Kultur versus Natur
While German anthropologists rejected the theory of evolution, there was still an interest in understanding the relationship between Kultur and Natur. They rejected evolutionism because it “placed steric categories of human nature into a fluid continuum…” (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 69). Nature, to German anthropologists before the 20th century was perceived to be a “static system of categories that allowed them, in their study of natural peoples, to grasp an unchanging essence of humanity, rather than the ephemeral changes that historians recoded” (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 62). Furthermore, they understood that nature functioned as a timeless oppositive to culture and history (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 7). In addition, “[a]nthropologists believed that in natural peoples they would be able to glimpse human nature directly, unmasked by the complications of history or culture” (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 20). Similar to the theory of evolution, German anthropologists “denounced Naturphilisophie because it viewed nature as becoming rather than being, a view antithetical to the concept of nature that anthropologists wanted to use against historical humanism” (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 63). In sharp contrast to cultural peoples, natural peoples lacked writing, culture, and history (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 20). While German historians believed …show more content…
Would we ourselves have become what we are outside Europe? He who placed us here, and others there, gave to them as much right to happiness in this life as he gave to us. Happiness is an internal state; its standard or determination, therefore, is not outside ourselves but rather within the breast of every individual. No other person has the right to constrain me to feel as he does, nor the power to impart to me his mode of perception. No other person can, in short, transform my existence and identity into his…” (1969, p.
While German anthropologists rejected the theory of evolution, there was still an interest in understanding the relationship between Kultur and Natur. They rejected evolutionism because it “placed steric categories of human nature into a fluid continuum…” (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 69). Nature, to German anthropologists before the 20th century was perceived to be a “static system of categories that allowed them, in their study of natural peoples, to grasp an unchanging essence of humanity, rather than the ephemeral changes that historians recoded” (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 62). Furthermore, they understood that nature functioned as a timeless oppositive to culture and history (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 7). In addition, “[a]nthropologists believed that in natural peoples they would be able to glimpse human nature directly, unmasked by the complications of history or culture” (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 20). Similar to the theory of evolution, German anthropologists “denounced Naturphilisophie because it viewed nature as becoming rather than being, a view antithetical to the concept of nature that anthropologists wanted to use against historical humanism” (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 63). In sharp contrast to cultural peoples, natural peoples lacked writing, culture, and history (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 20). While German historians believed …show more content…
Would we ourselves have become what we are outside Europe? He who placed us here, and others there, gave to them as much right to happiness in this life as he gave to us. Happiness is an internal state; its standard or determination, therefore, is not outside ourselves but rather within the breast of every individual. No other person has the right to constrain me to feel as he does, nor the power to impart to me his mode of perception. No other person can, in short, transform my existence and identity into his…” (1969, p.