The right to ignore: An epistemic defense of the nature/culture divide

In Richard Joyce (ed.), Handbook of Evolution and Philosophy. Routledge. pp. 210-224 (2017)

Authors
Maria Kronfeldner
Central European University
Abstract
This paper addresses whether the often-bemoaned loss of unity of knowledge about humans, which results from the disciplinary fragmentation of science, is something to be overcome. The fragmentation of being human rests on a couple of distinctions, such as the nature-culture divide. Since antiquity the distinction between nature (roughly, what we inherit biologically) and culture (roughly, what is acquired by social interaction) has been a commonplace in science and society. Recently, the nature/culture divide has come under attack in various ways, in philosophy as well as in cultural anthropology. Regarding the latter, for instance, the divide was quintessential in its beginnings as an academic dis-cipline, when Alfred L. Kroeber, one of the first professional anthropologists in the US, rallied for (what I call) the right to ignore—in his case, human nature—by adopting a separationist epistemic stance. A separationist stance will be understood as an epistemic research heuristic that defends the right to ignore a specif-ic phenomenon (e.g., human nature) or a specific causal factor in an explanation typical for a disciplinary field. I will use Kroeber’s case as an example for making a general point against a bias towards integration (synthesis bias, as I call it) that is exemplified, for instance, by defenders of evolutionary psychology. I will claim that, in principle, a separationist stance is as good as an integrationist stance since both can be equally fruitful. With this argument from fruitful sepa-ration in place, not just the separationist stance but also the nature/culture di-vide can be defended against its critics.
Keywords separation  integration  nature-culture  human nature  explanation  disciplinary differentiation  evolutionary psychology  standard social science model
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Divide and Conquer: The Authority of Nature and Why We Disagree About Human Nature.Maria Kronfeldner - forthcoming - In Elizabeth Hannon & Tim Lewens (eds.), Why we disagree about human nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 186-206.
God or Nature? A Western Dilemma: Reply to Simon Oliver.Manussos Marangudakis - 1999 - Telos: Critical Theory of the Contemporary 1999 (116):119-134.
Following Human Nature.Nathan Kowalsky - 2006 - Environmental Ethics 28 (2):165-183.
Nature and Culture as Human Spaces.Thomas Storck - 2015 - Studia Philosophica Estonica 8 (1):1-16.
Following Human Nature.Nathan Kowalsky - 2006 - Environmental Ethics 28 (2):165-183.
From Environment to Culture: Aspects of Continuity.Guido Ipsen - 2006 - Sign Systems Studies 34 (1):83-103.
From Environment to Culture.Guido Ipsen - 2006 - Sign Systems Studies 34 (1):83-103.
Science and Human Nature.Richard Samuels - 2012 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 70:1-28.
文化•创新文化•自主创新.ShanKan He - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 22:143-157.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-05-22

Total views
164 ( #40,594 of 2,325,335 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
109 ( #3,752 of 2,325,335 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature