Throughout the discussion in class and assigned readings I feel like my mind has expanded being able to comprehend dynamics and ideas within our social structure over time. The unique ways different cultures have learned that their are primitive and progressive ideologies related to the evolution and natural selection of man and and the relation between biology and traits. For example, Sol Tax’s argument is that Mednicks analysis shows inconsistent usage of the word primitive by anthropologists. Although the word “primitive” seems to denotes “people that anthropologist study” there are no genuinely primitive groups.
“Primitive” is not a legitimate concept deserving a single term. Despite the myth that”advanced” traits such as creativity are associated with individual biological differences; there is so scientific proof that correlates biology with creativity. Darwin described biological/genetic evolution as comprising three key components variation, competition (or selection), and inheritance cultural change also comprises these same phenomena. Yet while cultural evolution can be described as Darwinian in this sense, the details of the processes are unclear. Rise to Creating institutions and journals to provide results’ Boasian’s are important for their critique of human cultural evolution as progress-.
Biological progress is adaptation. In the journal “Current Anthropology” Mednick proposed an elaborate model that aimed to explain how creative ideas are generated and why creative people are more likely to have creative ideas. The model assumes that creative people have flatter associative hierarchies and as a consequence can more fluently retrieve remote associative elements, which can be combined to form creative ideas. This study aimed at revisiting Mednick’s model and providing an extensive test of its hypotheses.
A continuous free association task was employed and association performance was compared between groups high and low in creativity, as defined by divergent thinking ability and self-report measures. Although associative hierarchies do not differentiate between people with low and high creativity, more creative people do show higher associative fluency and more uncommon responses than less creative people. This suggests that creativity may not be related to a special organization of associative memory, but rather to a more effective way of accessing its contents. This supports evidence associating creativity with highly adaptive executive functioning. This was shown by the adaptive executive functioning of some of the US military leadership at the end of World War II after Axis had been defeated. Because they were now an occupying instead of a fighting force, they had to adapt to become more aware of the deeper ethical problems of colonialism by not using their own culture to judge another in an unbiased way. In other words, they learn how others with different perspectives see the world by using cultural relativism. By seeing different cultures as equal within their own structure and refusing to see right and wrong within one’s own culture or from the xenophobic wartime perspective used to promote genocide.
Ethnographic evidence undermines the theory of cultural relativism and the period of romanticism and the booming American economy in the aftermath of World War II renewed a lot of antagonism about other cultures . Nor has a close connection between race and personality ever been established. For the reconstructionist sometimes rather referred to as the american school, the explanation of cultural individuality is not based in biological type, physical environment, psychological traits or general historical or sociological conditions but in the specific historic fates of each local culture in its particular geographical and historical setting. The spread of cultural ideas from tribe to tribe is only one of the basic factors in cultural advance, the other factor being human creativeness from independent, original new things and Ideas. “Progress is no more a constant a characteristic of cultural change than is uniformity or gradual development.
Progress must be regarded as but one among several types of change characteristic of the historic process. The idea of progress, moreover, cannot be applied with equal success to all phases of civilization.” Single path of progress cannot work because people have had different history’s and experience different environments and cultures