Theories in the Study of

Culture and Society

WEEK 5
 In the context of Anthropology and Sociology, a theory is a coherent
set of general propositions that are used and applied as principles to
explain a certain phenomenon. Because the concepts of culture and
society are key discussion points in the fields of Anthropology and
Sociology, several theories are presented vis-a-vis their perspectives. The
said perspectives aid in understanding the concept of culture and society
as a product of human interactions as individuals live up to the standards
of their culture.
Comparative Theory
Anthropology is considered a comparative science when
various aspects of two or more societies are contrasted
systemically.
The main goal of Comparative Theory is to study the similarities
and differences between or among societies. Thus, identifying
distinct factors determines such similarities and differences.
Among the proponents of the said theory are anthropologists
Edward Taylor, Alfred Radcliffe-Brown, and Fredrick Barth.
Critical Theory
It was developed by social scientists and philosophers in Germany
during the mid-20th century.
In his book Traditional and Critical Theory (1972), German
philosopher and sociologist Max Horkheimer asserted that a critical
theory constitutes the whole of society within historical context.
Similarly, it seeks to offer “a robust and holistic critique by
incorporating insights from all social sciences.”
Such theory, thus, aims to critique society, social structures, and
systems of power. Its end goal is to foster egalitarian and social
change.
Cultural Evolutionism Theory
Developed in the 19th century, the Cultural Evolutionism
Theory declares that societies progress from simpler to more
complex organizational forms.
It explains the origin and growth of cultural phenomena in
human societies. Back in the 19th century, evolutionism was
initiated by the works of English naturalist and geologist
Charles Darwin.
Diffusionism Theory
Originated in the middle of the 19th century
Served as means of understanding the nature of the distribution
of human culture across the world.
As an anthropological school of thought, it attempted to
understand the nature of culture in terms of the origin of cultural
traits and their spread from one society to another.
The main proponent of such theory was German-American
anthropologist Franz Boas.
Feminist Theory
Feminist Theory is one of the key contemporary sociological
theories.
Such theory analyzes the status of men and women in society
with the purpose of utilizing that knowledge to improve women’s
lives.
Its objective is to give a voice to women and highlight various
ways on how women have greatly contributed to society.
Functionalism Theory
Polish anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski developed the
theoretical school called functionalism.
According to Malinowski, “culture is an instrumental mechanism
by which a person is put in a better position to cope with specific
problems in order to satisfy basic human needs” (Allaire &
Firsirotu, 1984).
In other words, all parts of society function to satisfy the
individual’s biological needs. Compared with Structural
Functionalism Theory, Functionalism Theory is less system-
oriented because it is more oriented towards the individual, thus it
is more open to social change.
Historical Materialism Theory
It is considered the sociological method of Marxism.
It investigates phenomena but in a more probing, many-sided,
rigorously scientific way that gives more insight into the total life
of society and more foresight about its trends of development
(Novack, 2002).
At heart, the said the theory imparts that social life is subject to
modification and transformation in accord with causes of a
physical or historical character.
Interpretative Theory
This is typically contrasted with Structural Functionalism Theory
as it claims to do away with subjectivity and assumes that human
behavior is best understood as determined by structural forces.
Such theory accepts more of FREE WILL and sees human
behavior as the outcome of the subjective interpretation of the
environment. While structural theory focuses on the situation in
which people act, Interpretive Theory conversely focuses on the
actors’ definition of the situation in which they act.
Neo-evolutionism Theory
It was developed in the 1940s through the work of the American
anthropologist Leslie White and Julian Steward, among others.
White (1943) posited that cultures became more cutting-edge as
they became more efficient at utilizing energy.
Cultures also progressed because of technology and social
organization were both influential in prompting such efficiencies.
Psychological Anthropology Theory
It is the study of psychological topics using anthropological
concepts and methods.
Thus Psychological Anthropology Theory highlights not only the
cultural vehicles of thought (e.g., language, symbolism, the body),
but also the concepts we use to think about those means.
Psychological anthropologists are concerned not merely with
emotional practices in diverse cultures, but with the shape and
cross-cultural validity of the concept of emotion (Beatty, 2013).
Psychological Anthropology Theory
It dominated British social anthropology from 1930 to 1960,
originally formulated in opposition to evolutionism.
This theory was formulated by British anthropologist Alfred
Radcliffe-Brown.
Like functionalism, structural functionalism’s idea of society is a
holistic, integrated system.
A key idea of such theory is that society is composed of social
groups and institutions, which share common norms and have a
definitive culture. It implies that social institutions primarily
function to maintain the harmony of the social whole.
Symbolic Interaction Theory
American philosopher, psychologist, and sociologist George
Herbert Mead introduced this theory to American sociology in the
1920s.
Such theory depends on the symbolic meaning people develop
and rely on during social interactions.
In general, symbolic interactionism analyzes society by addressing
the subjective meanings that individuals impose on behaviors,
events, and objects. As a result, society is understood to be
socially constructed through human interpretation, which is the
basis of social ties.
Orientations in Viewing other
Cultures
1. ETHNOCENTRISM

Ethnocentrism is the tendency to use one’s own cultural

standards and values to judge the behavior and beliefs of people
with different cultures. It is a cultural universal. That is, people
everywhere think that familiar explanations, opinions and
customs are true, right, proper, and moral.

The term ethnocentrism was coined by William Graham

Sumner. He defined it as the view of things in which one’s own
group is the center of everything, and all others are scaled and
rated with reference to it
1. ETHNOCENTRISM

Each group nourishes its own pride and vanity, boasts itself
superior, exalts its own divinities, and looks with contempt on
outsiders. Each group thinks its own folkways the only right ones,
and if it observes that other groups have other folkways, these
excite its scorn.

People who are ethnocentric believe their cultural beliefs are

morally correct and others are morally questionable. Thus, if the
beliefs, customs and values of other cultures differ from theirs,
they find that culture bizarre, barbaric and even savage.
 Ethnocentrism has both positive and negative implications. On the
positive, ethnocentrism is a mechanism to preserve culture. It promotes
people’s pride and encourages solidarity among individuals in order to
defend their group against external aggression. It is ethnocentrism that
gives people their sense of peoplehood, group identity, and place in history.
 On the negative side, too much emphasis on its superiority over other
culture may result to violence, oppression, prejudice, discrimination and
stagnation.
1. CULTURAL RELATIVISM
The opposite of ethnocentrism is cultural relativism, the view that the
behavior in one culture should not be judged by the standards of another.
For cultural relativists, the values, knowledge, and behavior of people
must be understood within their OWN CULTURAL CONTEXT.

It was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz

Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by
his students. Boas first articulated the idea in 1887: "civilization is not
something absolute, but is relative, and our ideas and conceptions are
true only so far as our civilization goes
 1. CULTURAL RELATIVISM
The goal of this is to promote
understanding of cultural practices that
are not typically part of one’s own
culture. Using the perspective of
cultural relativism leads to the view
that no one culture is superior to
another culture when compared to
systems of morality, law, politics, etc. It
is a concept that cultural norms and
values derive their meaning within a
specific social context.
 In addition, culture can also demonstrate the way a group thinks, their
practices, or behavioral patterns, or their views of the world. The goal of this is
to promote understanding of cultural practices that are not typically part of
one's own culture. Using the perspective of cultural relativism leads to the view
that no one culture is superior than another culture when compared to systems
of morality, law, politics, etc.

Overall, there is no right or wrong ethical system. In a holistic understanding

of the term cultural relativism, it tries to promote the understanding of cultural
practices that are unfamiliar to other cultures such as eating insects, genocides
or genital cutting.
Some important points about
Cultural Relativism are:
1. Cultural Relativism does not mean anything a culture or
group of people believe is true.

A good example of this is flat earthers. Just because someone

believes this to be true, doesn’t make it so. We have endless evidence
against their claims. However, if you wanted to understand how the flat
earthers came to believe this point, you would temporarily put aside your
own views and evidence for a moment and try to examine their claim from
their point of view. This can also be valuable in debunking some of their
claims in the long term. By learning to speak their ‘language’ we can open
lines of communication that are more productive, and hopefully get them
out of their insane beliefs.
2. Cultural Relativism does not mean that anything
a culture does is good or moral.

There are certain beliefs and practices

that are objectively harmful. But this is
where someone, who has never studied
anthropology might not understand that
kinship/marriage patterns don’t actually
contain any real morality outside of culture.
2. Cultural Relativism does not mean that anything
a culture does is good or moral.

For example, there is nothing objectively wrong with a woman practicing

polyandry (she has several husbands), such as is practiced in some parts of the
Himalayas. It teaches us that, marriage patterns are cultural options, not
objective truth. We can also examine the history of our own.
3. Cultural Relativism doesn’t mean that cultures can’t be compared.

There is sometimes a strange notion that there are no commonalities

between cultures. It is true that there are very few universals across all human
experience, but there are definitely some core things that humans all do, most of
which relate to survival and continuity. But even in practices that are entirely
different, we can find comparison as a useful tool for understanding ideas and
points of view. But again, cultural relativism is about putting aside our
preconceptions and having an experience that is less tainted by our past
knowledge and experience. This is especially powerful and useful when
problem solving in other cultures or even our own.
 To embrace cultural relativism is to not judge others by one’s own cultural
contexts. For example, some cultures eat foods I might deem disgusting but
availability of certain kinds of food, religion, and history all help determine what
is taboo and what is not.