Is Anthropology a Science, Non-science, or Pseudo-science?

Question

Please support your answer!

Answer 1

nowadays it is becoming increasingly a hard science by incorporating such disciplines as linguistics, geology, paleonology, forensics, biology, GPS systems, cartography, anatomy and physiology. On an excavation you are likely to find specialists from all these fields including epigraphists and pottery experts.

What is with all the thumbs down. i happen to have a degree in this field.

Answer 2

It's NOT pseudo-science (which, by definition is not at all scientific, but is utter hooey).

In the sense that 'science' is about 'knowing' then it's a science; it's a social science in the sense that it's about people, not purely about the physical world.

It's an actual, legitimate field of study -- people draw the 'science' line differently; some would include it, some exclude it.

Answer 3

Anthropology is a Social Science, which is based on factual bio-chemical data which has been collected & analyzed over time!

Answer 4

The Anthropology, is a science! It is the study of the human beings from a biological, social perspective and humanist. The anthropology is divided in two great fields: the physical anthropology, that deal with the biological evolution and the physiological adaptation of the human beings, and the social or cultural anthropology, that takes care of the forms in which the people live in society, that is to say, the forms on evolution on their language, culture and customs. The anthropology is essentially multicultural. The first anthropological studies analyzed nonwestern towns and cultures, but its present work concentrates, to a great extent, in the modern western cultures (the urban sprawls and the industrial society). The anthropologists consider fundamental to carry out works of field and give special importance to the experiences of first hand, participating in the activities, customs and traditions of the society to study.

Answer 5

It is a social science, so the two designations of yours to the right of science could be correct, depending on context.

A discipline that settles empirical questions politically, such as anthropology does, can never be a science.

Answer 6

I would say part of social sciences, but not just confined to sociology. I would say studying human cultures in many different aspects does involve science eg Genetics, non-science eg archeology, and many other subjects in combination.

I certainly don't think it can be classified as Pseudo-science, "Pseudoscience is defined as a body of knowledge, methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific or made to appear scientific, but does not adhere to the scientific method".

Is is vital part of understanding different aspects of our humanity, past or present.

Anthropology can involve linguistics, history, sociology, science, archeology, mathematics, evolution,theology etc. These subjects are studies, examined, analyzed to reach conclusions, get insight into different aspects of humanity like trying to solve puzzles.

It helps us to gain understanding, which can't be attained by just studying subjects in isolation. Bringing evidence and clues together from different disciplines gives a better insight into the question in hand!

It also give a different perspective on a given situation eg,

"The comparison with other Mediterranean populations by using neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence

analyses reveal that Palestinians are genetically very close

to Jews and other Middle East populations, including Turks

(Anatolians), Lebanese, Egyptians, Armenians and

Iranians.

Archaeologic and genetic data support that both

Jews and Palestinians came from the ancient Canaanites,

who extensively mixed with Egyptians, Mesopotamian and

Anatolian peoples in ancient times. Thus, Palestinian-

Jewish rivalry is based in cultural and religious, but not in

genetic, differences."

http://www.rense.com/general48/Palestini...

Answer 7

anthropology is a very SOFT science. conjecture, educated guesses, hypotheses, inference, guesswork, stereotyping, flipping a coin, romanticizing,

i would love to see what good if any ever came from any anthropological studies.

physical anthro/ physical archaeology- let's go dig up a native american sacred burial ground to see what we could see.

-but we would imprison someone if they did the same at arlington national cemetery.

think about it, how would you feel if someone dug up your dead grandparents and kept their bones  in

some university lab drawers?

the point is, who cares what tools these people used or how they worshiped their gods? what is the purpose of the study. any resultant postulations are usually employed to justify one race's superiority over another.

archaeology-modern day treasure hunting

not an indiana jones fan? OK

definition of social anthropology- white western european ethnocentrists running around asking questions of non white peoples who really would rather be left alone. those Samoan interviewees that margaret mead worked so hard on admitted that they were just joking around with the white lady.

if anthropologists were anywhere near accurate, any and all american and european government foreign policy objectives would be achieved instantly.

anthro has been used as a tool by many govts

check out 'national profiles'

other than the aforementioned mead, can anyone actually name a famous anthropologist? orrrrrrrrr name one aspect of your life that was significantly better because of an anthro study?

anthro depends on psychology because if we really can't know ourselves, how the h**l can we study others?

for anthro to be a hard science. ie empirical evidence and all, psychology has to get away from the nonsense of 'naming' things. if i think chocolate will make me feel better, the idea is turned into 'chocorationalization'

let's call this 'compartmentalization'  or this 'Oedipal complex'   'tranference'   'accomodation'   that's a real winner!

perhaps both 'disciplines' can never truly be referred to as sciences.

please excuse me, i'm just 'venting'