anthropology Ethnography

Chance for you to shine call for Poem

Biological Linguistic Cultural Archaeology Design Digital
Gossip about me - Aristrotal

What is Anthropology ?
Anthropologists study the characteristics of past and
present human communities through a variety of techniques. In
doing so, they investigate and describe how different peoples of
our world lived throughout history.
Anthropologists specialize in (as per Franz Boas)

1. Cultural or social anthropolog

Linguistic anthropolog
Biological or physical anthropolog
Archaeology.

Evolution of Anthropology

Beginning (Herodotous, Atistotle in 4th Century) Information

phas
Due to Colonialism & renaissance- Unsystematic Beginning (need
to understand rest of the world (White mans burden)
August Comte (Sociology)- Convergent Phase
Darwin, Tyler (Evolution) in 19th Century- Constructive Phase
Malinowski-study of man at all levels of development

Animals to Avatar
Human evolution is part of biological anthropology but
as anthropology is study of human all the fields are interlinked
and human history has to be understood. Human history becomes
to back bone for the anthropology study

Human Evolution Cultural Evolution

Animal Hurd

Cognitive Revolution Agricultural evolution

Man (Homo) Society

to to
(War and dieses) NEED is the mother of innovation

Wise Man (Homo-sapiens ) Kingdom

War with Nature War to protect or dominate

Phycology evolution Formation of institutes

IN group vs OUT group

Fear lust hunger

Food and Society laws,

Sub species of Homo
intitution
Language, tool use
Language and writing

Metaphors of/for
Metaphors of nature
social constrains

Digitalization

Internet IOT VR

Metaphors of the digital world

 anthropology

Biological Linguistic Cultural Archaeology Design Digital

Primates
Sub species of Homo
Migration From Africa
Adaptation to the environment
Phycology evolution

Lets talk about the

evolution

What is Biologicals Anthropology ?

Also referred to as physical anthropology or evolutionary
anthropology is the study of human origins and human variation
in Biological context. While the other subfields focus on current
and relatively recent human cultures, biological anthropology
looks to the deeper past, asking questions about what it means to
be a human by exploring where humans came from as a species.

Paleoanthropology looks at the fossil evidence of humanity’s

ancestors along with ancient material culture such as tools and
other human artifacts.
Primatology examines the behavioral and physical attributes of
both living and fossil primates as well as their relationships with
their environments.
Genetic anthropology is used within several areas of biological
anthropology. In this specialized area, DNA testing is combined
with archaeological, historical, and linguistic evidence to reveal
the history of ancient human migration or to track human disease.
Forensic anthropology is a subfield of biological anthropology
that applies scientific methods to the analysis of human remains
for the purposes of identifying a victim and determining the
possible cause of death.
T
Bioarchaeology studies human remains in archaeological settings
with a focus on what skeletal material can reveal about the
culture, diet, and presence of disease in a population

Evolution And theories

Evolution is defined as change in the allele frequency within a

gene pool that can lead to changes in an organism’s morphology
(form and structure) over time. Evolution involves the processes of
mutation, natural selection, and speciation.
The first person to propose a mechanism by which species
could change was French naturalist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, best
known for having developed the first theory of macroevolution, a
hypothesis about how the actual transformation from one species
into another species could occur. Lamarck’s theory relied on the
now defunct idea of the inheritance of acquired characteristics.
Georges Cuvier proposes Catastrophism which suggested that
floods, earthquakes, and other natural disasters understood within
the theory as acts of God have been responsible for killing all the
animals alive in certain places at certain times.
Charles Darwin introduced a new way of seeing the world,

On the Origin of Species. In it, he proposed that species evolve (or,

as he put it, undergo "descent with modification"), and that all living
things can trace their descent to a common ancestor.
The theory of natural selection has five main components
All organisms are capable of producing offspring faster than the
food supply increases
All organisms show variation
There is a fierce struggle for existence, and those with the most
suitable variations are most likely to survive and reproduce
Variations, or traits, are passed on to offspring (inherited)
Small changes in every generation lead to major changes over
long periods of time.
Theory of Natural Selection
Survival of the fittest does not necessarily mean that the biggest and
fastest survive; instead, it refers to those who are most
evolutionarily fit. This means that an organism has traits that are
sufficient for survival and will be passed on to future generations.

The term survival of the fittest was not even introduced by Darwin;
rather, it was first used by English philosopher, anthropologist, and
sociologist Herbert Spencer, who promoted the now discredited
ideology of social Darwinism.

Primates
Primates—including human beings—are characterized by a number
of distinct physical features that distinguish them from other
mammals. These include:

•opposable thumbs and (in nonhuman primates) opposable big toes;

•the presence of five digits (fingers or toes) on the appendages;

•flat nails instead of curved claws;

•pads at the tips of the fingers made up of deposits of fat and nerves;

•reduced reliance on sense of smell and a relatively small snout;

•depth perception;

•binocular vision (being able to see one image with both eyes);

•a relatively slow reproductive rate;

•relatively large brain size; and

•postorbital bars (bony rings that completely surround the eyes).

The Early Hominins

The term hominin refers to all species considered to be in direct
lineage to humans, which include the genera Homo,
Australopithecus, Paranthropus, and Ardipithecus. Hominids refers
to all modern and extinct great apes, which include humans,
gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangutans and their ancestors.

In bipedal locomotion, one leg is called the stance leg, and the other
is called the step leg. While the stance leg is on the ground, the step
leg is off the ground and striding forward.

The evolution of hominin bipedalism required complex anatomical

reorganization. For natural selection to produce such a tremendous
amount of change, the benefits of these changes must have been
great. There have been dozens of hypotheses for these changes,
ranging from freeing hands to carry tools, food, or offspring to
increasing energy efficiency or thermoregulation (the ability to
maintain the body’s temperature) by exposing more of the body’s
surface. None of the hypotheses are testable, making it truly
challenging to understand why humanity’s ancestors made such a
huge behavioral shift.

Homo sapiens: the Emergence

The origin of the genus Homo in Africa signals the beginning of the
shift from increasingly bipedal apes to primitive, large-brained,
stone tool-making, meat-eaters that traveled far and wide. This
early part of the human genus is represented by three species: Homo
habilis, Homo rudolfensis, and Homo erectus. H. habilis is known
for retaining primitive features that link it to australopiths. Little is
known about H. rudolfensis except that it had a relatively large
brain and large teeth compared to H. habilis and that it overlapped
in time and space with other early Homo.
The Smithsonian Institution has created an interactive tool (Human
Evolution Interactive Timeline | The Smithsonian Institution's
Human Origins Program (si.edu)) that visually illustrates the
interrelationships between an increasingly variable and colder
climate, encephalization, bipedalism, and new technologies and
tool use.
The Archaic Homo
There is no universal consensus on what is included within the term
“archaic Homo.” The term is used as an umbrella category
encompassing all the diverse Homo species after H. erectus.
Hominin species classified as archaic Homo typically have a brain
size averaging 1,200 to 1,400 cc, which overlaps with the range of
modern humans. Archaic Homo are distinguished from
anatomically modern humans by the characteristics of a thick skull,
prominent supraorbital ridges (brow ridges), and lack of a
prominent chin. Archaic Homo are viewed as transitional between
H. erectus and H. sapiens and display many overlapping and varied
traits. It has been proposed that archaic Homo may have been the
first species to use language, based on the size of their brains and the
fairly large social groups they lived in. Archaic Homo species as
presented here will be divided into two groups: the Early Archaic
(800–250 KYA) and the Late Archaic (300–30 KYA).

Neanderthal
Neanderthals have been found only in regions of Europe and the
Middle East and are dated to between about 400,000 and 40,000
years ago. The first fossils, which were found in the Neander Valley,
were believed to be the remains of an extinct kind of human. The
Germans called them the Neanderthals, the people of the Neander
Valley. Neanderthals possess several distinctive anatomical
characteristics: the skull and brain is larger than that of humans,
with an average size in Neanderthals of 1,520 cc compared to
modern humans’ 1200–1400 cc. Does the Neanderthal’s larger brain
size mean that it was more intelligent than modern humans? While
there does seem to be a correlation between brain size and complex
cognitive skills, the brain in some hominins may have been
organized differently than that of modern humans, with different
anatomical areas of the brain emphasized. It is believed that in the
Neanderthal brain, the frontal region, which is the center of speech
and language, was less developed, while the back of the brain,
which deals with the senses, was more developed. This greater
development in the back area of the brain could be a survival
adaptation found in Neanderthals who had to hunt in often harsh
and difficult conditions.

Neanderthals have been labeled, perhaps unjustly, as a species with

a limited ability to communicate in symbolic or abstract forms.
Until recently, the Neanderthal had been assumed to lack the
cognitive skills associated with the practice of ritual and art.
However, cave paintings discovered in Spain in 2012 by Alistair
Pike, an archaeologist at the University of Southampton, UK,
challenge that assumption. These paintings, which have been dated
to around 65,000 years ago, before the arrival of H. sapiens in the
region, have been determined to be the creative works of the
Neanderthal and are currently considered the oldest cave art ever
found. Neanderthals created more technologically advanced tools
than those produced by H. erectus and seen in the Acheulian tool
industry. The tool industry associated with the Neanderthal
hominins is called the Mousterian tool industry or the Middle
Paleolithic tool industry. Archeological sites that date to the
Neanderthal period are dominated by flake tools. This means that
the Neanderthal struck flakes from cores and then used the flakes as
their tools instead of the core. This resulted in smaller and sharper
tools with increased utility.

The Neanderthal went extinct around 35,000 to 50,000 years ago.

There have been various hypotheses as to what caused this: These
hypotheses include an inability to adapt to a changing climate and
colder temperatures, the spread of disease, competition for food
with H. sapiens, and even aggressive takeover by the H. sapiens,
who may have been better able to adapt to environmental changes
due to more complex technology and language skills. Another
theory points to evidence that the Neanderthal tended to live in
small, scattered groups with limited genetic diversity and low birth
rates, which potentially impacted the ability of the Neanderthal to
be competitive.
Homo sapiens: the Emergence
Modern H. sapiens first appeared about 200,000 years ago in Africa.
Anthropologists generally classify these people as “anatomically
modern H. sapiens,” which is a way of noting that while their bodies
are the same as modern humans, they had not yet developed the
cultural traditions, symbolic behaviors, and technologies that are
seen among later H. sapiens, including people of today. Probably
the most defining feature of anatomically modern H. sapiens is their
chin. Modern H. sapiens is the first hominin to exhibit a projecting
chin. One of the most common explanations for this anatomical
feature is that the chin evolved in response to human speech and
protects the jaw against stresses produced by the contraction of
certain tongue muscles.

Sometime around 40,000 years ago there was an abrupt change in

tool technology, subsistence patterns, and symbolic expression
among H. sapiens. These changes seem to have occurred almost
simultaneously in Africa, Asia, Europe, and Australia. While there is
evidence of some creative artistic activity in earlier groups like the
Neanderthal, they were not on the same scale as that seen during the
Upper Paleolithic, which is also referred to as “the human
revolution.

Over the 23,000 years of the Upper Paleolithic, there were many
distinctive tool industries within the larger category of the blade
tool industry, including the Aurignacian, Gravettian, Solutrean, and
Magdalenian. The most significant tool during the Upper Paleolithic
was the burin. The burin is a narrow-bladed flint capable of
scraping narrow grooves in bone. Scraping two parallel grooves
would allow a sliver of bone to be detached as stock for a needle,
pin, or awl.

During the Upper Paleolithic, H. sapiens created a great deal of cave

art. More than 350 cave painting sites have been discovered, the
majority located in France and Spain. Cave art seems to have been
created continually from 40,000 to 10,000 years ago and then
disappeared around 10,000 years ago, likely due to climate change.
As temperatures increased, underground shelters were gradually
replaced by surface settlements.

Are Humans Still Evolving?

A number of changes are associated with the Neolithic era and the
rise of agriculture around 10,000 to 8,000 years ago. Many have
noted that changes during this time period did not have positive
effects on human and environmental health. The evolutionary
mismatch hypothesis proposes that our bodies are best suited to the

environments we have spent much of our evolutionary history in,

which are very different from the environments we inhabit today
(Li, van Vugt, and Colarelli 2018).

Humans evolved for one million years as hunter-gatherers. Today,

human bodies are still trying to adapt to the largely grain-based diet
brought about by agriculture, a diet characterized by less diversity
and lower levels of nutrition than that of a typical hunter-gatherer.
Incomplete adaptation to this change has made people susceptible
to a number of diseases and nutritional deficiencies. Lactose
intolerance is a prime example. The domestication of cattle and the
drinking of cow’s milk began during the agricultural age, not very
long ago in evolutionary history. Currently 65 percent of humans
are unable to digest cow’s milk. Dental caries (cavities) are another
problem linked to the change in diet associated with agriculture.
The grain-based and high-sugar diets associated with agriculture are
very different from the diet of hunter-gatherers. Neither our bodies
nor the bacteria in our mouths have had time to fully adapt to this
change.

Another adaptation that took place during the Neolithic era is

related to variation in skin pigmentation. Humans who left Africa
and settled in Europe about 40,000 years most likely had dark skin
with high levels of melanin, which provides protection against
ultraviolet radiation New data confirms that about 8,500 years ago,
early hunter-gatherers in Spain, Luxembourg, and Hungary also had
darker skin. Skin pigmentation is an adaptation to ultraviolet
radiation, with different tones offering different advantages,
depending on one’s distance from the equator. As humans migrated
to the Northern Hemisphere, they were exposed to less ultraviolet
radiation, which also meant less absorption of the Vitamin D needed
for strong bones and other important immune functions. In order to
compensate for this loss and to allow for greater exposure to
ultraviolet radiation, skin pigmentation became lighter.

The human diversity has emerged in response to highly complex and

variable environments connected to factors such as exposure to UV
radiation, low oxygen levels at high altitude, changes in diet as a
result of hunting or agricultural practices, geographic isolation in
island populations, and climate variability and temperature. The
genus Homo has proven to be resilient and adaptive in response to
whatever environment or challenge it has faced. Variation is the key
to survival. While scientists recognize that biological and cultural
variation has greatly contributed to our human evolution, the
human species is now facing a moment in which we must
contemplate a difficult question: To what extent has our success as a
species jeopardized the survival of other species and the health of
the planet we all call home?

Are Humans Still Evolving?

A number of changes are associated with the Neolithic era and the
rise of agriculture around 10,000 to 8,000 years ago. Many have
noted that changes during this time period did not have positive
effects on human and environmental health. The evolutionary
mismatch hypothesis proposes that our bodies are best suited to the

environments we have spent much of our evolutionary history in,

which are very different from the environments we inhabit today
(Li, van Vugt, and Colarelli 2018).

Humans evolved for one million years as hunter-gatherers. Today,

human bodies are still trying to adapt to the largely grain-based diet
brought about by agriculture, a diet characterized by less diversity
and lower levels of nutrition than that of a typical hunter-gatherer.
Incomplete adaptation to this change has made people susceptible
to a number of diseases and nutritional deficiencies. Lactose
intolerance is a prime example. The domestication of cattle and the
drinking of cow’s milk began during the agricultural age, not very
long ago in evolutionary history. Currently 65 percent of humans
are unable to digest cow’s milk. Dental caries (cavities) are another
problem linked to the change in diet associated with agriculture.
The grain-based and high-sugar diets associated with agriculture are
very different from the diet of hunter-gatherers. Neither our bodies
nor the bacteria in our mouths have had time to fully adapt to this
change.

Another adaptation that took place during the Neolithic era is

related to variation in skin pigmentation. Humans who left Africa
and settled in Europe about 40,000 years most likely had dark skin
with high levels of melanin, which provides protection against
ultraviolet radiation New data confirms that about 8,500 years ago,
early hunter-gatherers in Spain, Luxembourg, and Hungary also had
darker skin. Skin pigmentation is an adaptation to ultraviolet
radiation, with different tones offering different advantages,
depending on one’s distance from the equator. As humans migrated
to the Northern Hemisphere, they were exposed to less ultraviolet
radiation, which also meant less absorption of the Vitamin D needed
for strong bones and other important immune functions. In order to
compensate for this loss and to allow for greater exposure to
ultraviolet radiation, skin pigmentation became lighter.

The human diversity has emerged in response to highly complex and

variable environments connected to factors such as exposure to UV
radiation, low oxygen levels at high altitude, changes in diet as a
result of hunting or agricultural practices, geographic isolation in
island populations, and climate variability and temperature. The
genus Homo has proven to be resilient and adaptive in response to
whatever environment or challenge it has faced. Variation is the key
to survival. While scientists recognize that biological and cultural
variation has greatly contributed to our human evolution, the
human species is now facing a moment in which we must
contemplate a difficult question: To what extent has our success as a
species jeopardized the survival of other species and the health of
the planet we all call home?

Phycology evolution
Influential evolutionary psychologists, Leda Cosmides and John
Tooby, provide the following list of the field’s theoretical tenets
(Tooby and Cosmides 2005)
The brain is a computer designed by natural selection to extract
information from the environment
Individual human behavior is generated by this evolved
computer in response to information it extracts from the
environment. Understanding behavior requires articulating the
cognitive programs that generate the behavior
The cognitive programs of the human brain are adaptations.
They exist because they produced behavior in our ancestors that
enabled them to survive and reproduce
The cognitive programs of the human brain may not be adaptive
now; they were adaptive in ancestral environments
Natural selection ensures that the brain is composed of many
different special purpose programs and not a domain general
architecture
Describing the evolved computational architecture of our brains
“allows a systematic understanding of cultural and social
phenomena”

There are numerous examples of the kinds of mechanisms that are

hypothesized to underlie our behavior on the basis of research
guided by these theoretical tenets: the cheater-detection module;
the mind-reading module; the waist/hip ratio detection module; the
snake fear module and so on. all behavior is best explained in terms
of underlying psychological mechanisms that are adaptations for
solving a particular set of problems that humans faced at one time in
our ancestry. Also, evolutionary psychologists stress that the
mechanisms they focus on are universally distributed in humans and
are not susceptible to much, if any, variation. They maintain that
the mechanisms are a product of adaptation but are no longer under
selection (Tooby and Cosmides 2005, 39–40)

“the biological argument for massive modularity”:

(1) Biological systems are designed systems, constructed

incrementally.

(2) Such systems, when complex, need to have massively modular

organization.

(3) The human mind is a biological system and is complex.

(4) So the human mind will be massively modularly in its

organization” (Carruthers 2006, 25).
 anthropology

Biological Linguistic Cultural Archaeology Design Digital

What is Archaeological Anthropology ?

Archaeological anthropology is the study of past humans and
cultures through material remains. It involves the excavation,
analysis and interpretation of artifacts, soils, and cultural
processes. through archaeology we can
explore how humans evolve
get to grips with major transformational processes in human
history such as the development of farming, the emergence of
towns and trading systems and the spread of world religion
learn why societies structure their families, economies and
political systems in the ways that they d
investigate how material culture represents and reproduces
beliefs and ideologies.
Fieldwork
Fieldwork is one of the most important practices of anthropology.
While all of the subfields of anthropology conduct fieldwork in
some form to gather information, each subfield may use different
methods of conducting research.

The concept of working in “the field” was traditionally based on

the practice of traveling to distant regions to study other cultures
within their native environmental contexts. In recent decades,
“the field” has broadened to include diverse settings such as one’s
hometown (as in urban anthropology), the Internet (visual or
virtual anthropology), or collections in university archives and
museums (ethnohistory or museum anthropology).

Archaeological Research Methods

Relics of past civilizations, in the form of human-made cultural
artifacts, temples, and burial remains, are the means by which we
can begin to understand the thoughts and worldviews of ancient
peoples.

In the quest to understand these ancient societies, human

curiosity has sometimes led to fantastical myths about races of
giant humans, dragons, and even extraterrestrial beings.

In the realm of archaeology, less speculative methods are used to

study the human past. Scientific approaches and techniques are
the foundation of archaeology today.
Archaeological Techniques
The first step in conducting field
research is to do a survey of an area
that has the potential to reveal
surface artifacts or cultural debris.
Surveys can be done by simply
walking across a field, or they may
involve using various technologies,
such as drones or Google Earth, to
search for unusual topography and
potential structures that would be
difficult to see from the ground.

Cultural artifacts that are found may

become the basis for an
archaeological excavation of the site.
A random sampling of excavation
units or test pits can determine a
site’s potential based on the quantity
of cultural materials found. GPS
coordinates are often collected for
each piece of cultural debris, along
with notes on specific plants and
animal found at the site, which can
be indicators of potential natural
resources

Features such as trails, roads, and

house pits are documented and
included in a full set of field notes.

Government agencies have different

protocols about what constitutes an
archaeological site; the standard in
many areas is six cultural objects
found in close proximity to one
another.

When preparing a site for excavation,

archaeologists will divide the entire
site into square sections using a grid
system, which involves roping off
measured squares over the surface of
the site.

This grid system enables

archaeologists to document and map
all artifacts and features as they are
found in situ (in the original
location).

Every cultural and natural object and feature is fully documented in the
field notes, with its exact placement and coordinates recorded on a map
using the grid system as a guide. These coordinates represent an object’s
primary context.

Archaeological Dating Techniques

Law of superposition

Stratigraphic superposition

Archaeological superposition

Ethnography and Ethnology

Ethnography is a method used by cultural anthropologists to create a

description of a culture or society. Ethnographers gather and utilize

information from many sources, such as fieldwork, museum
collections, government records, and archaeological data.

In the 19th century, a form of ethnography developed that was

called armchair anthropology, in which theories about human
societies and human behaviors were proposed solely based on
secondhand information.

One area of interest for early anthropologists was the similarities

and differences between various Indigenous societies. This interest
in comparison led to a branch of anthropology called ethnology,
which is a cross-cultural comparison of different groups. In early
anthropology, ethnology’s aim was to understand how various

indigenous societies were related to one another. This included the

relations among language dialects, dress, and appearance and to
what degree and in what direction various tribes had migrated from
one location to another.

Ethnology is still a common practice in linguistics, archaeology, and

biological anthropology.

Ethnography: Perspectives and Interpretation

Having an ethnocentric or etic perspective means someone is
judging a culture according to the standards of their own culture and
belief system. To observe a culture from the perspective of the
people being researched is to have an emic perspective. For
anthropologists to be effective researchers, they must be able to
observe and gather data from unbiased and emic perspectives.

An anthropologist’s interpretation of the information gathered can

significantly alter their research findings. Earlier anthropologists
were primarily male and White, so their findings were based on
interpretations made through these lenses. Feminist anthropology
attempts to address this male bias.

Feminist anthropology is recognized as having begun as early as the

1850s, with attempts made (by male anthropologist) to include more
information on women in their ethnographic research. In the 1920s,
female anthropologists such as Zora Neale Hurston and Ruth
Benedict began publishing in the field, but not until the 1928
publication of Margaret Mead’s Coming of Age in Samoa did a
female anthropologist gain prominence.

Participant Observation and Interviewing

Researchers studying other cultures practice a method called
participant observation, which entails directly participating in the
activities and events of a host culture and keeping records of
observations about these activities.

Researchers may create various types of records of their interactions

as participants and their observations about the host culture and
environment. These might take the form of field notebooks,
computer files, digital recordings, photographs, or film. Researchers
working in the field may also collect objects that will remind them
of the culture they are studying, often memorabilia such as maps,
tourism brochures, books, or crafts made by the people they are
observing.

An important source of information about a culture is interviews

with various people who grew up in that culture. Interviews can be
uncomfortable for people, and it is important that researchers do all
they can to help subjects feel at ease. Researchers will normally
conduct an interview in a familiar space for the informant, such as
the informant’s home. They will help the subject ease into the
interview by participating in introductory and hosting protocols
followed in that culture when a visitor comes to someone’s home.

Interviews can be short or long, and

there may be follow-up meetings and
further interviews based on how
knowledgeable the informant is.
Many informants are chosen because
they are deeply conscious of multiple
aspects of their culture. This type of
insider information is vitally
important to an anthropological
research project. In addition to
interview questions, survey questions
may also be asked during these
meetings.

The use of recording equipment, for

both audio and video recordings, is
common during interviews.
However, such equipment may be
considered intrusive by some, and
their use is always at the discretion of
the informant. Express permissions
must always be obtained both to
create a recording and to use a
recording in future projects.
 anthropology

Biological Linguistic Cultural Archaeology Design Digital

What is Cultural Anthropology ?

Cultural anthropologists study how people who share a common
cultural system organize and shape the physical and social world
around them, and are in turn shaped by those ideas, behaviors,
and physical environments.
Cultural anthropology asks many questions: What do people
think? How do they live? What makes a family? What economic
and spiritual practices do people engage in? What makes people
feel they are different from one another, and how do these
perceived differences emerge in ideas about race, gender, or
geographic origin? How do people create social structures and
understand power? Why do people eat what they eat? How do
they use language? What do they do in their leisure time? How do
they interact with animals, plants, and wider environments? And
how do all these identities, practices, and relationships affect how
people see themselves as humans?
What is Cultural ?

Culture is a set of beliefs,

practices, and symbols that are
learned and shared. Together,
they form an all-encompassing,
integrated whole that binds
people together and shapes
their worldview and lifeways.
Cultural anthropologists study all aspects of culture, but what exactly is
“culture”? When first asked most of the responses are that culture is food,
clothing, religion, language, traditions, art, music, and so forth. Indeed,
culture includes many of these observable characteristics, but culture is
also something deeper. Culture is a powerful defining characteristic of
human groups that shapes our perceptions, behaviors, and relationships.

One reason that culture is difficult to define is that it encompasses all the
intangible qualities that make people who they are. Culture is the “air we
breathe:” it sustains and comprises us, yet we largely take it for granted.
We are not always consciously aware of our own culture.

Characteristics of Culture
Humans are born with the capacity to learn the culture of any social
group. We learn culture both directly and indirectly
Culture changes in response to both internal and external factors
Humans are not bound by culture; they have the capacity to conform to
it or not, and sometimes change it
Culture is symbolic; individuals create and share the meanings of
symbols within their group or society
The degree to which humans rely on culture distinguishes us from other
animals and shaped our evolution
Human culture and biology are interrelated: Our biology, growth, and
development are impacted by culture.

Elements of Culture

what we
make do think
material culture non material culture

P eople living in groups learn to craft the things they need in order to make a
living in their environment. Early human ancestors learned how to make
sharp blades useful for processing meat. They shared their knowledge of
toolmaking in groups, passing those skills down to younger generations.
Objects that are made and used by humans in group contexts are called
material culture. All of the tools developed by early hominins (blades,
arrows, axes, etc.) are examples of material culture.

Thoughts or ideas that make up a culture are called the non-material

culture. In contrast to material culture, non-material culture does not
include any physical objects or artifacts. Examples of non-material culture
include any ideals, ideas, beliefs, values, norms that may help shape
society.

Culture lag, lag between material

culture and non material culture

Ahmed is a carpet seller in the

Istanbul Grand Bazaar. Every day,
people from all over the world
come into his stall to examine,
and sometimes buy, the carpets in
his inventory.

Anthropologist Patricia Scalco (2019) met Ahmed while she was

conducting research on market exchange in Istanbul. She carefully
observed the set of sales strategies he had crafted to respond to customer
desires and knowledge. When anyone pauses at the entrance, Ahmed
greets the potential customer and ushers the person into his stall. Bringing
out a silver platter, Ahmed offers the customer a cup of tea, a welcoming
gesture.

As the customer browses, Ahmed

initiates a carefully constructed
conversation designed to determine
what sort of person this customer is,
what they are looking for, and what they
really know (and do not know) about
carpets. He pulls out various carpets
from the stacks, unfurling them as he
describes their distinctive qualities.
Ahmed identifies this interaction as a sort of game he must play with his
customers. European tourists in this Turkish marketplace are often
inspired by the desire for handmade traditional crafts made by local rural
ethnic groups such as the Kurds.These days, however, most carpets sold in
the Istanbul market are industrially produced in Pakistan, India, and
China. However, in his many years of selling carpets, Ahmed has learned
that he must play to Western orientalist fantasies, weaving a distinctive
story around the origins and manufacture of a carpet, in order to win a
sale. Like other merchants in this market, Ahmed has a family to support,
and he cannot afford to openly contradict the knowledge and desires of his
customers.
Centered on the material culture of carpets, Ahmed’s work illustrates the
importance of what people do and what they think in the making of
cultural life. What people do and what they think are nonmaterial
elements of culture. In his everyday interactions with customers, Ahmed
has developed a set of habitual practices involving gesture and speech.
Anthropologists use the term cultural practices to refer to this form of
culture. Routine speech communicates meanings and values (such as the
“authenticity” of a carpet), while routine action organizes social events
(such as, hopefully, a sale). People from all walks of life develop similar
combinations of habitual action and speech that constitute the everyday
culture of people in those circumstances.
Shared ways of making sense of situations are called cultural frames.
Cultural frames tell people where they are, what role they play in that
context, and what forms of behavior and speech are expected and
appropriate
A cultural role is a conventionalized position held by a person or
persons in a particular context or situation. Sociocultural roles are
associated with certain behaviors and actions. For example, “mother” is
a sociocultural role in the cultural frame of “family.
The behaviors and actions associated with a sociocultural role are
collectively called a norm
Cultural values are notions about what is good, true, correct,
appropriate, or beautifu
An ideology identifies the entities, roles, behaviors, relationships, and
processes in a particular realm as well as the rationale behind the
whole system
A worldview is a very broad ideology that shapes how the members of a
culture generally view the world and their place in it
An aggregate is a combination of elements. What we make, what we do,
and what we think all combine in larger aggregates of culture. (Mothers
Day card
Colors, shapes, gestures, animals, plants—all of these commonly
acquire specific cultural meaning which are then used to represent
cultural norms or Cultural values as symbols . Symbols are useful
cultural aggregates because they provide a kind of shorthand for
expressing complex ideas
Combining objects, actions, and meanings, ritual is a special kind of
repeated, patterned action conventionally associated with a particular
meaning. Rituals incorporate symbols and roles along with routinized
activities such as gestures, music, and movement.
Social Structure

The way a society is formally organized is called social structure.

Typically, a society organizes a set of routine activities and objects in
space and time to accomplish a particular function, such as community
decision making, the production and circulation of goods, or religious
observance. Social structure is the framework for those realms,
designating when, where, how, and by whom these functions are
accomplished. Social structures combine material culture (such as
buildings) with practices (such as meetings) and ideas (such as the rules
and procedures of those meetings.

Paradoxes of Culture

Culture is continuous, but it changes

We can identify four main mechanisms of cultural change. These four

mechanisms overlap and interact as the history of a culture unfolds over
time. Diffusion is the movement of an element of culture from one society
to another, often through migration or trade. Friction occurs when two or
more elements of culture come into conflict, resulting in alteration or
replacement of those elements. Innovation is the slight alteration of an
existing element of culture, such as a new style of dress or dance.
Invention is the independent creation of a new element of culture, such as
a new technology, religion, or political form.

Culture is bounded but mobile

Because many elements of culture are shaped by environmental forces,

trading opportunities, and local histories of settlement, culture becomes
associated with territory. But because of the mobility of people, objects,
and ideas, culture rarely stays within the boundaries of any society;
rather, it wanders restlessly along lines of travel, communication,
conquest, and trade.

Culture is consensual but contested

In any society, people interact using a set of assumptions about the sorts of
behavior and speech considered appropriate to certain people in certain
situations. That is to say, culture is consensual; through their words and
actions, people agree to a certain way of doing things. Culture includes
conventionalized roles, behavioral norms, and shared ideas for framing
situations.

Culture is shared but it varies

How culture is widely yet unevenly shared among members of a group.

Different members of and groups in a society have different perspectives
on their shared culture and different versions of that culture.

Theories of Culture
Cultural Evolutionism
Some anthropologists are interested in the origins of human cultural forms
and how these forms have changed over long periods of time. Like Darwin,
these anthropologists believed that simple forms evolved into more
complex forms. Comparing different cultures of the world, they assigned
the ones they considered more rudimentary to earlier evolutionary stages,
while the ones they considered more complex were assigned to the more
advanced stages. For example, British anthropologist Edward Tylor argued
that human culture evolved from savagery through barbarism to
civilization. He identified savagery with people who used gathering and
hunting to meet their basic needs. The domestication of animals and plants
was associated with barbarism. Civilization resulted from more advanced
forms of farming, trade, and manufacturing as well as the development of
the alphabet. Not surprisingly, British scholars identified their own culture
as highly civilized.

Elaborating on Tylor’s scheme, American

anthropologist Lewis Henry Morgan subdivided
each of these three stages into an even more
elaborate model and proposed a mechanism for
moving from stage to stage. Morgan focused on
technology as the primary driver of cultural
evolution. New and better ways of making
things, according to Morgan, resulted in new
patterns of social practice and thought.
Advanced technology was associated with
advanced civilization.

Both Tylor and Morgan, like most

anthropologists of their day, thought that all
cultures passed through this single set of stages
in the march toward civilization. This kind of
theory is called unilineal evolution.

Disagreeing with this way of thinking, anthropologists such as Franz Boas

argued that there is no single line of cultural evolution but that each culture
changes according to its own unique historical trajectory. Moreover,
cultures evolve not in isolation but in constant interaction with one
another. Rather than focusing on technological changes within a culture,
Boas highlighted the diffusion of material objects, practices, and ideas
among cultures in complex relations of trade, migration, and conquest.

Though theories of unilineal cultural evolution have been largely

abandoned, some anthropologists are still interested in discovering regular
patterns that might govern how human cultures change over long periods of
time.

In the 1950s, American anthropologist Julian Steward developed an

approach called cultural ecology, recognizing the importance of
environmental factors by focusing on how humans adapt to various
environments. Steward’s approach showed how humans in each
environmental zone develop a set of core cultural features that enable them
to make a living. Central to each cultural core are ways of getting or making
all the resources necessary for human survival—in particular, food,
clothing, and shelter.

Cultural Materialism

anthropologist Marvin Harris

developed a theory called cultural
materialism, arguing that technology
and economic factors are
fundamental to culture, molding
other features such as family life,
religion, and politics

The European Point of View: Functionalism

Functionalism seeks to understand the purpose of the elements and
aggregates of culture in the here and now.

Bronislaw Malinowski, an early proponent of this approach, argued that

the function of culture is to meet human needs. All humans need to
satisfy the need for food, clothing, and shelter. The fundamental
purpose of culture is to provide a means of satisfying those needs. In the
course of meeting those basic needs, humans in all cultures develop a set
of derived needs—that is, needs derived from the basic ones. Derived
needs include the need to organize work and distribute resources.
Family structures and gender roles are examples of cultural elements
addressing these derived needs.
Finally, cultures also address
a set of integrative needs,
providing people with guiding
values and purpose in life.
Religion, law, and ideologies
fulfill these integrative needs.
Malinowski sought to
understand both the
biological and psychological
functions of culture.

British anthropologist Alfred R. Radcliffe-Brown, identified the functions

of various elements of culture in a slightly different way. Rather than
looking for the way culture satisfies biological or psychological needs,
structural functionalism focused more on how the various structures in
society reinforce one another. Culture is not a random assortment of
structural features but a set of structures that fit together into a coherent
whole. Common norms and values are threaded through the family
structure, the economy, the political system, and the religion of a culture.
Structural functionalists
conceptualized culture as a kind of
machine with many small parts all
working in tandem to keep the
machine operating properly. While
recognizing the value of this
approach, contemporary
anthropologists have complicated
the mechanistic model of culture by
pointing out that the various
elements of culture come into
conflict just as often as they
reinforce one another.
Structuralism
In a different sense, the term structure can refer to patterns of thought
embedded in the culture of a people—that is, conceptual structure.
French anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss pioneered this approach,
sometimes called French structuralism. Lévi-Strauss considered culture
to be a system of symbols that could be analyzed in the various realms of
culture, including myths, religion, and kinship. In these realms of
culture, objects and people are organized into symbolic systems of
classification, often structured around binary oppositions. Binary
oppositions are pairs of terms that are opposite in meaning, such as light/
dark, female/male, and good/evil. For example, kinship systems are
varied and complex, but they are fundamentally structured by oppositions
such as male versus female, older versus younger, and relation by blood
versus relation by marriage. Lévi-Strauss examined myths as well,
showing how the characters and plots emphasize binary oppositions.
Consider the many European folktales featuring an evil stepmother
(Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty), a character that combines the opposition
of good versus evil with the opposition of blood relation versus relation
by marriage. Lévi-Strauss argued that myths operate as public arenas for
conceptually pondering and processing the fundamental categories and
relations of a culture.
Ontology
In recent decades, some cultural
anthropologists have come to focus on
the nature of reality, including but not
limited to human perspectives and
experiences. Ontology is the study of the
true nature of existence. In some
cultures, for instance, the social world
consists not only of embodied persons
but also of spirit beings, such as
ancestors and witches, who interact with
people in mysterious ways. And in some
cultures, people are not just bodies but
assemblages that include souls, spirits,
characters, or fates. Ontological
anthropology explores how culture
constructs our social and natural
realities, what we consider real, and how
we act on those assumptions. Reaching
beyond human realities, ontological
anthropology also attempts to include
nonhuman perspectives, relationships,
and forms of communication.
For instance, in his provocative ethnography How Forests Think (2013),
anthropologist Eduardo Kohn describes how the web of life in the
Amazon rainforest consists of continual communication among plants,
animals, and humans. He examines how Amazonian peoples engage with
dogs, spirits, the dead, pumas, rivers, and even sounds. Humans and these
nonhuman beings are both antagonistic and interdependent in this
interactive web. Predators and prey read one another’s behavior,
interpreting intentions and motivations. Kohn’s effort is to get beyond
conventional modes of human thought and language to understand how
humans are embedded in nonhuman ecological realities.

Cultural Relativism
The most important anthropological value, however, is cultural
relativism, or suspending judgment about other cultures until one gains a
clear understanding of the meaning and significance of what those
cultures do and believe. Cultural relativism requires us to understand the
rationale, purpose, and meaning of cultural traditions and knowledge
before we decide on their validity. And it provides significant advantages
in better understanding others.
It allows us to see the worth, dignity, and respect of all persons,
allowing for initial exchange and collaboration between “us” and
“them.
It reminds us to approach the study of other cultures without
automatically judging them as inferior, thus minimizing
ethnocentrism
It helps us keep an open mind about the potentials and possibilities
inherent in our species.

First formally introduced by Franz Boas, cultural relativism laid the

groundwork for the discipline of anthropology, a science that would
study what it means to be human in all its diverse forms. Boas and his
students worked to apply cultural relativism across racial, ethnic,
linguistic, and socioeconomic boundaries, documenting the rich cultural
traditions of Indigenous peoples, minority communities, and immigrants.
The concept, though, has undergone a great deal of debate since the 1948
Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations. Is anything
okay if a culture decides it is? Are there any boundaries to cultural
relativism? Do we have to accept everything that a group does, or can an
anthropologist ultimately judge that a practice is damaging, harmful, and
not deserving of being respected and upheld?
Cultural Relativism 2.0
While these debates remain, anthropologists still value cultural relativism
(and the worthiness of other peoples and cultures), although perhaps in a
modified form that anthropologist Michael Brown calls cultural
relativism 2.0. As Brown states, cultural relativism 2.0 is “a call to pause
before judging, to listen before speaking, and to widen one’s views before
narrowing them” (2008).

In other words, first give people a chance.

 anthropology

Biological Linguistic Cultural Archaeology Design Digital

What is Linguistic Anthropology ?

Linguistic anthropologists study language in context, revealing
how people’s ways of communicating and expressing themselves
interact with human culture, history, politics, identity, and much
more.
Linguistic anthropologists regard language as a form of social
action. In other words, we explore how language is one of the
ways people create and sustain cultural beliefs, relationships, and
identities. Linguistic anthropologists are most interested in non-
referential functions, or the functions that reveal how language
generates meaning in context beyond merely conveying
information.

Language is culturally organized into genres such as folklore,

myth, humor, gossip, oratory, narrative, et cetera. Linguistic
anthropologists also study how verbal art is poetry. Analyses of
storytelling practices and ritual performances, sometimes
accompanied by music, demonstrate that language is both
formulaic and creative.

Linguists tend to regard language as a formal system with

predefined and unchanging rules. Linguistic anthropologists, on
the other hand, generally examine language as part of social life.

Linguistic anthropology does closely overlap with two linguistic

subfields: applied linguistics and qualitative (or interactional)
sociolinguistics. These subfields examine the social meaning of
language use in society and share an interest in social inequality
and institutional practices. Like linguistic anthropologists,
applied and qualitative linguists are unique in regarding human
identities not as fixed but as “performed,” or created through and
transformed by linguistic practices.
Subfields of Linguistic Anthropology
Historical linguistics
Structural linguistics
Sociolinguistic
Ethnomimeti
Psycholinguistics

Historical linguistics

This branch, also known as comparative linguistics, focuses on

study of language origins, development, and changes over time. it
investigates the relationship between human language capacity
and the evolution of languages from local dialects to classical and
global languages. it also aims to reconstruct ancestral language
forms and analyze language changes throughout history
Structural linguistics
Structural linguistics also referred to as descriptive linguistics,
this branch is primarily concerned with the structure and
construction of languages. It examines the rules governing
language formation, including how sound are combined into
words, words into sentences and sentences into speech. Structural
linguistics covers the analysis of phonemic, syntactic and
morphemic structures within languages.
Sociolinguistics
Sociolinguistics known as well as ethno-linguistics, this branch
studies language use in various social and situational contexts. It
explores how individuals utilize words to categorize experiences
and establish social relationships, as well as how speech variations
arise depending on the context.

Ethnogenetic
This area of study investigates how people within a society
perceive and classify the material and social aspects of their
surrounding world. Ethnogenetic aims to understand culture from
the perspective of the people themselves, shedding light on their
systematic knowledge of the world and the meaning they attribute
to cultural elements. This approach acknowledges that individuals
from different societies perceive and understand cultural
categories, such as art, food, kinship, supernatural being, through
distinct lenses.

Psycholinguistics

This branch focuses on the mental processes underlying language

acquisition and use. Together, these branches of linguistic
anthropology contribute to a comprehensive understanding of
human cultures, tracing their development from the emergence of
the emergence of humanity in prehistory to the dawn of
civilization in the historical era. they reveal how humans evolved,
acquired culture, and how that culture expanded progressed and
evolved over time.

Performativity language

In our everyday life, we sometimes use language performativity

without knowing it. It is about the words that count, which means
that the moment the language is spoken, the action it indicates is
realized too. This theory, based on linguistics, is very applicable
nowadays in resistances and movements, especially of gender. In
this article, we will focus on the transformation of the
performativity of language.

In order to better understand what is language performativity, we

have to differentiate two types of languages: the “ordinary”
language, which we use in daily life to express ourselves, and the
philosophical language or the “technical language” that we usually
work with, in university and for research. For John Langshaw
Austin, the language is not only useful for description or for self-
reflection but also useful with a performative quality. Language
allows connection throughout the world and once it is acted upon,
it becomes performative. This signifies that it implies
consequences and therefore engages itself with a responsibility for
the person to act upon the words he or she has spoken. A
probative example would be the role of a judge in a tribunal: when
the judge announces “this court is now in session”, these words
are acted upon immediately and imply that the session of the court
has started. While the performative language signifies that we do
not just “say” something, we actually “do” the thing according to
the bias of language.

Sapir Whorf Hypothesis Definition

The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis supports linguistic relativity. That
suggests the structure and vocabulary of the particular language
will influence or determine the overall perception and cognition
of the native speakers of that specific language.

That’s why Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis is also known as the concept

of linguistic relativity.

The Sapir Whorf Hypothesis suggests language influences

cognition & thinking and can alter a person’s worldview. Edward
Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf, in different periods, developed it.

The hypothesis presents two underlying theories, which are –

linguistic determinism and linguistic relativism. Linguistic
relativism takes a practical approach and suggests that the use of
language may influence thinking but does not define it.

However, the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis is criticized because it is

reductionist, not transferrable to all languages, & cannot be
proven in terms of causality.
 anthropology

Biological Linguistic Cultural Archaeology Design Digital

What is Digital Anthropology ?

Digital anthropology explores the intersection between humans
and technology in the digital era. It studies how people interact
with and use digital technology, how it affects their behavior and
culture, and how it shapes their perceptions of the world.

From Linguistic to digitals design

Idioms & Metaphor
We all use idioms and metaphors everyday, they are effective
literary tools used to communicate through abstract phrases and
expressions. An idiom is a group of words established by usage as
having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual
words (Examples: barking up the wrong tree, once in a blue moon,
see the light ). A metaphor is an expression representative or
symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.
(Example: “He broke my heart.” Your heart isn’t literally broken;
you’re just feeling hurt and sad.)

Characteristics of Metaphor
Universality
Metaphors may be used in different language, but uses universal
concepts. For instance, in physics, we come to know what
electricity is in terms of understanding the intangible water we are
familiar with, hence expressions of flow of electricity, pressure of
electricity, obstacle of electricity, to name just a few
Systematic character of metaphor
Different conceptual metaphors do not work independently, as
Lackoff and Johnson (1980) put it, metaphorical entailments can
characterize a coherent system of metaphorical concepts and a
corresponding coherent system of metaphorical expressions for
those concepts. Knowledge of what money, limited resources and
valuable commodity are in mind, these metaphors can facilitate
our understanding of the abstract concept time. The three
metaphors well agree with each other and mingle into a
harmonious whole, for money is in modern society a limited
resource while a limited resource is a commodity. In other words
time is money entails time is a limited resource, while the latter
entails time is a valuable commodity.
Power of enriching semantic meaning
The word loud has following meanings

(a) having great intensity of sound

(b) producing great intensity of sound ; resounding

(c)vehement or insistent :loud denunciations.

(d)Tastelessly bright ; garish, flashy: a loud red automobile

(e) obsessive in appearance or manner : Joe is a loud, vulgar

person.(Macmillan contemporary dictionary)

The first two items are of minor difference and of its literal
meaning, while the third item is somewhat different from its
literal meaning yet still bears close relationship to sound Item four
and five bear no direct relationship to sound, but sill stem from
high-pitchingness and ear-catchingness of sound. In a word,
metaphorization is the effective mechanism to make such
connotation possible.
Idiomatic learning

The mouse has no physical affordance to indicate it’s purpose or

function and has no parallel in the mechanical world. However,
learning how to use the mouse is effortless and memorable. There
are no tutorials for using the mouse. We have no reference for the
mouse, we don’t understand the technical functionality of the
mouse, but we use the mouse once and are proficient. This is
idiomatic learning.
Metaphoric design

Metaphoric design depends on a user’s understanding of

references from the physical world to denote the function of
interface controls. Visual metaphors such as trash cans, scissors
and floppy disks are 2D representations of 3D objects from the
physical world used to communicate the purpose of an interface
control. Metaphors can expedite the learning process for users by
associating the affordance of common physical world objects with
the interface controls of the digital world.

Anthropology and experience design

The Internet has blurred the boundaries across all nations, ethnic
and linguistic groups, and cultural variations are now forming a
singular global culture, all thanks to the World Wide Web. But
culture has been the core curiosity of Anthropologists since the
dawn of the discipline.

UX Research has the basis built from a methodology that has been
the crux of Anthropological Studies - "Ethnography"

Anthropologists are by default the proponents of Empathy,

Insights and Storytelling

"Design" has become a cornerstone of the Internet's development

since the 1980s, when developers, coders, and tech giants realized
that to keep the multitudinous global digital culture alive, the
experience must be engaging. People who are turning on their
computers must remain drawn into the interface so that both the
providers and the people win from their perspectives

Importance of "Thick Data" answering the Whys of people's

behaviour apart from the Hows answered by Big Data

Thick data is the result of the collaboration between data

scientists and anthropologists working together to make sense of
large amounts of data. Together, they analyze data, looking for
qualitative information like insights, preferences, motivations and
reasons for behaviors.

R eff.

The Digital and the Human: A Prospectus for Digital

Anthropology
 anthropology

Biological Linguistic Cultural Archaeology Design Digital

What is Design Anthropology ?

“Design Anthropology is the study of how design
translates human values into tangible experiences"

(Tunstall, 2011).

Design Anthropology brings together key thinkers and

practitioners involved in making and theorizing our contemporary
material and immaterial world: its rituals, its aesthetics, and its
interactions.
Design to way of living back to Design
Using Tools had a big impact on human brain developments. After
the fist use of flint knife we developed so many tools for deferent
needs. We then improved this tools for better experience. in this
development our tools also shaped our view towards the world we
live in. Need of tools gave birth to craftsman and scientists.
First we designed stone for hunting and processing. then we
molded clay for storage. In gathering of food we discovered
farming which made us settle in one place. now there was a bigger
need of design to store and process multiple things like food,
water, humans, cloths etc. Thus the design became a part of
human life, where we manipulated things around us for
betterment of life. Urbanization due to industrialisation, brought
about need for multistoried buildings. These new urban areas
were designed with water and power supply. Water supply and
storge gave berth to tanks in multistoried building, generating the
need to take the water up on roof tank. Pups solve this problem
but we need to remember when to switch on and off the pump. so
we used sensor for better experience.
anthropomorphism
Anthropomorphism, the interpretation of nonhuman things or
events in terms of human characteristics. People throughout
history have reported seeing human features in landforms, clouds,
and trees. Artists everywhere have depicted natural phenomena
such as the Sun and Moon as having faces and gender. In literature
and graphic art, such depiction often is called personification,
especially when the subject is an abstraction, such as Death or
Liberty. Anthropomorphism in science is widely criticized but not
uncommon. For example, the discoverers of the pulsar first
mistook its regular radio signals for messages from space, and
Charles Darwin (1809–82), the English naturalist who devised the
theory of evolution, described Nature as constantly seeking to
improve her creatures.

Ethnography
The scientific description of peoples and cultures
with their customs, habits, and mutual differences.

There are three types of ethnographic research methods to choose from,

which include
Passive Observatio
Contextual Interview
Archival Research
Passive Observation

Following the subjects and observing them doing their regular activities
without making an interaction. The researcher may take notes, click
photographs, or record videos to draw observational inferences.

Contextual Interviews

Following the subjects and observing them doing their regular activities
while also interacting with them.

Archival Research

The researcher digs down existing documents and past research for
understanding the requirements. There is no physical contact with the
subjects in the case of archival research.
Reff.

Design Anthropology: A Distinct Style of Knowing