Abstract

In this dissertation I attempt to do two things. The first is to show why some of the most pervasive research orientations in anthropology are, in their current forms, likely to be relatively unproductive ways of going about trying to understand cultural behavior. The second is to show how an alternative orientation to understanding cultural behavior does not really have the limitations that numerous scholars have supposed it to have. In showing these things, I hope to provide anthropologists with some systematic reasons for believing that a certain range of research endeavors show promise, while others do not, and thus, help ameliorate the directionlessness that numerous scholars claim currently besets the study of cultural behavior. ;In the first three chapters, I examine what I believe to be the systematic limitations of some of the approaches that are most common in anthropology today. With these common approaches having so many shortcomings, it is natural to look for an alternative approach to explaining culture that promises to be more successful. In chapters 4, 5, and 6, I explore the conceptual underpinnings and systematic limitations of approaches to understanding cultural behavior which center around using knowledge about the internal mental structuring of individuals. Chapter four looks at the fundamental assumptions governing attempts to explain cultural behavior through the study of internal cognitive structuring. Here, and in the next two chapters, I then look at some of the systematic objections that people might make to studying culture with such a perspective. I argue that such objections do not currently succeed in undermining the perspective outlined in chapter 4. We are still quite far from knowing what the best approach to explaining cultural behavior will be, but hopefully what I say in this thesis helps give a clearer idea of the most promising places to look