Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

A. G. Maisey · 25th October 2014, 11:51 PM

I think that maybe we’re on the same page here Jussi.

Speaking in very general terms, I believe it is possible for somebody from one culture/society to understand the way in which people from a different culture/society perceive, understand, act and react in respect of the world around them, and the people around them. In fact, this is the core of the profession of anthropology.

However, these anthropologists do not gain this understanding by working from their own cultural or societal base, they first learn, as an academic discipline, the cultural or societal base that they wish to use in their evaluation of that culture or society. They learn the way in which to observe, evaluate, measure.

In this, one thing is true:- time alters perspective.

We can think about this statement in similar terms to the idea of Albert E’s ideas on relativity: stand up close to a moving train it looks different to the way it looks if we stand off at a distance.

So, if we are evaluating a culture, or a society as it is at the present time, it will appear to be different to what is was , say, 500 years ago. However, there will fundamental elements in the culture/society that remain more or less constant both for now, and for 500 years ago.

This understanding of the way in which people from a different cultural base see and understand things is an understanding that can be learnt, and in the case of Jawa there has been more than enough work done in this field for a good understanding to be gained purely from study of the written word.

However, for a person to be able to understand in the same way as people from a different culture or society understand, is a whole different thing than merely understanding the way in which they understand.

Many years ago I had a close friend who was department head of anthropology at Sydney University. We had lots of conversations about all sorts of things ranging from the best way to skin a kangaroo to the idea of witchcraft in 17th century Bulgaria. I’ve forgotten most of what he said, but one thing he said has remained firmly in my memory.

Broadly it was this:- the idea of “heaven”, or of “going to heaven after death” is completely different for a traditional Chinese person and a person from a Western European society.

The word used by the Chinese person to describe the place equivalent to our heaven will translate into English as “heaven”, but it is totally impossible for an Englishman, or a Frenchman, or other Western European to understand what this idea of heaven means to the Chinese person, because the Western European and the Chinese person are working from entirely different cultural bases which affect the way in which they think and evaluate the world around them and the concept of “existence”.

To come back to Jawa, I believe it is possible for any person with sufficient interest to learn the way in which a traditional Javanese person understands the world, and how he evaluates things working with that world view.

But to understand in the same way that the traditional Javanese person understands is very probably not possible unless one is born and lives his entire life as a traditional Javanese person.

25th October 2014, 11:51 PM	#34
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,714	I think that maybe we’re on the same page here Jussi. Speaking in very general terms, I believe it is possible for somebody from one culture/society to understand the way in which people from a different culture/society perceive, understand, act and react in respect of the world around them, and the people around them. In fact, this is the core of the profession of anthropology. However, these anthropologists do not gain this understanding by working from their own cultural or societal base, they first learn, as an academic discipline, the cultural or societal base that they wish to use in their evaluation of that culture or society. They learn the way in which to observe, evaluate, measure. In this, one thing is true:- time alters perspective. We can think about this statement in similar terms to the idea of Albert E’s ideas on relativity: stand up close to a moving train it looks different to the way it looks if we stand off at a distance. So, if we are evaluating a culture, or a society as it is at the present time, it will appear to be different to what is was , say, 500 years ago. However, there will fundamental elements in the culture/society that remain more or less constant both for now, and for 500 years ago. This understanding of the way in which people from a different cultural base see and understand things is an understanding that can be learnt, and in the case of Jawa there has been more than enough work done in this field for a good understanding to be gained purely from study of the written word. However, for a person to be able to understand in the same way as people from a different culture or society understand, is a whole different thing than merely understanding the way in which they understand. Many years ago I had a close friend who was department head of anthropology at Sydney University. We had lots of conversations about all sorts of things ranging from the best way to skin a kangaroo to the idea of witchcraft in 17th century Bulgaria. I’ve forgotten most of what he said, but one thing he said has remained firmly in my memory. Broadly it was this:- the idea of “heaven”, or of “going to heaven after death” is completely different for a traditional Chinese person and a person from a Western European society. The word used by the Chinese person to describe the place equivalent to our heaven will translate into English as “heaven”, but it is totally impossible for an Englishman, or a Frenchman, or other Western European to understand what this idea of heaven means to the Chinese person, because the Western European and the Chinese person are working from entirely different cultural bases which affect the way in which they think and evaluate the world around them and the concept of “existence”. To come back to Jawa, I believe it is possible for any person with sufficient interest to learn the way in which a traditional Javanese person understands the world, and how he evaluates things working with that world view. But to understand in the same way that the traditional Javanese person understands is very probably not possible unless one is born and lives his entire life as a traditional Javanese person.