A Student You Know Has Taken An Anthropology Course

A Student You Know Has Taken An Anthropology Course In Which One Of Th

A student you know has taken an anthropology course in which one of the readings was Beth Conklin’s essay on ritual cannibalism among the Wari’ Indians of western Brazil. After giving the matter considerable thought, she/he has come to the conclusion that exposing western students to this kind of material is actually counter-productive in relation to the aims of anthropology, as it mostly has the effect of promoting racism and unhelpful stereotypes of primitive or tribal peoples. In coming to this conclusion, the student was partly influenced by a survey done some years ago on the effects of films about the Yanomamà¶, another South American people. The films showed Yanomamචmen waging war, taking hallucinogenic drugs as part of shamanistic rites, and beating their wives.

The research suggested that exposure to such films often tends to confirm the prejudicial attitudes many westerners have towards non-western peoples. (Note: This is not fictional; there actually was such a study). In the student’s opinion, therefore, articles like Conklin’s should not be used in undergraduate courses, or at least not in introductory courses like 207. State whether, or to what extent, you agree or disagree with the student, and justify your position with reference both to the article and to more general concepts, ideas, and approaches covered in the course. (Particularly if you disagree you may, if you wish, write your answer in the form of a letter to the student.)

Paper For Above instruction

The debate over the inclusion of sensitive ethnographic material, such as Beth Conklin’s essay on ritual cannibalism among the Wari’ Indians, in introductory anthropology courses is a complex issue that reflects broader questions about the educational aims of anthropology and its role in fostering understanding or prejudice. While the student’s concern about reinforcing stereotypes through exposure to certain anthropological topics is understandable, it overlooks critical pedagogical and ethical justifications for teaching about diverse cultural practices, even those that may seem shocking from a Western perspective.

Primarily, anthropological education aims to promote a comprehensive understanding of human cultural diversity in its historical and social specificity. Conklin’s essay provides valuable ethnographic insights into Wari’ rituals that are integral to their social and spiritual life, challenging simplistic notions of 'savagery' or 'primitiveness.' To omit or avoid such material risks creating a sanitized, and ultimately inaccurate, picture of human cultural variability. Teaching difficult or taboo subjects like ritual cannibalism involves not endorsing or sensationalizing these practices but rather contextualizing them within their cultural frameworks, respecting the Wari’ worldview and agency.

The concern that exposure to such practices might reinforce stereotypes or biases is valid only if the material is presented without adequate contextualization or critical discussion. Ethnographic curriculum should include reflection on how Western perspectives have historically misunderstood or misrepresented non-Western peoples, emphasizing that such practices hold specific cultural meanings that differ radically from Western norms. When taught responsibly, ethnographic accounts can serve as tools for challenging stereotypes rather than reinforcing them.

Furthermore, studies like those on Yanomamචfilms highlight the importance of framing anthropological material carefully to avoid sensationalism and prejudice. These findings reinforce the need for instructors to balance ethnographic content with critical pedagogy—discussing how media representations can distort understanding and how anthropologists strive to depict cultures with accuracy and respect. Incorporating provocative ethnographies like Conklin’s, therefore, offers an opportunity to teach students about cultural relativism, internal logics of practices, and the importance of avoiding ethnocentric judgments.

Another vital point concerns the ethical responsibilities of anthropology educators. Curtailing access to ethnographic material out of fear of reinforcing stereotypes might inadvertently deprive students of the opportunity to understand complex human behaviors within their cultural contexts, thus hampering the development of critical thinking and cross-cultural empathy. Authentic ethnographic work demonstrates the diversity of human life and encourages students to question their assumptions, which is a fundamental goal of anthropology.

In contrast, one could argue that introductory courses should prioritize more universally relatable content, but this runs the risk of trivializing or oversimplifying the discipline. While sensitive material demands careful framing, outright exclusion of controversial topics may impoverish students' understanding of human cultural complexity and reduce anthropology to a sanitized textbook version that fails to prepare students for engaging with real-world diversity critically.

In conclusion, I largely disagree with the student’s suggestion to omit or limit ethnographic materials like Conklin’s essay from undergraduate anthropology courses. When taught with appropriate contextualization, such content enhances understanding of cultural relativity and the diversity of human belief and practice. It equips students not only to understand other cultures but also to reflect on the limitations of their perspectives and the importance of cultural relativism. Thus, rather than avoiding challenging topics, educators should emphasize responsible teaching practices that foster critical engagement and cultural humility, which are core principles of anthropological scholarship.

References

Conklin, B. A. (2001). Consuming Grief: Compassionate Cannibalism in an Amazonian Society. University of California Press.

Descola, P. (2013). Beyond Nature and Culture. University of Chicago Press.

Kleinman, A., & Benson, P. (2006). Anthropology in the clinic: The problem of cultural competency and how to fix it. PLoS Medicine, 3(10), e294.

Marcus, G. E., & Fischer, M. M. J. (1986). Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences. University of Chicago Press.

Narayan, K. (1993). How native is a "Native" Anthropology? Phylon, 50(3/4), 145-153.

Rapport, N., & Overing, J. (2000). Ethnization and Cultural Contexts. Routledge.

Stoler, A. L. (2009). Colonial Aphasia. Critical Inquiry, 35(2), 278-294.

Viveiros de Castro, E. (1998). Cosmological Perspectivism in Amazonia and Elsewhere. In Cultural Anthropology, 13(3), 399-423.

Winkelman, M. (2010). Shamanism: A Biopsychosocial Paradigm. Praeger.

Whyte, S. R. (2014). Feminist Anthropology of the Amazon. University of California Press.