TOPIC 3: ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

“The main purpose of anthropology is to make the world safe for human indifferences” – Ruth Benedict

Social scientists and anthropologists have long recognized the idea that people in different parts of the world
view themselves in different ways. These different ways of viewing one’s self may be attributed to biological or
genetic variants and partly to social or cultural variation.

Your racial category, family structure, ethnic affiliation, religious customs, language, social beliefs and values,
cultural expression and identification indubitably contribute on your formation as a person, and accordingly, on
your self-construal.

These concepts or forces form part of the main subjects of anthropology. What is anthropology? How does
anthropology shape your sense of self? Etymologically, the word “anthropology” stemmed from two Greek
words, anthropos meaning man and logus meaning study or science. Thus, anthropology is the science of man.
It is concerned about the various aspects of the human species, irrespective of time and place, from ancient to
the contemporary. Anthropologists are interested not only on how humans have structurally evolved from their
animal predecessors but also on how humans transformed and into a culturally and socially adaptive being. By
taking a closer look unto how we have metamorphosed physically and culturally, this unit can help us explore
what makes us uniquely different from other living organisms.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
At the end of this lesson, you will be able to:
1. appreciate the science of anthropology and recognize its relevance on elucidating the development of self and
identity;
2. understand how the sense of self is shaped and influenced by culture;
3. elevate awareness and pride on the Filipino culture.

THE SELF AND THE PERSON IN CONTEMPORARY ANTHROPOLOGY

Are there characteristics and experiences which are inherently common among us? Are there universals in terms
of our biological endowments and predispositions? Given the uniformity in terms of our physiology and genetic
profile, are our behaviors and actions rooted from the same drives and passions? And do we share the same
biological needs?
With the identicalness of our physical environment and the cultures in which we thrive, can we affirm that all
men are alike? These questions about human universals form part of the central themes of anthropology since
its inception as a scientific discipline.

In their book, Personality in Nature, Society and Culture, psychologist Henry Murray and anthropologist Clyde
Kluckhohn (1953) claimed that “Every man is in certain respects like all other men, like some other men, and
like no other man.” This statement pictured how pre-contemporary and contemporary anthropology viewed the
human person. The pre-contemporary view of human nature demonstrated sameness, invariability, and
universality where man was regarded as identical, constant, and general.

Humans, like all other species, are considered essentially the same regardless of place and time. Thus, they are
predictable and can be studied uniformly.

While recognizing the self as an unchanging entity, anthropologists also accept its inherent variability.
Contemporary anthropologists subscribe to a more holistic approach in studying the self by looking unto human
variety brought about by variations across cultures and variations over time.

They suggest that the human person can be studied from many points of view. And that it’s only when we study
the full range of human phenomenon and consider the inescapable fact that men are in many respects like no
other man, can we genuinely appreciate human nature. This calls for a more comprehensive and encompassing
approach towards understanding the human person. That is, taking into account all the physical, biological,
psychological, social and cultural elements that make up the self.

This pursuit towards a holistic appreciation of the human nature was supported scientifically. For instance,
Anthropology Professor Katherine Ewing asserted an integrative stance on the self by defining it as one that
which “encompasses the physical organism, possessing all aspects of psychological functioning, and social
attributes”, (1990:254). Even the neurobiologist Joseph LeDoux described the self as the totality of what an
organism is physically, biologically, psychologically, socially, and culturally. He further claimed that though
the self is a unit, it is not unitary” (2002: 31).

Considering then the totality of all the processes and elements that constitute the self and the interrelationship
between and amongst these remain to be fundamental in understanding the human being. Study the figure
below. What does this show about how anthropology advances our understanding of ourselves?

The Concept of Culture

Cultural anthropology being one of the sub-disciplines of anthropology underscores the concept of culture and
its influence in shaping the self. By reflecting on your outputs in the activity Festival of Cultures, you probably
had a good grasp of what culture is and what constitute it. You might have also realized how culture affects the
way you construe your personal identity.

Culture is a broad construct which covers a wide range of elements – from your clothing designs to your food
preferences, the dialect you use for communicating, the festivals you enjoy, the religious beliefs and customs
you observe, the set of values you conform to, or even the kinds of books you read, or the jokes you crack – all
these illuminate your way of life and all these elements form part of the culture you were raised to.

One of the most fundamental aspects of culture is symbol. As people interact, they share a common set of
symbols which represent their identity. Cultural symbols aid in establishing the uniqueness of a particular
culture. When properly preserved and accurately passed on from one generation to the other, it continues to be
an indelible representation of one’s personhood.
Our Bodies and Culture

Recall some circumstances in your life where you pursued a particular fashion statement or modified your body
image because it is what’s “in” or it is what seems typical based on your cultural context. Did you ever go
through tattooing or body piercing because these convey something about your status? Or had you ever been
refrained from letting your hair be cut because of some religious beliefs? What about having been restricted of
wearing revealing clothes because it is considered a taboo?
If you answered in the affirmative, then you probably adhere unto the proposition that culture influences our
body image. Consciously or unconsciously, your body image or your perception of your body or that of others
is largely influenced by your culture.
Your bodies and what you do with it is a reflection of the life you live and the culture you were accustomed to.
Body modifications and embellishments for instance are regarded as part of the norms and representations of
some cultures.
The pictures below exemplify how our cultures are projected through our bodies.

Apo Whang-Od Oggay, the Living Legend Mambabatok (Tattoo Artist) of the Butbut Tribe in Buscalan,
Kalinga.

A woman from the Mursi Tribe in South Ethiopia, Africa with her profound lip and earlobe plates.
A woman from the Karen Tribe (also known as Padaung People) of Thailand with heavy brass rings on the
neck.

A member of the Bagobo people from coastal Mindanao in the Philippines with filed and blackened teeth.
The Self Embedded in Culture
The figure below illustrates a hypothetical self-concept of Mr. Juan Dela Cruz. Given the different roles he
assumes; he may be viewed in different ways by people around him. This demonstrates Mead’s idea that the
meaning or the characterization that we ascribe to the self depends on our roles in the society. The self as a
basic psychological concept which is commonly assumed to be static and have a universal nature is therefore
susceptible to changes depending on social situations and cultural contexts. The self is malleable and can act in
different ways depending on circumstances; it is multi-faceted yet unified. As such, the self has to be examined
as an entity embedded in culture.

Having interest in cross-cultural understandings of the person, French sociologist and anthropologist Marcel
Mauss (1950) substantiated on the notion of person as a cultural category. He used the terms moi (refers to the
concept of self) and personne (refers to the concept of person) but underscored the latter in elucidating about
personhood. According to him, the person was considered primarily a cultural conception, or a ‘category’ of a
particular community.

As a social category, the person is said to be socially and culturally constituted that can only be understood in
relation to everything else in the society and thus, may be subject to quite substantial, if not infinite, variation.
In the hypothetical self-concept map of Mr. Juan Dela Cruz, you might have noticed the different attributes of
his personne or the person that he is depending on his social situation. At home, he has to be the affectionate but
strict father that he is; he can be a very caring husband to his wife, yet may likewise be wary. At one point, he is
regarded soft-hearted but at another, he is viewed as someone firm. This points out to the malleability of his
personne depending on his cultural context.
Harry Triandis (2019), a psychology professor at the University of Illinois, furthered the discourse about the self
being culturally shaped. In his research, The Self and Social Behavior in Differing Cultural Contexts (1989), he
introduced and distinguished three aspects of the self: private, public, and collective self. The private self are
cognitions that involve traits, states, or behaviors of the person; it is an assessment of the self by the self.
Statements like “I am amiable”; “I am outspoken”; “I will buy X” are examples of our self-assessments about
ourselves.

The public self on the other hand refers to cognitions concerning the generalized other’s view of the self, such
as statements like “People think I am shy” or “People think I will buy X”. The public self is an assessment of the
self by the generalized others. The collective self are cognitions concerning a view of the self that is found in
some collective (e.g., family, co-workers, tribe, scientific society), such as, “My family thinks I am introverted”
or “My co-workers believe I shop too much.” The collective self-corresponds to an assessment of the self by a
specific reference or groups. These aspects of the self are heavily influenced by culture.