Cyber anthropology or anthropology in cyberspace

As a variety of anthropology, cyber anthropology is considered to be the fastest growing sub branch in the science. It is based on synergic effects of multimedia systems and hypermedia, using their comparative advantages. One of the least researched fields of cyber anthropology is the relationship of individuals and social groups with a multimedia document in terms of their perception of such subject. This is because the foundation of social-informatics perception in the society is created based on the evidence of a real life, whereas here the perception is established at the level of virtual, i.e. online life. The rhetorical question here is whether an identical content causes the same or different user reactions, depending on whether it was perceived offline or online, i.e. to what extend does the medium (and not the information content) dictate the user perception. In this respect the research titled "Perception of online museum content creators and actual habits of Croatian online museum visitors" can be a "case study" for the impact of "cyber potential" on the classic anthropological paradigm.     

Hacking anthropology

This essay outlines how the ‘hack’ might offer a model for anthropological research in the face of the distributed relations evidenced by digital data. The argument builds on fieldwork with citizens and activists and looks at their attempts to understand and make use of the data produced by energy sensors and monitors. Drawing on their experiences, I suggest that ‘the hack’ emerges as an important form of practice that helps people navigate the place of data in social relations. Taking the hack not just as ethnographic observation but also as a methodological proposition, I use my ethnographic material on the practice of the hack to reconsider the anthropological challenge of doing ethnography of processes that are only perceptible through numerical or digital data. To explore the value of the hack for anthropology, I introduce an example of an attempt to do ethnography in the mode of the hack. The essay ends with reflections on how the hack might provide us with new ways of getting to grips with the anthropological implications of systemic and emergent relations that are both brought to light and remade through data.     

Toward conservational anthropology: addressing anthropocentric bias in anthropology

Anthropological literature addressing conservation and development often blames ‘conservationists’ as being neo-imperialist in their attempts to institute limits to commercial activities by imposing their post-materialist eco-ideology. The author argues that this view of conservationists is ironic in light of the fact that the very notion of ‘development’ is arguably an imposition of the (Western) elites. The anthropocentric bias in anthropology also permeates constructivist ethnographies of human–animal ‘interactions,’ which tend to emphasize the socio-cultural complexity and interconnectivity rather than the unequal and often extractive nature of this ‘interaction.’ Anthropocentrism is argued to be counteractive to reconciling conservationists’ efforts at environmental protection with the traditional ontologies of the interdependency of human-nature relationship.     

Applying evolutionary anthropology

Evolutionary anthropology provides a powerful theoretical framework for understanding how both current environments and legacies of past selection shape human behavioral diversity. This integrative and pluralistic field, combining ethnographic, demographic, and sociological methods, has provided new insights into the ultimate forces and proximate pathways that guide human adaptation and variation. Here, we present the argument that evolutionary anthropological studies of human behavior also hold great, largely untapped, potential to guide the design, implementation, and evaluation of social and public health policy. Focusing on the key anthropological themes of reproduction, production, and distribution we highlight classic and recent research demonstrating the value of an evolutionary perspective to improving human well‐being. The challenge now comes in transforming relevance into action and, for that, evolutionary behavioral anthropologists will need to forge deeper connections with other applied social scientists and policy‐makers. We are hopeful that these developments are underway and that, with the current tide of enthusiasm for evidence‐based approaches to policy, evolutionary anthropology is well positioned to make a strong contribution.     

History of anthropology

The author describes the history of biological anthropology with special reference to the period from 17th to 19th century. The most important anthropological theories and methodological developments of that time as well as their representatives are discussed in detail.     

Dental anthropology.

By Simon Hillson. New York: Cambridge University Press. 1996. 373 pp. ISBN 0-521-45194-9. $74.95 (cloth). © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Biomechanics in anthropology

Biomechanics is the set of tools that explain organismal movement and mechanical behavior and links the organism to the physicality of the world. As such, biomechanics can relate behaviors and culture to the physicality of the organism. Scale is critical to biomechanical analyses, as the constitutive equations that matter differ depending on the scale of the question. Within anthropology, biomechanics has had a wide range of applications, from understanding how we and other primates evolved to understanding the effects of technologies, such as the atlatl, and the relationship between identity, society, culture, and medical interventions, such as prosthetics. Like any other model, there is great utility in biomechanical models, but models should be used primarily for hypothesis testing and not data generation except in the rare case where models can be robustly validated. The application of biomechanics within anthropology has been extensive, and holds great potential for the future.     

The Islam of anthropology

Research on ‘Muslim societies’ is a controversial topic in the present, particularly given the US army’s current employment of anthropological experts in war zones under military occupation. In 2006 the UK Foreign Office, too, sought to include anthropologists in its worldwide research project entitled ‘Combating Terrorism by Countering Radicalization’, with grants given outside the normal process of research funding and differently assessed. In this article, I immodestly argue for how the discipline of anthropology should apprehend and analyse Islam in the present political context. The paper claims that anthropological research provides an antidote to the Islamophobia of much talk about Islam in the Australian public sphere, an Islamophobia originating not only from the right but from some leftists and feminists as well.     

Family therapy and anthropology

There has been among family therapists a widespread belief that anthropology is at least useful if not kindred to their field. The belief springs from the assumption that families in different cultural milieus have different ways of expressing their experience of intimacy in everyday life. If this is true, family organization transcends culture, and the latter is a mere language or mode of expression of the more basic pillar of family organization. However, the assumption is also strong that different cultural contexts produce different types of families, and the natural consequence of this hypothesis is that family therapy as developed in the United States would be restricted to dealing with American families, while the problems of family life elsewhere should be meted by the local cultural ways. These two hypotheses, namely that of family universality and that of cultural relativism, are far ends of a continuum. The more interesting and real cases lie somewhere in the middle.In the following argument I will discuss this subject by presenting a brief overview of family therapy's theories and practices for those readers who know nothing about it, by reviewing a recent book that makes the claim that family therapists will benefit from some kind of anthropological knowledge, and finally by turning the question on its head and addressing the interest family therapy may have for anthropologists.     

The old physical anthropology

In the eighteenth century, workers in general biology, medicine, and physical anthropology knew little about human physiology. As a result, they heavily stressed mystical, essentialist classifications of organisms, constitutional types, and diseases. Comparative morphology and diagnostic systems prevailed. At different times and for somewhat different reasons, these older paradigms were abandoned and newer ones adopted. Late in this scientific revolution, in the midtwentieth century, the new physical anthropology was born.