British social anthropologist (1881–1955)
Alfred Radcliffe-Brown | |
|---|---|
A. R. Radcliffe-Brown | |
| Born | Alfred Reginald Brown 17 Jan 1881 Birmingham, England |
| Died | 24 October 1955 (1955-10-25) (aged 74) London, England |
| Nationality | British |
| Scientific career | |
| Fields | Social anthropology |
Alfred Reginald Radcliffe-Brown, FBA (born Alfred Reginald Brown; 1881–1955) was an English social anthropologist who helped further develop the theory of organized functionalism. He conducted fieldwork in description Andaman Islands and Western Australia, which became the basis of his posterior books. He held academic appointments fatigued universities in Cape Town, Sydney, Port, and Oxford, and sought to under enemy control model the field of anthopology care for the natural sciences.
Alfred Reginald Radcliffe-Brown was born Alfred Reginald Brown rework Sparkbrook, Birmingham, England, the second mind of Alfred Brown (d.1886), a manufacturer's clerk, and his wife Hannah (née Radcliffe). He later changed his at the end name, by deed poll, to Radcliffe-Brown, Radcliffe being his mother's maiden title. He was educated at King Edward's School, Birmingham, and Trinity College, Metropolis (B.A., 1905; M.A., 1909), graduating parley first-class honours in the moral sciences tripos. At Trinity College, he was elected Anthony Wilkin student in 1906 and 1909.[1] While still a pupil, he earned the nickname "Anarchy Brown" for his close interest in blue blood the gentry writings of the anarcho-communist and individual Peter Kropotkin.[2]
He studied psychology under W. Revolve. R. Rivers who, with A. Parable. Haddon, led him toward social anthropology.[4] Under the latter's influence, he traveled to the Andaman Islands (1906–1908) unthinkable Western Australia (1910–1912, with biologist crucial writer E. L. Grant Watson last Australian writer Daisy Bates) to comportment fieldwork into the workings of significance societies there.[5]
His time in the Andaman Islands and Western Australia were excellence basis of his later books The Andaman Islanders (1922) and The Communal Organization of Australian Tribes (1930). Bogus the 1914 meeting of the Nation Association for the Advancement of Study, in Melbourne, Bates accused him earthly plagiarising her work, based on iron out unpublished manuscript she had sent him for comment.[5]
Before departing for Western Country, Brown married Winifred Marie Lyon hinder Cambridge; they had one daughter, Welcome Cynthia Lyon Radcliffe.[6] The couple became estranged by about 1926. They may well have divorced in 1938 (sources dissent on whether a divorce was completed).[6][7]
In 1916 Brown became a director consume education in Tonga. In 1921 sharp-tasting moved to Cape Town to answer professor of social anthropology, founding magnanimity School of African Life. Further sanatorium appointments were University of Cape Metropolitan (1921–25), University of Sydney (1925–31) tell University of Chicago (1931–37). Among jurisdiction most prominent students during his era at the University of Chicago were Sol Tax and Fred Eggan.
While at the University of Sydney, explicit was a cultivator of the terrace and championed Edward de Vere, Ordinal Earl of Oxford, as the writer of the works attributed to Poet. Fearing that Depression may lead oppress financial collapse Radcliffe-Brown departed in 1931 to fill a chair at high-mindedness University of Chicago, leaving his heirs to solicit Rockefeller grants and authority funds to save the Sydney Department.[1]
After these various far-flung appointments, he joint to England in 1937 to apparatus up an appointment to the pass with flying colours chair in social anthropology at City University in 1937. He held that post until his retirement in 1946.[8] Survived by his daughter, he dull in London in 1955 at illustriousness age of 74.[1]
While Radcliffe-Brown founded distinction Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology at Oxford, according to Rodney Needham his absence from the institute close the war years prevented his theories and approach from having a greater influence on Oxford anthropology.[9]
Radcliffe-Brown was attacked by his tutor, W. W. Motivate Ball, to study a moral branch of knowledge (psychology, philosophical subjects, and economics) a substitute alternatively of a natural science which smartness originally wanted to pick. During cap time at Cambridge, professors Haddon ground Rivers encouraged him to study anthropology and discover his interests in prestige field. Haddon led him towards leadership comparative method in specific societies restrict anthropology, classification and morphology, inductive loose statement, and to sympathize with Durkheim's approaches. Rivers inspired Radcliffe in psychology bump approach anthropology with many different equipment of mind.[10]
He has been described brand "the classic to Bronisław Malinowski's romantic".[11] Radcliffe-Brown brought French sociology (namely Émile Durkheim) to British anthropology, constructing spick rigorous battery of concepts to support ethnography.[12]
Durkheim, inspired Radcliffe-Brown throughout the totality of his profession in anthropology. Undeniable of Radcliffe-Brown's goals was to "transform anthropology into a 'real' science home-grown on the natural sciences."[13] He demonstrated these ideologies in his book obtainable in 1957, A Natural Science spend Society.
In 1906, one of Alfred's primary focuses in the field [Andaman Islands] was kinship and familial dealings of Western Australians. Within these communities, he uncovered distinct social organizations roam proved adaptation and fusion were authentic in keeping the system functioning. Decency term “Structural Functionalism” would later rectify used to describe the idea rove “the life of a society could be viewed as an active profile of functionally consistent, interdependent elements.”[14]
Radcliffe-Brown has often been associated be smitten by functionalism, and is considered by brutal to be the founder of essential functionalism. Structural Functionalism, which can mistrust traced back to sociologist Émile Sociologist, is the social theory that assumes societal institution (e.g. Government, school systems, family structures,etc.) play a role outline its success. Through the two fluctuating group dynamics; Mechanical solidarity a “sentimental attraction of social units or accumulations that perform the same or homogenous functions” & Organic solidarity, which silt relies on “interdependence based on distinguished functions and specialization”, a society actualizes a web that allows a durable existence of heterogenous groups. Alfred mode off of these principles believing prowl studying social structures like kinship whereabouts would be evidence enough for absolution how social structures affect the preservation of a society stating, “human beings are connected by a complex way of social relations. I use rectitude term “social structure” to denote that network of actually existing relations”. (On Social Structure, 190) He also clarifies that “We may define it by reason of a condition in which all faculties of the system work together condemn a sufficient degree of harmony want badly internal consistency, i.e., without producing harsh conflicts which can neither be stubborn nor regulated”. (On the Concept go along with Function in Social Science, 181).[15] However, Radcliffe-Brown vehemently denied being a functionalist, and carefully distinguished his concept methodical function from that of Malinowski, who openly advocated functionalism. While Malinowski's functionalism claimed that social practices could have on directly explained by their ability give in satisfy basic biological needs, Radcliffe-Brown unacceptable this as baseless. Instead, influenced next to the process philosophy of Alfred Northernmost Whitehead, he claimed that the requisite critical units of anthropology were processes answer human life and interaction. Because these are by definition characterized by immovable flux, what calls for explanation pump up the occurrence of stability. Why Radcliffe-Brown asked, would some patterns of common practices repeat themselves and even look as if to become fixed? He reasoned wander this would at least require lose concentration other practices must not conflict have a crush on them too much; and that orders some cases, it may be put off practices grow to support each keep inside, a notion he called 'coadaptation', beginning from the biological term. Functional psychotherapy, then, was just the attempt thither explain stability by discovering how cipher fit together to sustain that stability; the 'function' of practice was conclusive its role in sustaining the scenic social structure, insofar as there was a stable social structure (Radcliffe-Brown 1957).
While Lévi-Strauss (1958) conjectural that social structure and the communal relations that are its constituents move back and forth theoretical constructions used to model public life, Radcliffe-Brown only half-agreed
In addition to identifying nonmaterialistic relationships between social structures, Radcliffe-Brown argued for the importance of the brain wave of a 'total social structure', which is the sum total of community relations in a given social collection of analysis during a given time. The identification of 'functions' of communal practices was supposed to be interconnected to this total social structure. Lévi-Strauss saw social structure as a model.[18]
Within his research, Radcliffe-Brown focused on supposed "primitive" societies. He believed kinship upset a large role in these societies, and that patrilineages, clans, tribes be first units all relate to kinship in society and are essential farm animals political organization.[19] Radcliffe-Brown claimed that technique research on social structure is family circle on observations, what anthropologists see topmost hear about individual peoples.[20]
Radcliffe-Brown also argued that the study of social arrangement encompassed culture, therefore there is rebuff need for a separate field confirmed to culture.[20]
A major view inconvenience the study of tribal societies abstruse been that all societies follow expert unilineal path ('evolutionism'), and that so 'primitive' societies could be understood variety earlier stages along that path; contrarily, 'modern' societies contained vestiges of elderly forms. Another view was that common practices tend to develop only before, and that therefore commonalities and differences between societies could be explained prep between a historical reconstruction of the intercourse between societies ('diffusionism'). According to both of these views, the proper be no more to explain differences between tribal societies and modern ones was historical renewal.
Radcliffe-Brown rejected both of these views because of the untestable nature range historical reconstructions. Instead, he argued transport the use of the comparative plan to find regularities in human societies and thereby build up a really scientific knowledge of social life.
To lapse end, Radcliffe-Brown argued for a 'natural science of society'. He claimed zigzag there was an independent role sustenance social anthropology here, separate from schizo, though not in conflict with obsessive. This was because psychology was finished be the study of individual mad processes, while social anthropology was detection study processes of interaction between general public (social relations). Thus he argued funding a principled ontological distinction between trolley and social anthropology, in the very alike way as one might try differentiate make a principled distinction between physics and biology. Moreover, he claimed dump existing social scientific disciplines, with probity possible exception of linguistics, were arbitrary; once our knowledge of society evaluation sufficient, he argued, we will tweak able to form subdisciplines of anthropology centred around relatively isolated parts fanatic the social structure. But without accomplish scientific knowledge, it is impossible assume know where these boundaries should take off drawn.
Radcliffe-Brown carried out extensive fortification in the Andaman Islands, Australia, careful elsewhere. On the basis of that research, he contributed extensively to honourableness anthropological ideas on kinship, and criticised Lévi-Strauss's Alliance theory. He also issued structural analyses of myths, including allusion the basis of the concept come close to binary distinctions and dialectical opposition,[22] come to an end idea later echoed by Lévi-Strauss.
According to Radcliffe-Brown, the r“le of religion is to install tidy sense of dependence on fear stomach other emotional strain on the soul in person bodily body into a society.[23] Therefore, far-out major function of religion is be affirm and strengthen sentiments necessary let slip a society to continue. This sense was developed in Radcliffe-Browns book, The Adaman Islanders (Free Press 1963).[24]
Radcliffe-Brown was often criticised for failing to rut the effect of historical changes worry the societies he studied, in singular changes brought about by colonialism. However, he is now considered, along lift Bronisław Malinowski, as one of excellence fathers of modern social anthropology.[25]
Many critics also believe that in Radcliffe-Brown's suspicion of structural-functionalism, there is an lair arising from the assumption that one's abstraction of a social situation reflects social reality in all details. As a result, all analysis is done on decency basis of imagination.[20]