Epistemologies and methodologies that someone with training in cultural anthropology can bring to any issue, problem, or situation.
Ethnography/fieldwork/participant observation. Spending a lot of time (several months, years) observing and actually participating in the activities of a particular group (which may require learning special terminology or even a whole language) is the foundation of anthropological knowledge. From this stems all of the following:
Emic perspective (insider’s view). We begin with an etic (outsider’s) perspective of others; over time, we work toward an emic perspective of the group. Both etic and emic perspectives are important. The etic perspective makes it easier to see overall patterns, the “big picture.” That’s why, when we want to understand our own culture, we try to take a step back from our emic perspective and develop a more etic perspective. But an etic perspective needs to be grounded in an emic perspective to be meaningful—if you don’t really get at how people experience and understand their own culture, your assessment of patterns and meaning can be totally off. Both etic and emic views are essential to the
Holistic approach. We can only understand the meaning of any particular cultural element (item, or pattern in thought or behavior) by studying it in context, looking at how it fits into the rest of the culture, how the pieces of the culture hang together. We do not assume that any particular element has the same function in one culture as another—the context and meaning can be quite different. Context is critical to informing an appropriate interpretation/reaction/policy/program/etc. Remember that part of context is the past, hence the importance of
Historical particularism. Each culture or subgroup has its own particular history that has shaped the way it is today. We do not assume that other groups have the same historical elements as our own, that cultures are unchanging, that they tend to take the same path, or that evolution (change over time) = development or improvement. We know that formal histories are written by the conquerors and thus a partial view, so we are critical and questioning and seek multiple perspectives (below).
Cultural relativism or relativity. We approach all cultures with respect. This does not mean that we love and accept all elements of all cultures—not even our own! But we know that cultural elements do make sense in context, that one group of people is just as sensible and rational (and senseless and irrational) as another. Rather than assuming that one’s own culture is the best or more sensible, and rather than judging a culture based on one element taken out of context, we approach another culture with the idea that we need to figure things out. This open-minded approach is key to developing a reliable understanding of that group or an issue within that group. This process helps us step away from stereotypes, as does considering
Multiple perspectives. Groups tend to be diverse; even within subgroups, there may be different patterns in thought, behavior, experience, etc. Experience and perspective may be influenced by social identities (race, class, gender, sexuality, rural/urban, etc.). Thus it is critical to search out these multiple perspectives in order to have a more thorough, complex understanding of a group or particular issue. One method of getting at multiple perspectives is through interviews.
Interviews. Asking questions in a consistent and in-depth manner helps us identify patterns in thoughts and behaviors. Interviews must be conducted in a culturally appropriate manner. Closed-ended questions are avoided, as they limit possible responses to those anticipated by the researcher and can shut out information and erase connections. Open-ended questions are thus a key element in reducing researcher bias and eliciting emic perspectives.
Interviews with participants representing different social locations (identities and roles) and experiences helps us capture multiple perspectives and thus more complex and reliable information. Interviews are an important method of getting ideas of causation (beyond correlation)—the why.
Citation
Manthei, Jennifer. 2017. “The Anthropological Toolkit.” Excerpt. Handout for SOA 302 Understanding Cultures. University of Illinois Springfield.