Search results

We now know what kinship terminologies are and what their function is in kinship systems, even though this knowledge is not yet widespread. Every social system consists of a set of organizations built up interactively by the use of specific idea systems: governmental systems are systems of organizations built up by the use of governmental ideas, military systems by the use of military ideas, economic systems by the use of economic ideas, and so on, including kinship systems by the use of kinship ideas. These social idea systems are not preeminently nomenclatures per se, but are associated with distinctive nomenclatures, just in the way that geometry is not a nomenclature but is associated with a nomenclature. For kinship, the core of the nomenclature has mainly been encountered and studied under the heading of "kinship terminologies." The ideas associated with them are the ideas that make up their definitions. These are highly systematic and form powerfully generative conceptual calculi. This paper describes how this recognition has emerged from earlier, quite different, formulations.

Experimental economics and bounded rationality are very different from one another, but both claim to offer a more general and more empirical type of economic theory. Experimental economists, in addition, claim that their game-theoretic analyses provide rigorous, calculable, inferences from individual decisions to society as a whole. They claim to be describing the basis of social stability, although the argument depends on a unitary conception of "society" that ethnologists have now largely rejected. Both groups view rationality as inherently or originally individualistic and "utility maximizing" rather than inherently or originally social—albeit for entirely different reasons. Neither recognizes rationality as inherently bound up with organizations. These views have no basis in ethnography and are sharply in conflict with the stress on local knowledge in the most successful contemporary development policies. A crucial empirical issue is the nature and power of indigenous decision algorithms. The economists treat them as non-existent, insignificant, or erroneous. I show that they are organizationally situated and part of the organizational process, genuinely optimizing, and the basis of cultural ecological adaptation. Moreover, it is this external adaptation, not an internal game-like system of self-perpetuating rules, that is the ultimate basis of social stability, as well as dynamism.

A linguistico‐semantic pattern associated with the designation of foods in English can be used in convenient classroom demonstrations of the concept of a cultural code and its importance.

This is the first major study of a Sikh community in Central Punjab to appear in the modern anthropological literature. Perhaps because this historically and economically important people and region have been so long neglected, they present certain important contradictions or paradoxes in terms of commonly accepted generalization about Indian village life. Thus, the villagers describe their Sikh religion as Hindu, yet insist that it forbids observance of caste

Leaf reviews LAND REFORMS IN INDIA, VOLUME 6: Intervention for Agrarian Capitalist Transformation in Punjab and Haryana edited by Sucha Singh Gill; LAND REFORMS IN INDIA, VOLUME 7: Issues of Equity in Rural Madhya Pradesh edited by Praveen K. Jha; and LAND REFORMS IN INDIA, VOLUME 8: Performance and Challenges in Gujarat and Maharashta edited by Ghanshyam Shah and D. C. Sah.