of culture grew from the intersection between sociology, as shaped
by early theorists like Marx, Durkheim, and Weber, and with the growing discipl
ine of anthropology where researchers pioneered ethnographic strategies for desc
ribing and analyzing a variety of cultures around the world. Part of the legacy
of the early development of the field is still felt in the methods (much of cult
ural sociological research is qualitative) in the theories (a variety of critica
l approaches to sociology are central to current research communities) and subst
antive focus of the field. For instance, relationships between popular culture,
political control, and social class were early and lasting concerns in the field
.
Cultural studies[edit]
In the United Kingdom, sociologists and other scholars influenced by Marxism, su
ch as Stuart Hall and Raymond Williams, developed cultural studies. Following ni
neteenth-century Romantics, they identified "culture" with consumption goods and
leisure activities (such as art, music, film, food, sports, and clothing). Neve
rtheless, they understood patterns of consumption and leisure to be determined b
y relations of production, which led them to focus on class relations and the or
ganization of production.[18][19] In the United States, "Cultural Studies" focus
es largely on the study of popular culture, that is, the social meanings of mass
-produced consumer and leisure goods. The term was coined by Richard Hoggart in
1964 when he founded the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies or
CCCS. It has since become strongly associated with Stuart Hall, who succeeded Ho
ggart as Director. Cultural studies in this sense, then, can be viewed as a limi
ted concentration scoped on the intricacies of consumerism, which belongs to a w
ider culture sometimes referred to as "Western Civilization," or "Globalism."
From the 1970s onward, Stuart Hall's pioneering work, along with his colleagues
Paul Willis, Dick Hebdige, Tony Jefferson, and Angela McRobbie, created an inter
national intellectual movement. As the field developed it began to combine polit
ical economy, communication, sociology, social theory, literary theory, media th
eory, film/video studies, cultural anthropology, philosophy, museum studies and
art history to study cultural phenomena or cultural texts. In this field researc
hers often concentrate on how particular phenomena relate to matters of ideology
, nationality, ethnicity, social class, and/or gender.[citation needed] Cultural
studies is concerned with the meaning and practices of everyday life. These pra
ctices comprise the ways people do particular things (such as watching televisio
n, or eating out) in a given culture. This field studies the meanings and uses p
eople attribute to various objects and practices. Specifically, culture involves
those meanings and practices held independently of reason. Watching television
in order to view a public perspective on a historical event should not be though
t of as culture, unless referring to the medium of television itself, which may
have been selected culturally; however, schoolchildren watching television after
school with their friends in order to "fit in" certainly qualifies, since there
is no grounded reason for one's participation in this practice. Recently, as ca
pitalism has spread throughout the world (a process called globalization), cultu
ral studies has begun to analyse local and global forms of resistance to Western
hegemony.[citation needed]
In the context of cultural studies, the idea of a text not only includes written
language, but also films, photographs, fashion or hairstyles: the texts of cult
ural studies comprise all the meaningful artifacts of culture.[citation needed]
Similarly, the discipline widens the concept of "culture". "Culture" for a cultu
ral studies researcher not only includes traditional high culture (the culture o
f ruling social groups)[20] and popular culture, but also everyday meanings and
practices. The last two, in fact, have become the main focus of cultural studies
. A further and recent approach is comparative cultural studies, based on the di
scipline of comparative literature and cultural studies.[citation needed]
Scholars in the United Kingdom and the United States developed somewhat differen
t versions of cultural studies after the field's inception in the late 1970s. Th
e British version of cultural studies was developed in the 1950s and 1960s mainl
y under the influence first of Richard Hoggart, E. P. Thompson, and Raymond Will
iams, and later Stuart Hall and others at the Centre for Contemporary Cultural S
tudies at the University of Birmingham. This included overtly political, left-wi
ng views, and criticisms of popular culture as 'capitalist' mass culture; it abs
orbed some of the ideas of the Frankfurt School critique of the "culture industr
y" (i.e. mass culture). This emerges in the writings of early British cultural-s
tudies scholars and their influences: see the work of (for example) Raymond Will
iams, Stuart Hall, Paul Willis, and Paul Gilroy.
Whereas in the United States Lindlof & Taylor said, "Cultural studies [were] gro
unded in a pragmatic, liberal-pluralist tradition".[21] The American version of
cultural studies initially concerned itself more with understanding the subjecti
ve and appropriative side of audience reactions to, and uses of, mass culture; f
or example, American cultural-studies advocates wrote about the liberatory aspec
ts of fandom.[citation needed] The distinction between American and British stra
nds, however, has faded.[citation needed] Some researchers, especially in early
British cultural studies, apply a Marxist model to the field. This strain of thi
nking has some influence from the Frankfurt School, but especially from the stru
cturalist Marxism of Louis Althusser and others. The main focus of an orthodox M
arxist approach concentrates on the production of meaning. This model assumes a
mass production of culture and identifies power as residing with those producing
cultural artifacts. In a Marxist view, those who control the means of productio
n (the economic base) essentially control a culture.[citation needed] Other appr
oaches to cultural studies, such as feminist cultural studies and later American
developments of the field, distance themselves from this view. They criticize t
he Marxist assumption of a single, dominant meaning, shared by all, for any cult
ural product. The non-Marxist approaches suggest that different ways of consumin
g cultural artifacts affect the meaning of the product. This view is best exempl
ified by the book Doing Cultural Studies: The Case of the Sony Walkman (by Paul
du Gay et al.), which seeks to challenge the notion that those who produce commo
dities control the meanings that people attribute to them. Feminist cultural ana
lyst, theorist and art historian Griselda Pollock contributed to cultural studie
s from viewpoints of art history and psychoanalysis. The writer Julia Kristeva i
s among influential voices in the turn of the century, contributing to cultural
studies from the field of art and psychoanalytical French feminism.[citation nee
ded]
See also[edit]
Portal icon Culture portal
Anthropology
Cultural region
Outline of culture
Semiotics of culture
Wikipedia book Culture at Wikipedia books
Notes[edit]
Jump up ^ Harper, Douglas (2001). Online Etymology Dictionary
Jump up ^ "What is culture?". Bodylanguagecards.com. Retrieved 2013-03-29.
Jump up ^ Hoebel, Adamson. Anthropology: Study of Man.
Jump up ^ Macionis, Gerber, John, Linda (2010). Sociology 7th Canadian Ed. Toron
to, Ontario: Pearson Canada Inc. p. 53.
Jump up ^ Cicero, Marcus Tullius (45 BC). Tusculanes (Tusculan Disputations). pp
. II, 15.
^ Jump up to: a b Velkley, Richard (2002). "The Tension in the Beautiful: On Cul
ture and Civilization in Rousseau and German Philosophy". Being after Rousseau:
Philosophy and Culture in Question. The University of Chicago Press. pp. 1130.
Jump up ^ O'Neil, D. 2006. "Processes of Change".
Jump up ^ Pringle, H. 1998. The Slow Birth of Agriculture[dead link]. Science 28
2: 1446.
Jump up ^ Immanuel Kant 1784 "Answering the Question: What is Enlightenment?" (G
erman: "Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklrung?") Berlinische Monatsschrift, D
ecember (Berlin Monthly)
Jump up ^ Michael Eldridge, "The German Bildung Tradition" UNC Charlotte
Jump up ^ "Adolf Bastian", Today in Science History; "Adolf Bastian", Encyclopdia
Britannica
^ Jump up to: a b Arnold, Matthew. 1869. Culture and Anarchy.
Jump up ^ Williams (1983), p.90. Cited in Shuker, Roy (1994). Understanding Popu
lar Music, p.5. ISBN 0-415-10723-7. argues that contemporary definitions of cult
ure fall into three possibilities or mixture of the following three:
"a general process of intellectual, spiritual, and aesthetic development"
"a particular way of life, whether of a people, period, or a group"
"the works and practices of intellectual and especially artistic activity".
Jump up ^ Bakhtin 1981, p.4
Jump up ^ McClenon, pp.528-529
Jump up ^ Levine, Donald (ed) 'Simmel: On individuality and social forms' Chicag
o University Press, 1971. p. xix.
Jump up ^ Macionis, J., and Gerber, L. (2010). Sociology, 7th edition
Jump up ^ Raymond Williams (1976) Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society.
Rev. Ed. (New York: Oxford UP, 1983), pp. 8793 and 2368.
Jump up ^ John Berger, Peter Smith Pub. Inc., (1971) Ways of Seeing
Jump up ^ Bakhtin, Mikhail 1981. The Dialogic Imagination. Austin, TX: UT Press,
p.4
Jump up ^ Lindlof & Taylor, 2002, p.60
Sources[edit]
Terrence Deacon (1997). The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and t
he Brain. New York and London: W. W. Norton.
Ralph L. Holloway Jr. (1969). "Culture: A Human domain". Current Anthropology. 1
0(4).
Dell Hymes (1969). Reinventing Anthropology.
Michael Tomasello (1999). "The Human Adaptation for Culture". Annual Review of A
nthropology 28.
Whorf, Benjamin Lee (1941). "The relation of habitual thought and behavior to la
nguage". Language, Culture, and Personality: Essays in Honor of Edward Sapir (Me
nasha, WI: Sapir Memorial Publication Fund).
Walter Taylor (1948). A Study of Archeology. Memoir 69, American Anthropological
Association. Carbondale IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
References[edit]
"Adolf Bastian". Today in Science History. 27 Jan 2009 Today in Science History
"Adolf Bastian", Encyclopdia Britannica Online, 27 January 2009
Ankerl, Guy (2000) [2000]. Global communication without universal civilization,
vol.1: Coexisting contemporary civilizations: Arabo-Muslim, Bharati, Chinese, an
d Western. INU societal research. Geneva: INU Press. ISBN 2-88155-004-5.
Arnold, Matthew. 1869. Culture and Anarchy. New York: Macmillan. Third edition,
1882, available online. Retrieved: 2006-06-28.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Ed. Michael Holquis
t. Trans. Caryl Press. ISBN 978-0-252-06445-6.
Barzilai, Gad. 2003. Communities and Law: Politics and Cultures of Legal Identit
ies University of Michigan Press. ISBN 0-472-11315-1
Benedict, Ruth (1934). Patterns of Culture. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Pr
ess. ISBN 978-0-521-29164-4
Cohen, Anthony P. 1985. The Symbolic Construction of Community. Routledge: New Y
ork,
Dawkins, R. 1982. The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene. Paperback
ed., 1999. Oxford Paperbacks. ISBN 978-0-19-288051-2
Findley & Rothney. Twentieth-Century World (Houghton Mifflin, 1986)
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New Yor
k. ISBN 978-0-465-09719-7.
1957. "Ritual and Social Change: A Javanese Example", American Anthropologist, V
ol. 59, No. 1. doi:10.1525/aa.1957.59.1.02a00040
Goodall, J. 1986. The Chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of Behavior. Cambridge, MA:
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-11649-8
Hoult, T. F., ed. 1969. Dictionary of Modern Sociology. Totowa, New Jersey, Unit
ed States: Littlefield, Adams & Co.
Jary, D. and J. Jary. 1991. The HarperCollins Dictionary of Sociology. New York:
HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-271543-7
Keiser, R. Lincoln 1969. The Vice Lords: Warriors of the Streets. Holt, Rinehart
, and Winston. ISBN 978-0-03-080361-1.
Kroeber, A. L. and C. Kluckhohn, 1952. Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts an
d Definitions. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum
Kim, Uichol (2001). "Culture, science and indigenous psychologies: An integrated
analysis." In D. Matsumoto (Ed.), Handbook of culture and psychology. Oxford: O
xford University Press
McClenon, James. "Tylor, Edward B(urnett)". Encyclopedia of Religion and Society
. Ed. William Swatos and Peter Kivisto. Walnut Creek: AltaMira, 1998. 528-29.
Middleton, R. 1990. Studying Popular Music. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
ISBN 978-0-335-15275-9.
O'Neil, D. 2006. Cultural Anthropology Tutorials, Behavioral Sciences Department
, Palomar College, San Marco, California. Retrieved: 2006-07-10.
Reagan, Ronald. "Final Radio Address to the Nation", January 14, 1989. Retrieved
June 3, 2006.
Reese, W.L. 1980. Dictionary of Philosophy and Religion: Eastern and Western Tho
ught. New Jersey U.S., Sussex, U.K: Humanities Press.
Tylor, E.B. 1974. Primitive culture: researches into the development of mytholog
y, philosophy, religion, art, and custom. New York: Gordon Press. First publishe
d in 1871. ISBN 978-0-87968-091-6
UNESCO. 2002. Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, issued on Internation
al Mother Language Day, February 21, 2002. Retrieved: 2006-06-23.
White, L. 1949. The Science of Culture: A study of man and civilization. New Yor
k: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Wilson, Edward O. (1998). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. Vintage: New York
. ISBN 978-0-679-76867-8.
Wolfram, Stephen. 2002 A New Kind of Science. Wolfram Media, Inc. ISBN 978-1-579
55-008-0
External links[edit]
Find more about Culture at Wikipedia's sister projects
Definitions and translations from Wiktionary
Media from Commons
Quotations from Wikiquote
Source texts from Wikisource
Textbooks from Wikibooks
Learning resources from Wikiversity
Cultura: International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology
[show]
Links to related articles
Categories: CultureAnthropologyCountercultureCounterculture of the 1960sHistory
of ideasSociology of cultureSocial agreement
Navigation menu
Create accountLog inArticleTalkReadEditView history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikimedia Shop
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Data item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Afrikaans
???????
Aragons
?????
???????
Asturianu
Avae'?
Aymar aru
Az?rbaycanca
?????
Bn-lm-g
Basa Banyumasan
?????????
??????????
?????????? (???????????)?
?????????
Boarisch
???????
Bosanski
Brezhoneg
Catal
???????
Cebuano
Cetina
Chamoru
ChiShona
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
??????????
Eesti
????????
??????
Espaol
Esperanto
Estremeu
Euskara
?????
Fiji Hindi
Franais
Frysk
Furlan
Gaeilge
Gaelg
Galego
???/Hak-k-ng
???
???????
??????
Hrvatski
Ido
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Interlingue
????
slenska
Italiano
?????
Basa Jawa
Kalaallisut
????????-???????
???????
Kaszbsczi
???????
Kiswahili
Kreyl ayisyen
Kurd
????????
Ladino
???
Latina
Latvieu
Lietuviu
Lojban
Magyar
??????????
Malagasy
??????
Malti
?????
????
????????
Bahasa Melayu
Mirands
???????
??????
??????????
Nahuatl
Nederlands
Nedersaksies
??????
????? ????
???
Napulitano
Nordfriisk
Norsk bokml
Norsk nynorsk
Novial
Occitan
???? ?????
Oshiwambo
O?zbekcha
??????
Plzisch
??????
Papiamentu
????
?????????
Plattdtsch
Polski
Portugus
Romna
Runa Simi
??????????
???????
???? ????
Scots
Seeltersk
Shqip
Sicilianu
?????
Simple English
SiSwati
Slovencina
Slovencina
Soomaaliga
?????
?????? / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / ??????????????
Basa Sunda
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
?????
???????/tatara
??????
???
??????
Trke
??????????
????
Vneto
Ti?ng Vi?t
Vro
Winaray
Xitsonga
??????
Yorb
??
Zazaki
Zeuws
emaiteka
??
Edit links
This page was last modified on 22 May 2014 at 22:16.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; add
itional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and P
rivacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, I
nc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policyAbout WikipediaDisclaimersContact WikipediaDevelopersMobile viewWi
kimedia Foundation Powered by MediaWiki