Anthropology (catch all)

[goesh]

"I really believe it's time for someone to post the Social Scientific equivalent of Luther's 95 Theses to the doorway of PC academia."

A big, fat Amen! to that. Islamic terrorists already posted their thesis on the walls of the WTC and the Pentagon using jet liners.

[Bill Moore]

While no theory is perfect this one helped me make sense of Maslov's, which was obviously too rigid. The ERG explains people will sacrifice their existance needs for the good of the group or personal growth (self actualization), which is helpful in understanding terrorist/insurgent motivation. You will not get them to quit fighting by simply providing economic aid, that isn't the real issue.

http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/erg/

How the existence, relatedness, and growth theory differs from Maslow's hierarchy:

ERG allows different levels of needs to be pursued simultaneously.

Allows the order of needs to be different for different people.

If a higher level need is unfullfilled the person "may" regress to a lower level.

Bottom line it is not a rigid hierarchy, and explains a wider range of behaviors, such as the "starving artist" who may place growth above existence needs.

(this is paraphrased)

The best part of this theory to me is it refutes Maslov's, which all of us who have been in the real world outside a labatory know just doesn't apply to the behavior we see.

[120mm]

One theory that I've seen that resonates with my "verstehen" and tangentially contradicts Maslov, is the matrix that John Dalmas uses in his "The Regiment" Science Fiction novel.

There are four basic compartments

Play - Study

War - Work

For the great majority of people, "War" is restricted to a disagreement or at worst, physically fighting. For a few, "War" means the kind where people die. For the some people, "War" overlaps with "Work". For some, "War" is "War". For others, "War" overlaps with "Play". It sounds a little weird, though, to equate "Enemy" with "Playmate", but the parallels can be found, if you look for them.

Children instinctively know this. I think if you raised kids in an isolation chamber, they'd get right out and "play war" if given the chance. I'm not a psycho-babble kind of guy; this just struck a chord with me, when I heard it for the first time.

[marct]

Hey 120mm

One theory that I've seen that resonates with my "verstehen" and tangentially contradicts Maslov, is the matrix that John Dalmas uses in his "The Regiment" Science Fiction novel.

I knew there was a reason we got on so well - we're both Dalmas fans .

Children instinctively know this. I think if you raised kids in an isolation chamber, they'd get right out and "play war" if given the chance. I'm not a psycho-babble kind of guy; this just struck a chord with me, when I heard it for the first time.

I'm not sure if you are aware of this or not, but Dalmas' Matrix of the T'Sel also resonates with Tibetan Buddhism, some variants of Gnosticism (mainly 3rd century Alexandrian stuff and the Cathars), the Zurvanites and, strangely enough, with Neuro-Linguistic Programming.

I've thought about trying to work some of it into my organizational culture work (it fits really well with concepts such as the "learning organization"). I usually end up not doing so, because the Anthro stuff I use is pretty far out as far as many of the Management people are concerned and I don't want to freak them too badly .

You are certainly right about the rigidity of the Maslow work, as is Bill. It is way to "linear" in its conception of people's "programming", and it can't account for all too many observations. It think that it is a useful heuristic if we are examining populations, but tends to drop in utility when we get down to the level of individuals.

Marc

[120mm]

Dalmas, like a few other Science Fiction writers, only write "fiction" because the money is better and you don't have to be as diligent with your references, imho.

I'm also a big fan of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". I especially like Pirsig's attack on The Dialogs. It also explains why I distrust "metrics" and people who need them in order to function. I implicitly trust "The Groove" and "Gut Feelings". I suppose if you broke it down, you could demonstrate, in tangible terms, how "The Groove" works. As in the Combat Tracking thread, Tracking is just Terrain Forensics and could be demonstrated scientifically, but would that be a worthwhile expenditure of time and effort?

Which brings us to Marc's continual hinting about Anthro's pathological fear of mathematics. I have been dying to hear some examples of how one could apply math into Anthropology. Oddly enough, though I trust my "Gut", I see Mathematics as the highest form of Science. On one hand, it is a powerful tool to demonstrate reality. On the other, it is a powerful demonstration of the "rightness" of the world.

[marct]

Hi 120mm,

Dalmas, like a few other Science Fiction writers, only write "fiction" because the money is better and you don't have to be as diligent with your references, imho.

Could well be, I don't know the man, although I would love to sit down and drink a couple of pints with him.

I'm also a big fan of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". I especially like Pirsig's attack on The Dialogs. It also explains why I distrust "metrics" and people who need them in order to function. I implicitly trust "The Groove" and "Gut Feelings". I suppose if you broke it down, you could demonstrate, in tangible terms, how "The Groove" works. As in the Combat Tracking thread, Tracking is just Terrain Forensics and could be demonstrated scientifically, but would that be a worthwhile expenditure of time and effort?

Actually, it's already been done by psychologist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi in his book Flow. For Csikszentmihalyi, being "in the groove" is a balance between skill and challenge in a particular "game field" (i.e. a bounded, rule ordered set of tasks with clear win-lose settings). I've used his work to explain how certain types of ritual activity effect behaviour patterns such as looking for work.

One of the things I have been interested in doing is looking at the relationship between Flow states and basic forms of social relationships. I haven't had the chance to put that down on paper yet, though <sigh>.

Which brings us to Marc's continual hinting about Anthro's pathological fear of mathematics. I have been dying to hear some examples of how one could apply math into Anthropology. Oddly enough, though I trust my "Gut", I see Mathematics as the highest form of Science. On one hand, it is a powerful tool to demonstrate reality. On the other, it is a powerful demonstration of the "rightness" of the world.

"Hinting"? Nah, I'll make it an outright statement - many Cultural Anthropologists are terrified of any mathematics more complex than descriptive statistics. I've seen this fairly consistently for the past 10 years or so, and I suspect that a lot of people entered Cultural Anthropology so hat they wouldn't have to do any mathematics.

I find it interesting that you see "Mathematics as the highest form of Science". Personally, I would say that Mathematics is a collection of languages for describing particular components of reality and not a science at all .

If you want an example of how Anthropology could use mathematics, let me give you one that I have been struggling with for several years (I still don't have it right because I am mathematically illiterate in the applicable dialects ). I have been trying to use set theoretic topology to examine how "perception space" is created within a culture based around basic forms of social relations (they are five of them, including the null set). Now, it strikes me that each of these basic forms is fairly "stable"; probably rooted in evolved neuro-psychology, as are some of the transformation sequences between forms (e.g. Turner's Rites of Passage theory). I suspect, although I can't offer a mathematical roof, that these basic social forms are also extensible though multiple dimensions in the same way as the Platonic Solids are extensible.

This type of idea, call it a form of "cultural geometry", is really fairly old - the original versions of it were used to analyze kinship patterns in the 1920's, and Tylor used it to analyze cultural institutions back in 1888. But, in part due to the tide of Marxist and Post Modernist thought in the discipline, these works aren't being taught any more, so they are not part of the "received heritage" of many new Anthropologists. When you add in the institutional reality of getting degrees today, you also have to remember that no one who wants to go to graduate school can afford to take classes where they wil get poor marks. This is even worse in graduate school where you can be kicked out of your program for getting less than a B-. So, the end result is that intellectual exploration is not encouraged and you cannot afford to try and get the tools that are needed.

Marc

[selil]

I find it interesting that you see "Mathematics as the highest form of Science". Personally, I would say that Mathematics is a collection of languages for describing particular components of reality and not a science at all .

I'll jump on that band wagon. Science is the systematic study of something. Biological science is biology, the study of faith is theology, etc.. There is no Mathology though you have mathematics it is basically a just another language like Spanish or English. When I put forth that technology is more of a science than math you should see the gray beards sputter.

I really like the Wikipedia article for science where it says "Mathmatics is sometimes classified in a third grouping, called formal science..." I like that "sometimes"...

[120mm]

This type of idea, call it a form of "cultural geometry", is really fairly old - the original versions of it were used to analyze kinship patterns in the 1920's, and Tylor used it to analyze cultural institutions back in 1888. But, in part due to the tide of Marxist and Post Modernist thought in the discipline, these works aren't being taught any more, so they are not part of the "received heritage" of many new Anthropologists. When you add in the institutional reality of getting degrees today, you also have to remember that no one who wants to go to graduate school can afford to take classes where they wil get poor marks. This is even worse in graduate school where you can be kicked out of your program for getting less than a B-. So, the end result is that intellectual exploration is not encouraged and you cannot afford to try and get the tools that are needed.

Marc

So... what stops an individual from conducting "Guerilla Learning". That is, deciding what they Need To Know(tm) beforehand, mastering the skill, and then taking the classes in order to get the credit.

The problem being, you can't be a scientist without the sheepskin. Especially if you want to work for the people who are in charge of War.

A perfect world would allow someone to apply for the job by demonstrating skill and mastery rather than "punched tickets".

[120mm]

Actually, it's already been done by psychologist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi in his book Flow. For [SIZE=-1]Csikszentmihalyi, being "in the groove" is a balance between skill and challenge in a particular "game field" (i.e. a bounded, rule ordered set of tasks with clear win-lose settings). I've used his work to explain how certain types of ritual activity effect behaviour patterns such as looking for work.

One of the things I have been interested in doing is looking at the relationship between Flow states and basic forms of social relationships. I haven't had the chance to put that down on paper yet, though <sigh>.

Marc

I will attest to that. When I am "on", women make eye contact, smile and otherwise flirt. If I am not "on", I don't exist, in their eyes.

Likewise with mechanical things. I sometimes fabricate parts for machines, and if I am "happy", nothing goes wrong. I can work for hours and even my sloppy tries end up being "right".

Same thing with tracking or navigation. I've followed critters or folks without even looking for sign. Or at a map, if I need to get somewhere.