Культурний матеріалізм як стратегія дослідження культурних систем

Бідочко, Леся

dc.contributor.advisor	Кисельов, Сергій
dc.contributor.author	Бідочко, Леся
dc.date.accessioned	2016-11-15T16:28:49Z
dc.date.available	2016-11-15T16:28:49Z
dc.date.issued	2016
dc.identifier.citation	Бідочко Леся Ярославівна. Культурний матеріалізм як стратегія дослідження культурних систем / Бідочко Л. Я. // Магістеріум : Політичні студії. - 2016. - Т. 64. - С. 3-8.	uk
dc.identifier.uri	http://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/handle/123456789/9802
dc.description	and relationships between them, and the weaknesses of this scientific approach. Cultural materialism, a golden mean between structural Marxism and dialectical materialism, is based on the idea that social life and political culture are a response to practical or material problems of the existence. Marvin Harris, who has extended Marxist three-tier model of culture and developed the new scientific approach, stands on the strong techno-environmental and techno-economical positions, arguing that each cultural system has three components: infrastructure (means of production and reproduction), structure (social relations), and superstructure (ideological relations). Infrastructural changes possess some dominance over structure and superstructure, and the reverse link (effect) is unlikely. Taking into account the essential aspects of cultural materialism as a theoretical paradigm, the article focuses on four critical points of this approach. Firstly, cultural materialists tend to reduce knowledge to science. Both emic and etic approaches are favorable in the investigation, but the scientists appeal to the observable and positively measurable variables, while other ones are put out of sight. Secondly, cultural materialism makes a strong emphasis on the etic infrastructure, and nevertheless, it gives some place for the reverse relation. Still, there is no single example to corroborate the statement that structural or superstructural changes determine the mode of production and reproduction. Thirdly, Marvin Harris levels the connection between cultural materialism and other social sciences, placing them to the niche of uncertainty. Finally, it seems that all cultural phenomena do have some materialist explanation. Here comes a risk of overgeneralization and endless search for some economic basis, which might be just an accidental state of affairs or a circumstance of the second order. It means that infrastructure cannot be considered as one-dimensional determinant, as it tends to be rather heterogeneous set of technological, demographic, economic, and environmental variables.	en
dc.description.abstract	У статті розкрито суть засадничих принципів культурного матеріалізму, його основних понять і зв’язків між ними, а також виокремлено слабкі місця цього підходу.	uk
dc.language.iso	uk	uk
dc.subject	культурний матеріалізм	uk
dc.subject	культурна система	uk
dc.subject	інфраструктурний детермінізм	uk
dc.subject	інфраструктура	uk
dc.subject	Марвін Гарріс	uk
dc.subject	культурна антропологія	uk
dc.subject	cultural materialism	en
dc.subject	cultural system	en
dc.subject	infrastructural determinism	en
dc.subject	infrastructure	en
dc.subject	Marvin Harris	en
dc.subject	cultural anthropology	en
dc.title	Культурний матеріалізм як стратегія дослідження культурних систем	uk
dc.title.alternative	Cultural Materialism as a Strategy for Studying Cultural Systems	en
dc.type	Article	uk
dc.status	published earlier	uk
dc.relation.source	Магістеріум: Політичні студії	uk