Ethnoscience

Ethnoscience has been defined as an attempt 'to reconstitute what serves as science for others, their practices of looking after themselves and their bodies, their botanical knowledge, but also their forms of classification, of making connections, etc.' (Augé, 1999: 118).'A societies culture consists of whatever it is one has to know or believe in order to operate in a manner acceptable to its members. Culture is not a material phenomenon; it does not consist of things, behavior, or emotions. It is rather an organization of these things. It is the form of things that people have in mind, their models for perceiving, relating, and otherwise interpreting them.' Ethnoscience has been defined as an attempt 'to reconstitute what serves as science for others, their practices of looking after themselves and their bodies, their botanical knowledge, but also their forms of classification, of making connections, etc.' (Augé, 1999: 118). Ethnoscience has not always focused on ideas distinct from those of 'cognitive anthropology', 'component analysis', or 'the New Ethnography'; it is a specialization of indigenous knowledge-systems, such as ethno-botany, ethno-zoology, ethno-medicine, etc. (Atran, 1991: 595). According to Scott Atran, ethnoscience looks at culture with a scientific perspective (1991: 650), although most anthropologists abhor this definition. Ethnoscience helps to understand how people develop with different forms of knowledge and beliefs, and focuses on the ecological and historical contributions people have been given (Atran, 1991: 650). Tim Ingold describes ethnoscience as a cross-discipline (2000: 160). He writes that ethnoscience is based on increased collaboration between social sciences and the humanities (e.g., anthropology, sociology, psychology, and philosophy) with natural sciences such as biology, ecology, or medicine (Ingold, 2000: 406-7). At the same time, ethnoscience is increasingly transdisciplinary in its nature (Ingold, 2000: 407). Of course, naturally over time, the ways in which data has been collected and studied has changed and the field has evolved, becoming more detailed and specific (Urry, 1972: 45). The ideas, mechanics, and methods of ethnoscience evolved from something else - a combination of several things. This pretext amalgamation of theories, processes, and –isms led to the evolution of today's ethnoscience. Early on, Franz Boas established cultural relativism as an approach to understanding indigenous scientific practices (Uddin, 2005: 980). Cultural relativism identifies people's differences and shows how they are a result of the social, historical, and geographical conditions (Uddin, 2005: 980). Boas is known for his work in Northern Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, working with the Kwakwaka'wakw Indians, which is where he established the importance of culture (Uddin, 2005: 980). Lévi-Strauss' structuralism was a strong contributor to the ideas of ethnoscience (Uddin, 2005: 980). It, itself, was the leading idea of providing structure to the research and a guide to organizing and relating different cultures. 'Ethnoscience refers to a 'reduction of chaos' achieved by a particular culture, rather than to the 'highest possible and conscious degree' to which such chaos may be reduced;' basically, the ethnoscience of a society creates its culture (Sturtevant, 1964: 100). Much of the influence of anthropology, e.g., geographical determinism, was through the contributions of Jean Bodin (Harris, 1968: 42). In his text, he tried to explain why 'northern people were faithful, loyal to the government, cruel, and sexually uninterested, compared to why southern people were malicious, craft, wise, expert in science but ill-adapted to political activity (Harris, 1968: 52).' The Greek historian, Polybius, asserted 'we mortals have an irresistible tendency to yield to climatic influences; and to this cause, and no other, may be traced the great distinctions that prevail among us in character, physical formation, complexion, as well as in most of our habits…' (quoted in Harris, 1968: 41). Another aspect of anthropology prior to ethnoscience is enculturation. Newton and Newton described enculturation as a process whereby the novice, or 'outsider', learns what is important to the 'insider' (1998). Marvin Harris writes, 'One of most important technical expressions is the doctrine of 'psychic unity,' the belief that in the study of sociocultural differences, hereditary (genetic) differences cancel each other out, leaving 'experience' as the most significant variable' (Harris, 1968: 15). This is one of the many starts of people opening up to the idea that just because people are different, doesn't mean they are wrong in their thinking. Harris describes how religious beliefs hinder and affect the progress of anthropology and ethnography. The moral beliefs and restrictions of religion fought against anthropological ideas, possibly due to (especially at the time) to the newly hyped idea of evolutionism and Darwinism (Harris, 1968). Bronislaw Malinowski was one of many who contributed heavily to the precursor of ethnoscience. His earlier work brought attention to sociological studies; his earliest publication focused on a family in Australia, using a sociological study perspective (Harris, 1968: 547). After the First World War, anthropological work was at a stand still; nothing had evolved, if not regressed (Urry, 1972: 54). This allowed him to start from scratch, and rebuild his ideas and methods (Harris, 1968: 547). Later, however, Malinowski branched out to political evolution during World War II. The period after World War II is what led to ethnoscience; anthropologists learned their skills could be applied to problems that were affecting modern societies (Mead, 1973: 1). Malinowski said '… with his tables of kinship terms, genealogies, maps, plans and diagrams, proves an extensive and big organization, shows the contribution of the tribe, of the clan, of the family, and he gives a picture of the natives subjected to a strict code of behavior and good manners, to which in comparison the life at the Court of Versailles or Escurial was free and easy' (1922: 10). After World War II, there was an extreme amount of growth in the anthropological field, not only with research opportunities but academically, as well (Mead, 1973: 2). The anthropologist Robin Horton, who taught at several Nigerian universities, considered the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples as incorporated within conceptual world views that bear certain similarities to, and differences from, the modern scientific worldview. Like modern science, traditional thought provides a theoretical structure that 'places things in a causal order wider than that provided by common sense' (Horton, 1967, p. 53). In contrast to modern science, he saw traditional thought as having a limited awareness of theoretical alternatives and, consequently, displaying 'an absolute acceptance of the established theoretical tenets' (Horton, 1967, pp. 155–6).