Can we be cultural relativists without being complete ethical relativists? NO

Should anthropologists merely be amoral observers? NO

What do cultural anthropologists do? - Generally engage in participant observation – - Also use interviewing, surveying, consensuses, other - Extended stay in research site - Conduct research in local language - May develop close ties with local people

Know ethnology and ethnography

Ethnography may generalize from a limited time experience or contact with a small number of people
Ethnographer cannot see or experience everything or every perspective - Subjectivity of data

Ethnography is frequently rife with ethical dilemma

LANGUAGE
- is a human biological adaption
- We are hardwired to acquire language, but it can only be activated through society
- There may be basic principle and rules which are foundation of all languages (Chomsky – “universal grammar”)
- Words are SYMBOLS – something that stands for something else
- Since the relationship between sound and meaning is symbolic: humans can combine worlds and sounds into new, meaningful utterances that have never been heard before
- Symbols enable humans to transmit and store information (including abstract concepts) - This allows us to create and transmit culture

What is Boroditsky’s main point in “How languages shape thought?”

- Anthropologists have long been interested in the relationship between language and culture - Does language merely label or describe

Sapir-whorf hypothesis
- The claim that the culture and thought patterns of people are strongly influenced by the language they speak - Perception and understandings of time, space and matter are conditioned by the structure of a language - Nell – people are adapted through language is the main point

Whorf:
- Hopi v. English - English – time divided into 3+ verb tenses (past, present, and future) - We