Suchergebnisse

"Scale," a term referring to size and/or complexity, is a societal dimension frequently employed and generally regarded as important but rarely systematically investigated. This paper provides a critical overview of the meanings which have been attached to the concept and the implications they carry. Special attention is paid here to the diverse literature dealing with the contrast between societies characterized by such polar terms as Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft, folk and urban, small and large, simple and complex. The paper then turns to a consideration of the effects of social scale as an independent variable affecting social organization and social relations. This is undertaken by reference to the author's own ethnographic research in societies and situations which apparently offer contrasts in scale: (1) the Aleutian Islands, where a case study was made of processes and results of a major change in scale, from that of a small-scale hunting and fishing society to one participating in the national political and economic nexus of the United States;(2) village India, contrasting the very small scale of a Himalayan village and its region with the larger-scale situation of villages of the densely populated Indo-Gangetic plain; (3) urban India, contrasting social organization and social relations in the city with those in traditional villages, as described in 2. In each instance, general principles have been derived from the ethnographic data concerning the social consequences of variations in scale and the social processes which they engender, e.g., the widespread quest for community, communal sentiments, and communal experience which large-scale organization brings about. In conclusion, some two dozen general inferences about the ways in which scale influences social relations are proposed and enumerated. It is hoped that as a result, other anthropologists may be moved to investigate the implications of scale in the various societies in which they work. One significant aim would be to ascertain what features of social organization and social relations are inherently aspects of scale, what features are affected by scale (and in what ways), and what features are independent of scale.

Polyandry has long fascinated anthropologists because it is both exotic and disturbing; its presence obscures recognition of all other aspects of a society's marital system. Although previous studies have failed to pinpoint any significant uniformities in the phenomena labelled polyandry, the availability of new data may suggest a pattern of significant similarities and differences, such as in the Pahari and Tibetan cases. Here the differences are product of dissimilar underlying strategies and cultural values.

Categories into which people classify themselves and others in a North Indian city were collected, together with identifying characteristics and stereotypes. Utilizing a symbolic interactionist perspective, these were analyzed with reference to social behavior: the manner in which interaction was conditioned or influenced by the system of social categories and the meanings attached to them. The complexity of the terminological system, its variability and manipulability, the crucial importance of situation and audience, and the tenuous relationship between terminology and behavior were revealed.

The relationship between soc stratification & birth-ascribed soc identity is explored cross-culturally in response to the more specific question: is soc ranking by race distinctive or not? 5 societies are used as examples of birth-ascribed soc separation & inequality: Rwanda, India, Swat, Japan & the US. Each of several models & concepts which have been applied to systems of collective soc ranking are examined in some detail with reference to these societies: "stratification," "ethnic stratification," "caste," "race," "colonialism," "class," "pluralism," "hierarchy as symbolic interaction," & "sexual stratification." In each case, the structural & interactional similarities associated with birth-ascription as a basis for collective inequality are emphasized, & are contrasted with acquired status & individually based inequality. This leads to a discussion of the consequences of inherited inequality, wherein the nature of instit'ized inequality & oppression is examined, again in cross-cultural perspective, including those consequences which lead to change & emancipation. The conclusion is that "race," as the term is used in the US, Europe, & South Africa, is not qualitatively diff in its implications for human soc life, from caste in India & Swat, the "invisible" racial distinction in Japan, or the ethnic stratification of Rwanda, or the sexual stratification found in most societies. Where distinctions of this kind are employed, they affect people & the events which people generate in similar ways despite the diff historical & cultural conditions in which they occur. Exploitation & oppression seem to be universal concomitants of such systems, & rectification of these concomitants seems to be a universal & urgent aim of those who suffer them. Structural change--elimination of the system of birth-ascribed stratification itself & of its behavioral manifestations--is the only viable solution. AA.