What do you think?
Rate this book
L'uomo primitivo
Un classico della scienza antropologica che confuta definitivamente le varie teorie razziali e razziste. Sulla base di un'analisi comparativa senza confini - dai Vedda di Ceylon ai negri d'America, dagli Eschimesi alle tribù della California, agli Europei in varie epoche - Boas dimostra che razza, cultura e lingua sono variabili indipendenti, ossia che ad una stessa razza può corrispondere una o altra lingua, una o altra cultura e viceversa.
233 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1911
21 people are currently reading
505 people want to read
About the author
Franz Boas
382 books92 followersFranz Uri Boas was a German-American anthropologist and a pioneer of modern anthropology who has been called the "Father of American Anthropology". His work is associated with the movements known as historical particularism and cultural relativism.
Studying in Germany, Boas was awarded a doctorate in 1881 in physics while also studying geography. He then participated in a geographical expedition to northern Canada, where he became fascinated with the culture and language of the Baffin Island Inuit. He went on to do field work with the indigenous cultures and languages of the Pacific Northwest. In 1887 he emigrated to the United States, where he first worked as a museum curator at the Smithsonian, and in 1899 became a professor of anthropology at Columbia University, where he remained for the rest of his career. Through his students, many of whom went on to found anthropology departments and research programmes inspired by their mentor, Boas profoundly influenced the development of American anthropology. Among his many significant students were Alfred Louis Kroeber, Alexander Goldenweiser, Ruth Benedict, Edward Sapir, Margaret Mead, Zora Neale Hurston, and Gilberto Freyre.
Boas was one of the most prominent opponents of the then-popular ideologies of scientific racism, the idea that race is a biological concept and that human behavior is best understood through the typology of biological characteristics. In a series of groundbreaking studies of skeletal anatomy, he showed that cranial shape and size was highly malleable depending on environmental factors such as health and nutrition, in contrast to the claims by racial anthropologists of the day that held head shape to be a stable racial trait. Boas also worked to demonstrate that differences in human behavior are not primarily determined by innate biological dispositions but are largely the result of cultural differences acquired through social learning. In this way, Boas introduced culture as the primary concept for describing differences in behavior between human groups, and as the central analytical concept of anthropology.
Among Boas's main contributions to anthropological thought was his rejection of the then-popular evolutionary approaches to the study of culture, which saw all societies progressing through a set of hierarchic technological and cultural stages, with Western European culture at the summit. Boas argued that culture developed historically through the interactions of groups of people and the diffusion of ideas and that consequently there was no process towards continuously "higher" cultural forms. This insight led Boas to reject the "stage"-based organization of ethnological museums, instead preferring to order items on display based on the affinity and proximity of the cultural groups in question.
Boas also introduced the idea of cultural relativism, which holds that cultures cannot be objectively ranked as higher or lower, or better or more correct, but that all humans see the world through the lens of their own culture, and judge it according to their own culturally acquired norms. For Boas, the object of anthropology was to understand the way in which culture conditioned people to understand and interact with the world in different ways and to do this it was necessary to gain an understanding of the language and cultural practices of the people studied. By uniting the disciplines of archaeology, the study of material culture and history, and physical anthropology, the study of variation in human anatomy, with ethnology, the study of cultural variation of customs, and descriptive linguistics, the study of unwritten indigenous languages, Boas created the four-field subdivision of anthropology which became prominent in American anthropology in the 20th century.
Studying in Germany, Boas was awarded a doctorate in 1881 in physics while also studying geography. He then participated in a geographical expedition to northern Canada, where he became fascinated with the culture and language of the Baffin Island Inuit. He went on to do field work with the indigenous cultures and languages of the Pacific Northwest. In 1887 he emigrated to the United States, where he first worked as a museum curator at the Smithsonian, and in 1899 became a professor of anthropology at Columbia University, where he remained for the rest of his career. Through his students, many of whom went on to found anthropology departments and research programmes inspired by their mentor, Boas profoundly influenced the development of American anthropology. Among his many significant students were Alfred Louis Kroeber, Alexander Goldenweiser, Ruth Benedict, Edward Sapir, Margaret Mead, Zora Neale Hurston, and Gilberto Freyre.
Boas was one of the most prominent opponents of the then-popular ideologies of scientific racism, the idea that race is a biological concept and that human behavior is best understood through the typology of biological characteristics. In a series of groundbreaking studies of skeletal anatomy, he showed that cranial shape and size was highly malleable depending on environmental factors such as health and nutrition, in contrast to the claims by racial anthropologists of the day that held head shape to be a stable racial trait. Boas also worked to demonstrate that differences in human behavior are not primarily determined by innate biological dispositions but are largely the result of cultural differences acquired through social learning. In this way, Boas introduced culture as the primary concept for describing differences in behavior between human groups, and as the central analytical concept of anthropology.
Among Boas's main contributions to anthropological thought was his rejection of the then-popular evolutionary approaches to the study of culture, which saw all societies progressing through a set of hierarchic technological and cultural stages, with Western European culture at the summit. Boas argued that culture developed historically through the interactions of groups of people and the diffusion of ideas and that consequently there was no process towards continuously "higher" cultural forms. This insight led Boas to reject the "stage"-based organization of ethnological museums, instead preferring to order items on display based on the affinity and proximity of the cultural groups in question.
Boas also introduced the idea of cultural relativism, which holds that cultures cannot be objectively ranked as higher or lower, or better or more correct, but that all humans see the world through the lens of their own culture, and judge it according to their own culturally acquired norms. For Boas, the object of anthropology was to understand the way in which culture conditioned people to understand and interact with the world in different ways and to do this it was necessary to gain an understanding of the language and cultural practices of the people studied. By uniting the disciplines of archaeology, the study of material culture and history, and physical anthropology, the study of variation in human anatomy, with ethnology, the study of cultural variation of customs, and descriptive linguistics, the study of unwritten indigenous languages, Boas created the four-field subdivision of anthropology which became prominent in American anthropology in the 20th century.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
August 13, 2015
This book is the compilation of a series of lectures delivered and revised between 1895 and 1910. As such it gives a very good review of the state of understanding of academic anthropologists on the issues of the relative superiority of the various human races and the differences of the mental processes between men in highly civilized as opposed to primitive societies.
Franz Boas comes down resolutely on the side of the equality of all races. He also argues that the mental processes of primitive and civilized man are the same. The civilized the man has the benefit of more education and access to books. However, the civilized man essentially uses the same mental processes to organize information, analyze and then draw conclusions.
The fact is that the propositions that Boaz argued for in the first decade of the 20th century become articles of faith in our world. Reading this book allows us to see in other words how the ideas we now take for granted were proposed and defended in another era.
I am sure like everyone else we are glad to see that Boaz's viewpoint has become the norm. Because this book however defends essentially what we have all believed in, it really tells us very little new. As you the reader follows Boaz's arguments one is distressed to see how many 19th Century academics in fact did believe in racial supremacy and how vigorously they defended their views. As several have observed after the defeat of the Nazis perhaps we only escaped by the skin of our teeth.
Franz Boas comes down resolutely on the side of the equality of all races. He also argues that the mental processes of primitive and civilized man are the same. The civilized the man has the benefit of more education and access to books. However, the civilized man essentially uses the same mental processes to organize information, analyze and then draw conclusions.
The fact is that the propositions that Boaz argued for in the first decade of the 20th century become articles of faith in our world. Reading this book allows us to see in other words how the ideas we now take for granted were proposed and defended in another era.
I am sure like everyone else we are glad to see that Boaz's viewpoint has become the norm. Because this book however defends essentially what we have all believed in, it really tells us very little new. As you the reader follows Boaz's arguments one is distressed to see how many 19th Century academics in fact did believe in racial supremacy and how vigorously they defended their views. As several have observed after the defeat of the Nazis perhaps we only escaped by the skin of our teeth.
May 30, 2024
IS THERE “NO FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE” IN THE THINKING OF “PRIMITIVE” AND “CIVILIZED” MAN?
Franz Uri Boas (1858-1942) was a German-born American who has been called the "Father of American Anthropology.” His students included A. L. Kroeber, Ruth Benedict, Edward Sapir, Margaret Mead, Zora Neale Hurston, etc. [NOTE: page numbers below refer to a 254-page 1965 paperback edition.]
He wrote in the Preface to this revised 1938 edition, “Since 1911, when the first edition of [this book] was published much work has been done in all the branches of science that have to be considered in the problem with which the book deals… For this reason a large part of the book had to be rewritten and rearranged.” (Pg. 17)
He continues, “The first statement of some of the conclusions reached in the book were made in an address delivered by the author… in 1895… The result of [my] studies has been an ever-increasing certainty of his conclusions. There is no fundamental difference in the ways of thinking of primitive and civilized man. A close connection between race and personality has never been established.” (Pg. 17) He adds in the Introduction, “Let our minds go back a few thousand years… At this period the ancestors of the races that are today among the most highly civilized were in no way superior to primitive man as we find him now in regions that have not come into contact with modern civilization. Was the civilization attained by these ancient people of such a character as to allow us to claim for them a genius superior to that of any other race?” (Pg. 22)
He observes, “The rapid dissemination of Europeans over the whole world destroyed all promising beginnings which had arisen in various regions. Thus no race except that of eastern Asia was given a chance to develop independently. The spread of the European race cut short the growth of the existing germs without regard to the mental aptitude of the people among whom it was developing.” (Pg. 29)
He suggests, “it must be strongly emphasized that the races we are accustomed to call higher races are not by any means and in all respect farthest removed from the animal… the European shares lower characteristics with the Australian, both retaining in the strongest degree the hairiness of the animal ancestor…” (Pg. 101)
He notes, “The reason for a lack of close correlation between brain-weight and mental faculties is not far to seek. The functioning of the brain depends upon the nerve cells and fibers, which do not constitute, by any means, the whole mass of the brain. A brain with many cells and complex connections between the cells may contain less connective tissue than another one of simpler nervous structure… if there is a close correlation between form and ability, it must be looked for rather in the morphological traits of the brains than in its size.” (Pg. 104)
He points out, “The social status of most members of our society is more stable, so far as the acquiring of the barest necessities of life is concerned, so that exceptional conditions do not prevail often; but nobody would maintain that the majority of civilized men are always prepared to meet emergencies. The economic depression of 1929 and the following years has shown how ill prepared a large part of our population is to meet an emergency of such magnitude. We may recognize a difference in the degree of improvidence caused by the difference of social form, but not a specific difference between lower and higher types of man.” (Pg. 127)
He explains, “The groups of ideas expressed by specific word-stems show very material differences in different languages, and do not conform by any means to the same principles of classification. To take the example of ‘water.’ In Eskimo, ‘water’ is only fresh water for drinking; sea-water is a different term and concept. As another example of the same kind, the words for ‘snow’ in Eskimo may be given. Here we find one word expressing ‘snow on the ground’; another one, ‘falling snow’; a third one, ‘drifting snow’; a fourth one, ‘a snowdrift.’ In the same language the seal in different conditions is expressed by a variety of terms. One word is the general term for ‘seal’’ another one signifies the ‘seal basking in the sun’; a third one, a ‘seal floating on a piece of ice’; not to mention the many names for the seals of different ages and for male and female.” (Pg. 191)
He states, “The term race, as applied to human types, is vague. It can have a biological significance only when a race represents a uniform, closely inbred group, in which all family lines are alike---as in pure breeds of domesticated animals. These conditions are never realized in human types and impossible in large populations.” (Pg. 227)
This book will be of great interest to those studying the historical development of anthropology.
Franz Uri Boas (1858-1942) was a German-born American who has been called the "Father of American Anthropology.” His students included A. L. Kroeber, Ruth Benedict, Edward Sapir, Margaret Mead, Zora Neale Hurston, etc. [NOTE: page numbers below refer to a 254-page 1965 paperback edition.]
He wrote in the Preface to this revised 1938 edition, “Since 1911, when the first edition of [this book] was published much work has been done in all the branches of science that have to be considered in the problem with which the book deals… For this reason a large part of the book had to be rewritten and rearranged.” (Pg. 17)
He continues, “The first statement of some of the conclusions reached in the book were made in an address delivered by the author… in 1895… The result of [my] studies has been an ever-increasing certainty of his conclusions. There is no fundamental difference in the ways of thinking of primitive and civilized man. A close connection between race and personality has never been established.” (Pg. 17) He adds in the Introduction, “Let our minds go back a few thousand years… At this period the ancestors of the races that are today among the most highly civilized were in no way superior to primitive man as we find him now in regions that have not come into contact with modern civilization. Was the civilization attained by these ancient people of such a character as to allow us to claim for them a genius superior to that of any other race?” (Pg. 22)
He observes, “The rapid dissemination of Europeans over the whole world destroyed all promising beginnings which had arisen in various regions. Thus no race except that of eastern Asia was given a chance to develop independently. The spread of the European race cut short the growth of the existing germs without regard to the mental aptitude of the people among whom it was developing.” (Pg. 29)
He suggests, “it must be strongly emphasized that the races we are accustomed to call higher races are not by any means and in all respect farthest removed from the animal… the European shares lower characteristics with the Australian, both retaining in the strongest degree the hairiness of the animal ancestor…” (Pg. 101)
He notes, “The reason for a lack of close correlation between brain-weight and mental faculties is not far to seek. The functioning of the brain depends upon the nerve cells and fibers, which do not constitute, by any means, the whole mass of the brain. A brain with many cells and complex connections between the cells may contain less connective tissue than another one of simpler nervous structure… if there is a close correlation between form and ability, it must be looked for rather in the morphological traits of the brains than in its size.” (Pg. 104)
He points out, “The social status of most members of our society is more stable, so far as the acquiring of the barest necessities of life is concerned, so that exceptional conditions do not prevail often; but nobody would maintain that the majority of civilized men are always prepared to meet emergencies. The economic depression of 1929 and the following years has shown how ill prepared a large part of our population is to meet an emergency of such magnitude. We may recognize a difference in the degree of improvidence caused by the difference of social form, but not a specific difference between lower and higher types of man.” (Pg. 127)
He explains, “The groups of ideas expressed by specific word-stems show very material differences in different languages, and do not conform by any means to the same principles of classification. To take the example of ‘water.’ In Eskimo, ‘water’ is only fresh water for drinking; sea-water is a different term and concept. As another example of the same kind, the words for ‘snow’ in Eskimo may be given. Here we find one word expressing ‘snow on the ground’; another one, ‘falling snow’; a third one, ‘drifting snow’; a fourth one, ‘a snowdrift.’ In the same language the seal in different conditions is expressed by a variety of terms. One word is the general term for ‘seal’’ another one signifies the ‘seal basking in the sun’; a third one, a ‘seal floating on a piece of ice’; not to mention the many names for the seals of different ages and for male and female.” (Pg. 191)
He states, “The term race, as applied to human types, is vague. It can have a biological significance only when a race represents a uniform, closely inbred group, in which all family lines are alike---as in pure breeds of domesticated animals. These conditions are never realized in human types and impossible in large populations.” (Pg. 227)
This book will be of great interest to those studying the historical development of anthropology.
October 3, 2023
1911'de ilk baskısını yapan bu kültürel antropoloji klasiğini Franz Boas, 1938'e değin sürekli güncellemiş; bu çeviri de son baskısına dayanıyor. Boas, ırkçı ve sömürgeci zırvaların sözde bilimsel temellerini, müthiş bir zeka ve titizlikle darmadağın ediyor. Medeni/ilkel ayrımının çok da sağlam olmadığını göstermesi bir yana, bu kitap özünde, rasyonel düşüncenin perspektif değiştirebilme yetisiyle, yani toleransla ilgili olduğunu da anlatıyor. Ancak güzel çıkarımlara varabilmek için sabırlı olmanız gerek, çünkü çok da kolay bir kitap değil. Birkaç bariz hatalı kelime seçimi hariç, iyi bir çeviri.
January 6, 2026
This book's excellence is not at how correct it is comparing with the modern Anthropology. Instead, its value shows in how little of information the author based his inference on. It is published in 1910 -- just 50 some years after Darwin published his On the Origin of Species, and 20 years after the discovery of Java Man, and 40 years before the DNA was discovered! However, with meticulous scientific analysis, Boas gave the assertions that influenced the progress of Anthropology for more than a century.
It's also a pivotal work against racism. Boas clearly showed that no race is inherently superior.
It's also a pivotal work against racism. Boas clearly showed that no race is inherently superior.
Want to read
May 21, 2021
October 19, 2023
Influential!
"The Mind of Primitive Man" by Franz Boas is a seminal work in the field of anthropology, and its significance endures to this day. Published in 1911, this book represents a pioneering effort to challenge prevailing notions of racial superiority and cultural evolution in early 20th-century America. Boas, a highly influential figure in the development of modern anthropology, argued for the cultural relativism that is now widely accepted in the discipline.
Boas begins by examining the prevailing theories of his time, which often categorized human societies on a hierarchical scale based on their perceived level of development. He vehemently critiques the idea that certain groups of people are biologically superior or inferior to others. Instead, he emphasizes the role of environmental factors and historical context in shaping the cultures of various societies.
One of the most significant contributions of "The Mind of Primitive Man" is Boas's concept of cultural relativism. He contends that to understand and appreciate the practices and beliefs of any society, one must view them within their unique cultural context, rather than imposing external judgments based on one's own cultural norms. This idea has since become a fundamental tenet of modern anthropology, influencing the way scholars study and interpret other cultures.
The book is structured thematically, exploring topics such as language, art, myth, and religion among various indigenous societies, including the Kwakiutl, Eskimo, and Native American tribes. Boas's approach is heavily rooted in ethnography, and he presents a wealth of detailed observations and case studies to support his arguments. His emphasis on empirical research and the collection of accurate data was a significant departure from earlier armchair theorizing.
In "The Mind of Primitive Man," Boas also delves into the importance of cultural diffusion, or the spread of cultural elements between societies, as opposed to the deterministic concept of cultural evolution. He shows how various cultures interact and influence each other, leading to complex and dynamic cultural landscapes.
While this book is celebrated for its groundbreaking ideas, it's important to recognize that it reflects the historical context of its time, and some aspects of Boas's work have been critiqued in the light of contemporary understanding and methodology in anthropology. Nevertheless, the lasting impact of "The Mind of Primitive Man" on the field of anthropology cannot be overstated. It set the stage for the rejection of racial stereotypes and ethnocentrism in anthropological research, paving the way for more respectful and equitable approaches to the study of human cultures.
In summary, "The Mind of Primitive Man" is a foundational text in the field of anthropology, challenging prevailing notions of cultural superiority and evolution while championing the principles of cultural relativism and empirical research. It remains a vital read for anyone interested in the history and development of anthropological thought.
"The Mind of Primitive Man" by Franz Boas is a seminal work in the field of anthropology, and its significance endures to this day. Published in 1911, this book represents a pioneering effort to challenge prevailing notions of racial superiority and cultural evolution in early 20th-century America. Boas, a highly influential figure in the development of modern anthropology, argued for the cultural relativism that is now widely accepted in the discipline.
Boas begins by examining the prevailing theories of his time, which often categorized human societies on a hierarchical scale based on their perceived level of development. He vehemently critiques the idea that certain groups of people are biologically superior or inferior to others. Instead, he emphasizes the role of environmental factors and historical context in shaping the cultures of various societies.
One of the most significant contributions of "The Mind of Primitive Man" is Boas's concept of cultural relativism. He contends that to understand and appreciate the practices and beliefs of any society, one must view them within their unique cultural context, rather than imposing external judgments based on one's own cultural norms. This idea has since become a fundamental tenet of modern anthropology, influencing the way scholars study and interpret other cultures.
The book is structured thematically, exploring topics such as language, art, myth, and religion among various indigenous societies, including the Kwakiutl, Eskimo, and Native American tribes. Boas's approach is heavily rooted in ethnography, and he presents a wealth of detailed observations and case studies to support his arguments. His emphasis on empirical research and the collection of accurate data was a significant departure from earlier armchair theorizing.
In "The Mind of Primitive Man," Boas also delves into the importance of cultural diffusion, or the spread of cultural elements between societies, as opposed to the deterministic concept of cultural evolution. He shows how various cultures interact and influence each other, leading to complex and dynamic cultural landscapes.
While this book is celebrated for its groundbreaking ideas, it's important to recognize that it reflects the historical context of its time, and some aspects of Boas's work have been critiqued in the light of contemporary understanding and methodology in anthropology. Nevertheless, the lasting impact of "The Mind of Primitive Man" on the field of anthropology cannot be overstated. It set the stage for the rejection of racial stereotypes and ethnocentrism in anthropological research, paving the way for more respectful and equitable approaches to the study of human cultures.
In summary, "The Mind of Primitive Man" is a foundational text in the field of anthropology, challenging prevailing notions of cultural superiority and evolution while championing the principles of cultural relativism and empirical research. It remains a vital read for anyone interested in the history and development of anthropological thought.
Read
July 29, 2012Interessante foi perceber como o autor com um discurso evolucionista, fruto do seu tempo é claro, contesta a visão orgânica da cultura e lança novas diretrizes para a análise da diversidade humana. Contesta veementemente a relação entre raça e cultura dando um gostinho amargo para os discursos fascistas que ganham força na metade do século XX.
November 19, 2017
This is a classic and should be read as a period piece. For more information see the Wikipedia article.
May 3, 2019
What was this book? Very racist!
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews