Anthropology

[koan]

I recently acquired a book by Ernest Becker about the origins of society and the root of all our problems. Fascinating stuff. He talks about moiest societies and how the dividing of society into two complimentary groups was a method of self validation as well as the root of all human competition. His attitude is that it is our lack of understanding of the roots of culture that presents the problems that escalate the learned behaviour to destructive proportions. The book is called "Escape From Evil". He won a Pulitzer for an earlier work called "The Denial of Death".

I want to become an anthropologist now. :popcorn:

[Godwhacker]

Sounds interesting. In particular the other book of his you mention. Im making an assumption based on the title that its about our culture's denial and avoidance of death and its issues. If so, I would like to read it. I work in a place where death is common, and I think that some of the suffering that I witness would be lessened a little by our culture having a better understanding of death and related issues (e.g. ageing).

[Adora]

I recently acquired a book by Ernest Becker about the origins of society and the root of all our problems. Fascinating stuff. He talks about moiest societies and how the dividing of society into two complimentary groups was a method of self validation as well as the root of all human competition. His attitude is that it is our lack of understanding of the roots of culture that presents the problems that escalate the learned behaviour to destructive proportions. The book is called "Escape From Evil". He won a Pulitzer for an earlier work called "The Denial of Death".
Um... whut? Roots of whose culture, and what kind of roots? Does he mean physical division, or simply creating a dichotic spectrum? How can knowing the root of a negative learned behaviour magically make someone stop doing it? Why does the acceptance of death suddenly negate bad behaviours? Societies that had and/or now have death cults still practice(d) bad learned behaviours, so how does he explain them?

Sounds like a load of shite to me.

[godfry n. glad]

Um... I have to admit I'm a bit confused.

I spent entirely too much time trying to determine what "moiest societies" were before finally deciding it must be a typo. Then the vague descriptions left me... skeptical. I guess I'll have to try reading it.

[viscousmemories]

I searched for info about this author/book until my head hurt, and couldn't really find anything that spoke in certain terms about any strong empirical support for Becker's work. I found plenty of allusions to the existence of empirical evidence, but none of the evidence. Here's what I learned in a nutshell:

Becker was a fringe psychologist/cultural anthropologist in the 60's, ostracized in the last decade of his life. As koan mentions in her OP, he won the Pulitzer (posthumously) for his earlier book, Denial of Death. Three psychologists took his Escape from Evil (in which he apparently promotes the idea that humans' inability to deal with their own mortality compels them to embrace an ideology) and wrote In the Wake of 9/11: The Psychology of Terror.

The only thing I've found that really recommends the 9/11 book (besides individual quotations and opinions) is that it was published by the American Psychological Association. However, I couldn't find anything else on the APA site to recommend Becker or his theories, nor could I find anything definitive looking anywhere else.

:shrug:

[koan]

My apologies, godfry, I coined the word from moiety

Moiety (http://mil.citrus.cc.ca.us/cat1courses/anth214/vocabulary.htm): A very large group split into two distinct halves. Clans will make up the moieties. They are interdependent upon one another for economic exchange, emergency situations, marriage partners, and rivalries. Moieties are a very ritualized classification system that is inherited and passed on.


Sheesh what does a writer need to get a little respect around here? I never considered that Becker's credentials would not be good enough for him to warrant mention. His critics are mostly disturbed by the "darkness" of his theories. For Godwhacker, there is an Ernest Becker Foundation (http://faculty.washington.edu/nelgee/) that continues to promote his ideas and seems to have a lot of stuff on their homepage about coping with death and dying so I imagine that his earlier book deals with those issues. I am researching violence and toxic leaders at the moment.

[koan]

I recently acquired a book by Ernest Becker about the origins of society and the root of all our problems. Fascinating stuff. He talks about moiest societies and how the dividing of society into two complimentary groups was a method of self validation as well as the root of all human competition. His attitude is that it is our lack of understanding of the roots of culture that presents the problems that escalate the learned behaviour to destructive proportions. The book is called "Escape From Evil". He won a Pulitzer for an earlier work called "The Denial of Death".
Um... whut? Roots of whose culture, and what kind of roots? Does he mean physical division, or simply creating a dichotic spectrum? How can knowing the root of a negative learned behaviour magically make someone stop doing it? Why does the acceptance of death suddenly negate bad behaviours? Societies that had and/or now have death cults still practice(d) bad learned behaviours, so how does he explain them?

Sounds like a load of shite to me.

Do you limit all of your knowledge by such quick assessments?

[viscousmemories]

Sheesh what does a writer need to get a little respect around here?
To get respect from me, a social scientist has to have theories that are heavily empirically researched, widely peer-reviewed and generally accepted as true (or at least well-recommended) by the scientific community. There are countless theories of human behavior out there. I can either commit the rest of my life to thoroughly studying every single one, or I can rely on the scientific community to distill them for me.

I never considered that Becker's credentials would not be good enough for him to warrant mention.
I don't know if you're talking about my comments, but I never suggested that he didn't warrant mention. It looks like he has produced some interesting theories and that at least a few people in the field have invested quite a bit in their promotion. But as I said above I just personally tend to have more confidence in more widely accepted and empirically supported theories. Especially in a specialized field that I'm not likely to devote a lot of time and energy to studying. :shrug:

[koan]

Ernest Becker (http://www.answers.com/topic/ernest-becker)

Over the past two decades, a trio of experimental social psychologists has amassed a large body of empirical evidence substantiating the universal motive of death denial as advanced by Becker. The highly topical and jargon-free account of that work is now in print In the Wake of 9/11: The Psychology of Terror by Pyszczynski, Solomon and Greenberg. (American Psychological Association Press, 2003).

I'd say he was a freethinker of his time. I'm glad the evidence arrived to back him up. Where would we be without people who thought outside the box?

[viscousmemories]

Yeah, I found that information too. The same text is at Wikipedia, and both come straight from the Ernest Becker Foundation (http://faculty.washington.edu/nelgee/index.html), which is run by a Neil Elgee. As I said, I couldn't find any definitive information about him or his work at the American Psychological Association website or in fact anywhere else. But then I don't even know who might be considered an authoritative source on cultural anthropology. :shrug:

[koan]

Guess I get excited by new information. I find that books cross my path at interesting times. In this case, I am researching a topic, wandered through a used book store and this book was there. It backs up every thought I've had about society since I could philosophise. That excites me. I couldn't have imagined a book more appropriate to exactly what I was trying to find out at the time. Synchronicity.

I'm only on page 20 and my whole world of ideas is making sense. Finally.

Just be excited for me, vm. You don't have to read it, honest.

[viscousmemories]

Just be excited for me, vm.
Okay, koan, I'm excited for you. I'm sorry if I offended you by sharing my thoughts on the subject.

[koan]

Just be excited for me, vm.
Okay, koan, I'm excited for you. I'm sorry if I offended you by sharing my thoughts on the subject.

I wasn't offended. I ought to use more smilies. I'm sorry if I made you feel you offended me. :giggle:

I am a little surprised a pulitzer prize and a foundation to further his work doesn't lend him more credit. :shrug: And I am a little concerned for my project if legitimacy of sources requires unattainable proof to have it taken seriously. :sadcheer: Perhaps when I've finished the book I could answer questions about it with more knowledge. For now, I'm just excited. Don't you ever get that way when you find something you didn't know existed? :slide:

[viscousmemories]

I wasn't offended. I ought to use more smilies. I'm sorry if I made you feel you offended me. :giggle:
Okay, good. :)

I am a little surprised a pulitzer prize and a foundation to further his work doesn't lend him more credit. :shrug:
Well like I said, for me it lends his work some credit. Just not as much as a lot more empirical research, peer-reviewed sources of information about him and general acceptance and recognition in the field would. I'm just anal that way, though.

I know that in 1974, the Pulitzer foundation found his first book to be a distinguished example of "general non-fiction". I even went so far as to look up the criteria for the Pulitzer Prize, but they don't have any rigid standards for what makes a work 'distinguished'. So I'm not really sure how much importance that has.

I also know that some guy with a doctorate (and a handful of "board members" and 'advisors' to his foundation) have a lot invested in endorsing and promoting the work. But there are even more people with doctorates who promote Intelligent Design (for which I'm fairly certain there is no scientific support), so I don't really give that a lot of weight either.

Right now, that's all I have to go on.

And I am a little concerned for my project if legitimacy of sources requires unattainable proof to have it taken seriously. :sadcheer:
Well that's just a problem with "soft sciences" in general, I think. I don't think it's easy to find empirical evidence that supports a lot of theories of psychology, sociology, cultural anthropology, etc. But that doesn't mean I don't value those fields of study or think they have things to offer. I'm just naturally a very skeptical person and even more skeptical of fringe theories.

Perhaps when I've finished the book I could answer questions about it with more knowledge. For now, I'm just excited. Don't you ever get that way when you find something you didn't know existed? :slide:
That's cool. Sure I know how that is. When I was in my 20's I was a big fan of Timothy Leary and R.D. Laing, two psychologists who almost nobody takes seriously. To this day I think it's entirely possible that their work has never gotten and will never get the serious attention it deserves, but that's show business. For me, life is too short to latch on to every theory that sounds intuitively reasonable. Like I said, there are just too many. But I'm not trying to discourage you at all. I'm just saying that's the approach I take to things. I know it isn't for everybody.

[Adora]

Do you limit all of your knowledge by such quick assessments?
When an obvious stinking pile of shit is in front of you, do you poke your toe in it to make sure it is shit, and then decide not to step in it? Or do you actually have any answers for my questions that I posed. How does he explain the bad behaviour of entire societies built around death-cults (eg- Ancient Egypt, the Mayans, etc)? You've read the book, peaches, so enlighten us all.

[fragment]

Adora, you could try having some basic reading comprehension skills. Nothing koan has posted suggests there is any connection at all between the "Denial of Death" book and the "Escape from Evil" book, other than the same author. Maybe they are both expounding the same theory, maybe they're not, but your question is based on a massive assumption. And posting "You've read the book..." when koan has already informed us "I'm only on page 20" suggests your ability to understand plain English is ridiculously limited. As such I question your ability to recognise any piles of shit, because you just seem to be making shit up here.

[Adora]

you could try having some basic reading comprehension skills.
Fair enough. I made a mistake with that question (though I would counter this by saying this seems to be some sort of underlying theme in all his work, if the reference sites provided in this thread are any indication, and so probably plays a large part in the book koan is reading). But I still want to know how he equates understanding cultural origins with avoiding bad learned behaviours. Anyone care to answer that one?

"I'm only on page 20" suggests your ability to understand plain English is ridiculously limited.
Or maybe I forget some people read slower than I do. Awh sadface :(

[wildernesse]

I searched for info about this author/book until my head hurt, and couldn't really find anything that spoke in certain terms about any strong empirical support for Becker's work.

What kind of empirical support are you looking for regarding a claim in cultural anthro?

[viscousmemories]

What kind of empirical support are you looking for regarding a claim in cultural anthro?
I don't know, I'm not a cultural anthropologist. But since this comes from the Ernest Becker Foundation...

"Over the past two decades, a trio of experimental social psychologists has amassed a large body of empirical evidence substantiating the universal motive of death denial as advanced by Becker."

...I assume there's some to be had. So far I haven't read anything that inspires me to go out and buy that book to find out what it is, though. So I was hoping to find some on the 'net.