What do you think?
Rate this book
Raza: Ciencia y Politica
Book by Benedict, Ruth
- GenresAnthropologyPolitics
214 pages, Paperback
First published January 28, 1945
About the author
Ruth Benedict
81 books144 followersRuth Fulton Benedict, noted anthropologist, studied Native American and Japanese cultures.
Ruth Fulton Benedict, a folklorist, attended Vassar College, and graduated in 1909.
She entered graduate school at Columbia University in 1919 under Franz Boas. She received her Philosophiae Doctor and joined the faculty in 1923. She perhaps shared a romantic relationship with Margaret Mead, and Marvin Opler ranked among her colleagues.
Work of Ruth Fulton Benedict clearly evidences point of view of Franz Boas, her teacher, mentor, and the father. The passionate humanism of Boas, her mentor, affected affected Ruth Benedict, who continued it in her research and writing.
Ruth Fulton Benedict held the post of president of the association and also a prominent member of the folklore society. People recognized this first such woman as a prominent leader of a learned profession. From the limited confines of culture-trait diffusion, this transitional figure redirected folklore, her field, away towards theories of integral performance to the interpretation of culture, as people can view. The relationships among personality, art, language, and culture insist that no trait existed in isolation or self-sufficiency; she champions this theory in her Patterns of Culture in 1934.
Ruth Fulton Benedict, a folklorist, attended Vassar College, and graduated in 1909.
She entered graduate school at Columbia University in 1919 under Franz Boas. She received her Philosophiae Doctor and joined the faculty in 1923. She perhaps shared a romantic relationship with Margaret Mead, and Marvin Opler ranked among her colleagues.
Work of Ruth Fulton Benedict clearly evidences point of view of Franz Boas, her teacher, mentor, and the father. The passionate humanism of Boas, her mentor, affected affected Ruth Benedict, who continued it in her research and writing.
Ruth Fulton Benedict held the post of president of the association and also a prominent member of the folklore society. People recognized this first such woman as a prominent leader of a learned profession. From the limited confines of culture-trait diffusion, this transitional figure redirected folklore, her field, away towards theories of integral performance to the interpretation of culture, as people can view. The relationships among personality, art, language, and culture insist that no trait existed in isolation or self-sufficiency; she champions this theory in her Patterns of Culture in 1934.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
June 27, 2013
Ruth Benedict is one of those rare, gifted, uncluttered intellects that shine through time. Compare the text of this with the included pamphlet “Races of Mankind” (which also lists her on the by-line, but was pretty clearly written by the junior colleague). This is the third book by hers I’ve read (I started with The Chrysanthemum and the Sword, and thought it was so good, I found a copy of Patterns of Culture, and then this book). Granted, I had only one course in cultural anthropology in college; but why did I never hear about her (I remember reading Mead, Kroeber, and Boas)? Why didn’t she make “full” with any of these books? Were her male colleagues at Columbia total idiots?
June 14, 2024
THE FAMED ANTHROPOLOGIST LOOKS CRITICALLY AT “RACE”
Ruth Fulton Benedict (1887-1948) was an American anthropologist and folklorist, who studied under Franz Boas, and was close friends with Margaret Mead.
She wrote in the first chapter of this 1959 book, “It is essential, if we are to live in this modern world, that we should understand racism and be able to judge its arguments. We must know the facts first of race, and then of this doctrine that has made use of them. For racism is an ‘ism’ to which everyone in the world today is exposed; for or against, we must take sides... and the history of the future will differ according to the decision which we make.” (Pg. 5)
She observes, “human history is a vastly more complicated thing than a mere record of the distribution of anthropomorphic measurements, and cultural achievements are not mechanically transmitted and guaranteed by any racial inheritance.” (Pg. 18)
She points out, “Even before Darwin, there were learned students who challenged this idea that each race was a separate entity… It was immediately evident that mankind did not include a series of fully developed species, the proper criterion for which was, according to Darwin, sterility or the production of sterile offspring if they were crossed. Nothing was more obvious than the fact that fertile children were born from the mating of even the most extreme types of the White race with the most extreme types of Negro or Mongolian; intermixture of different ethnic groups had occurred constantly in history…” (Pg. 25)
She notes, “The most obvious differences between apes and men is that between the hairy coat of the anthropoids and the human skin. Of all human races the Mongoloids are the freest of body hair.; the Whites… are the hairiest. The anthropoids have thin lips, and the most contrastingly ‘human’ development is the full lips of the Negro; Whites have much more ‘primitive’ lips. Neither by the test of hairiness nor by the test of lips would the Whites belong to that branch of the human race anatomically farthest removed from the ancestral type.” (Pg. 67)
She suggests, “In all stocks individuals differ in ability, and civilization will always be the poorer if we close the gates of opportunity to those of superior ability whatever their blood may be.” (Pg. 80)
She summarizes, “Race… is not the modern superstition. But racism is. Racism is the dogma that one ethnic group is condemned by Nature to hereditary inferiority and another group is destined to hereditary superiority. It is the dogma that the hope of civilization depends upon eliminating some races and keeping others pure. It is the dogma that one race has carried progress with it throughout human history and can alone ensure future progress.” (Pg. 98)
Of ‘intelligence tests,’ she comments, “The differences did not arise because people were from the North or the South, or because they were white or black, but because of differences in income, education, cultural advantages, and other opportunities.” (Pg. 183)
This book will be of great interest for those studying the concept of “racial”/ethnic differences among human populations.
Ruth Fulton Benedict (1887-1948) was an American anthropologist and folklorist, who studied under Franz Boas, and was close friends with Margaret Mead.
She wrote in the first chapter of this 1959 book, “It is essential, if we are to live in this modern world, that we should understand racism and be able to judge its arguments. We must know the facts first of race, and then of this doctrine that has made use of them. For racism is an ‘ism’ to which everyone in the world today is exposed; for or against, we must take sides... and the history of the future will differ according to the decision which we make.” (Pg. 5)
She observes, “human history is a vastly more complicated thing than a mere record of the distribution of anthropomorphic measurements, and cultural achievements are not mechanically transmitted and guaranteed by any racial inheritance.” (Pg. 18)
She points out, “Even before Darwin, there were learned students who challenged this idea that each race was a separate entity… It was immediately evident that mankind did not include a series of fully developed species, the proper criterion for which was, according to Darwin, sterility or the production of sterile offspring if they were crossed. Nothing was more obvious than the fact that fertile children were born from the mating of even the most extreme types of the White race with the most extreme types of Negro or Mongolian; intermixture of different ethnic groups had occurred constantly in history…” (Pg. 25)
She notes, “The most obvious differences between apes and men is that between the hairy coat of the anthropoids and the human skin. Of all human races the Mongoloids are the freest of body hair.; the Whites… are the hairiest. The anthropoids have thin lips, and the most contrastingly ‘human’ development is the full lips of the Negro; Whites have much more ‘primitive’ lips. Neither by the test of hairiness nor by the test of lips would the Whites belong to that branch of the human race anatomically farthest removed from the ancestral type.” (Pg. 67)
She suggests, “In all stocks individuals differ in ability, and civilization will always be the poorer if we close the gates of opportunity to those of superior ability whatever their blood may be.” (Pg. 80)
She summarizes, “Race… is not the modern superstition. But racism is. Racism is the dogma that one ethnic group is condemned by Nature to hereditary inferiority and another group is destined to hereditary superiority. It is the dogma that the hope of civilization depends upon eliminating some races and keeping others pure. It is the dogma that one race has carried progress with it throughout human history and can alone ensure future progress.” (Pg. 98)
Of ‘intelligence tests,’ she comments, “The differences did not arise because people were from the North or the South, or because they were white or black, but because of differences in income, education, cultural advantages, and other opportunities.” (Pg. 183)
This book will be of great interest for those studying the concept of “racial”/ethnic differences among human populations.
Read
June 7, 2017read this for work. Still relevant at moments, other times hopelessly out of date.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews