 |
| Culture and Society: Indian Heritage Study With Anil |
Comprehensive Analysis of Culture and Personality under Social Psychology
Social Psychology
SOC MJC 713
Unit 3: Culture and Personality, (a)
Concept and Characteristics, (b) Relationship Between Culture and Personality
Dr. Anil Kumar
Assistant Professor
Department of Sociology
Patna Women’s College (Autonomous)
Culture and Personality
- Learning Objectives
- Understand
the concept of culture and its characteristics.
- Explore
the relationship between culture and personality.
- Examine
classical sociological thinkers’ perspectives on culture.
- Analyze
major cultural studies in India.
- Understand
the meaning of personality in psychology and sociology.
- Discuss
major studies on personality and society, including the idea of national
character.
- Relate
culture and personality in the Indian context.
Introduction
Culture and
personality are deeply
connected concepts across anthropology, sociology, and psychology. Culture
provides the foundational social environment where individuals learn how to
think, feel, communicate, behave, and relate to others, largely through social
values, beliefs, institutions, traditions, and community expectations. In
contrast, personality refers to the relatively consistent and stable patterns
of thought, emotion, motivation, and behaviour that make each individual
unique.
The culture-and-personality perspective
specifically examines how social environments and child-rearing practices
actively shape psychological development. This approach explains why
individuals raised in different societies often develop distinct emotional
styles, identities, gender expectations, and ideas about adulthood. By
providing learned patterns of customs and social expectations, a society's
culture creates the primary framework through which its members understand
themselves and interact with the world.
However, this perspective does not mean that
culture completely determines every aspect of human behaviour. Individuals
possess distinct biological characteristics, unique personal experiences, and
the capacity to make independent choices. Personality ultimately develops within a cultural setting, meaning that while culture
provides the essential rules, meanings, and behavioural models, it acts as a
guide rather than a absolute constraint on individual identity.
- E.B. Tylor’s definition of culture.
- Margaret Mead’s cultural anthropology.
- Clifford Geertz’s interpretive approach.
E. B. Tylor (1832 1917)
Sir Edward Burnett Tylor (1832–1917), an English anthropologist, offered one of the earliest comprehensive anthropological definitions of culture. In Primitive Culture, he wrote:
“Culture, or civilisation, taken in its broad, ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society” (Tylor, 1871, Vol. 1, p. 1).
Tylor’s definition remains important because it presents culture as a comprehensive system of learned social life. Culture includes not only visible practices, such as dress, food, festivals, and rituals, but also less visible elements, such as beliefs, moral principles, ideas about right and wrong, knowledge, emotional expectations, and social responsibilities.
Culture as a Complex Whole
Tylor described culture as a “complex whole” because its elements are interconnected. Knowledge shapes beliefs, beliefs shape morals, morals shape laws, and laws shape customs and everyday behaviour. For example, ideas about family responsibility may be connected with religious beliefs, moral expectations, inheritance practices, marriage rules, and patterns of child-rearing.
Culture should therefore not be understood as a random collection of customs. It is an organised system in which different parts support and influence one another. A change in one part of culture may produce changes in other parts. For instance, the spread of digital technology may influence education, employment, communication, family relationships, social identity, and ideas about privacy.
Culture Is Learned
One of Tylor’s most important contributions was his emphasis on the acquired nature of culture. Cultural behaviour is learned through social interaction rather than inherited biologically. A person is not born knowing a particular language, religion, dress code, moral system, or set of social customs. These are learned through family, school, peer groups, religious institutions, media, and wider community life.
The process through which people learn the culture of their society is called enculturation. Through enculturation, children learn how to speak, behave, express emotions, show respect, respond to authority, form relationships, and participate in social institutions. For example, children learn whether they should address elders formally or informally, whether independence or obedience is valued, and how emotions such as anger or sadness should be expressed.
Although biological development provides the learning capacity, culture determines much of what is learned and how it is expressed. This distinction helps explain why people with similar biological capacities may develop very different habits, personalities, skills, and social expectations in different cultural environments.
The Scope of Culture
Tylor’s definition includes several major dimensions of culture:
- Knowledge: Information and understanding about the natural, social, and spiritual world.
- Belief: Ideas about reality, religion, morality, human nature, and the meaning of life.
- Art: Creative expressions such as music, dance, painting, literature, architecture, and craft.
- Morals: Standards used to judge behaviour as right or wrong, good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable.
- Law: Formal rules and institutions that regulate conduct and maintain social order.
- Custom: Established patterns of behaviour followed by members of a society.
- Capabilities and habits: Learned skills and regular practices, including communication, work, food preparation, and social interaction.
These elements influence personality by providing individuals with models of appropriate behaviour. Culture teaches people not only what to do but also how to evaluate themselves and others.
Culture and Personality Development
Personality develops through the interaction of biological potential and cultural experience. Every individual has unique characteristics, but culture influences the expression of those characteristics. For example, a child may have a natural tendency to be active or quiet, but the social meaning of these traits depends on the cultural setting. In one society, assertiveness may be praised as confidence; in another, it may be interpreted as disrespectful or aggressive.
Culture influences personality in several important ways:
Self and Identity
Culture provides individuals with concepts through which they understand who they are. Ideas about age, gender, family position, caste (in Indian context), class, religion, nationality, occupation, and community membership contribute to identity formation. A person may understand the self primarily as an independent individual or as a member of a family, community, religious group, or nation.
In individualistic cultural settings, people may be encouraged to value personal choice, self-expression, independence, and individual achievement. In more collectivistic settings, individuals may be encouraged to emphasise family responsibility, social harmony, cooperation, and group obligations. These are general tendencies rather than absolute rules; individuals within every society differ from one another.
Emotional Development
Culture influences how emotions are understood and expressed. Societies teach people when it is appropriate to show anger, sadness, affection, fear, pride, or joy. Some cultures encourage open emotional expression, while others value emotional restraint and self-control. Cultural rules also influence the interpretation of emotions. For example, silence may indicate respect in one setting but disagreement or discomfort in another.
Gender Roles
Culture shapes expectations concerning masculinity, femininity, family responsibilities, occupations, dress, behaviour, and emotional expression. Children often learn gender roles through parental instructions, toys, stories, school practices, media representations, and observation of adults. Because gender expectations vary across societies and historical periods, many of them are socially organised rather than biologically fixed.
Childhood and Socialisation
Child-rearing practices influence personality development. Parents and caregivers teach children discipline, cooperation, obedience, independence, responsibility, and social manners. Some families give children considerable freedom to make decisions, whereas others emphasise respect for authority and conformity to family expectations.
These practices do not produce identical personalities in every child. Children interpret experiences differently, and temperament also plays a role. Nevertheless, child-rearing provides important patterns through which children learn to function within their society.
Adolescence and Adulthood
The experience of adolescence varies across cultures. In some societies, adolescence is viewed as a period of conflict and uncertainty; in others, young people move gradually into adult responsibilities without a sharply defined adolescent stage. Cultural expectations determine when individuals are considered mature, what responsibilities they receive, and how they are expected to behave.
Similarly, adulthood and old age are culturally organised. Societies differ in their expectations concerning marriage, employment, parenthood, independence, authority, retirement, and respect for older people.
Enculturation and Socialisation
Enculturation is the lifelong process through which people learn and internalise the culture of their society. Socialisation is a related concept referring to the process through which individuals learn social roles, norms, values, and patterns of interaction.
The main agents of enculturation and socialisation include:
- Family: Provides early language, values, emotional patterns, religious beliefs, and ideas about relationships.
- School: Teaches knowledge, discipline, cooperation, competition, citizenship, and formal rules.
- Peer group: Influences language, fashion, identity, leisure, attitudes, and social behaviour.
- Religion: Provides moral principles, rituals, beliefs, and explanations of life and death.
- Media: Communicates ideas about gender, success, beauty, relationships, consumption, and social status.
- Workplace: Teaches punctuality, responsibility, hierarchy, professional identity, and cooperation.
- State and law: Establish formal expectations concerning citizenship, rights, duties, and acceptable conduct.
Through these institutions, people learn both explicit rules and implicit expectations. Explicit rules may be written in laws or taught directly. Implicit expectations may be learned through observation and repeated participation in everyday life.
Culture and the Development of Personality
The culture-and-personality approach became especially influential through the work of anthropologists such as Ruth Benedict (Ruth Fulton Benedict, 1887–1948; she was an American Anthropologist and Folklorist), Margaret Mead, and Abram Kardiner(1891–1981; he was an American Psychiatrist, Psychoanalyst, and founder of Psychological Anthropology). These scholars examined how cultural patterns influence emotional life, character, childhood development, and social behaviour.
Ruth Benedict argued that cultures select and emphasise particular patterns of behaviour. In Patterns of Culture (1934), she suggested that different societies organise human possibilities in different ways. A behaviour that is admired in one culture may be discouraged in another. Her work encouraged anthropologists to study cultures as integrated systems rather than judge them by the standards of another society (Benedict, 1934).
Margaret Mead’s research demonstrated that ideas about adolescence and gender roles vary significantly across societies. Her work challenged the assumption that emotional development, adolescent conflict, and gender behaviour are determined entirely by biology. Mead argued that people learn culturally appropriate patterns of behaviour through socialisation and participation in society (Mead, 1928, 1968).
Abram Kardiner connected cultural institutions with personality formation. He distinguished between primary institutions, such as child-rearing practices and family organisation, and secondary institutions, such as religion, mythology, and social ideologies. According to this approach, early social experiences influence basic personality patterns, which may later be expressed through cultural beliefs and institutions (Kardiner & Linton, 1939).
Culture Does Not Completely Determine Personality
Culture strongly influences personality, but it does not mechanically determine every individual’s behaviour. People are not identical copies of their culture. Individuals differ because of temperament, biological development, family experience, social class, education, gender, historical period, migration, personal choices, and exposure to multiple cultural environments.
A person may accept some cultural values and reject others. They may reinterpret traditional practices, combine elements from different cultures, or challenge social expectations. Therefore, culture should be understood as a framework of possibilities and limitations rather than an unchangeable programme.
For example, a society may value respect for elders, but individuals may express that value differently. One person may follow traditional forms of obedience, another may express respect through emotional support, and a third may respectfully question an elder’s decision. The shared value remains culturally meaningful, but its individual expression varies.
Cultural Relativism and Ethnocentrism
The study of culture and personality requires cultural relativism. Cultural relativism means understanding beliefs and practices within their own social and historical context rather than immediately judging them by the standards of another culture. It does not require accepting every practice as morally correct; instead, it encourages careful interpretation before evaluation.
The opposite tendency is ethnocentrism, which occurs when people treat their own culture as the natural or superior standard for judging others. Ethnocentrism may lead to misunderstanding, prejudice, and inaccurate explanations of behaviour. Anthropological analysis attempts to recognise cultural difference while also examining questions of inequality, power, human rights, and social change.
Contemporary Importance
The relationship between culture and personality is important in education, counselling, mental health, social work, management, public policy, and intercultural communication. Professionals who ignore cultural differences may misunderstand behaviour or impose inappropriate expectations.
In mental health, for example, emotional distress may be expressed differently across cultural settings. Some individuals may describe psychological problems through physical symptoms, religious language, family concerns, or social difficulties. Understanding cultural meanings can help professionals provide more sensitive and effective support.
In education, teachers who recognise cultural differences in communication, participation, discipline, and family involvement can create more inclusive learning environments. In workplaces, awareness of cultural expectations can improve cooperation among people from different backgrounds.
Conclusion
Tylor’s definition presents culture as a complex whole consisting of knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and learned capabilities. This understanding provides a strong foundation for the study of culture and personality because it shows that people acquire many of their ways of thinking and behaving through membership in society.
The culture-and-personality perspective demonstrates that personality develops through the interaction of biological potential, individual experience, and cultural learning. Culture shapes identity, emotional expression, gender roles, childhood experiences, moral expectations, and social relationships. At the same time, individuals interpret and sometimes transform the culture in which they live. A balanced understanding therefore recognises both the power of culture and the agency of individuals.
References
Benedict, R. (1934). Patterns of culture. Houghton Mifflin.
Kardiner, A., & Linton, R. (1939). The individual and his society: The psychodynamics of basic personality. Columbia University Press.
Mead, M. (1928). Coming of age in Samoa: A psychological study of primitive youth for Western civilisation. William Morrow.
Mead, M. (1968). On what is a culture? What is a civilization? In C. F. Madden (Ed.), Talks with social scientists (pp. 16–27). Southern Illinois University Press. https://www.berghahnbooks.com/downloads/chapters/MeadStudying_Ch02.pdf
Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive culture: Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, art, and custom (Vol. 1). John Murray. https://archive.org/details/primitiveculture01tylouoft/ #ORIGINAL_WORK
ABOUT: Primitive Culture: Researches
into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Art, and Custom (Volume 1, page 1), (1871,
London: John Murray) (NOTE: This book is in two volumes: Volume 1 (The Origins of Culture): Covers ethnography, social evolution, linguistics,
and myth, and Volume 2 (Religion in Primitive Culture): Focuses
on his interpretation of animism)
Margaret Mead (1901–1978)
Introduction
Margaret Mead (1901–1978), an American Cultural Anthropologist, made an important contribution in the field of study of Culture and Personality. Through her cross-cultural research, she challenged the belief that human personality and social behaviour are determined mainly by biology. Mead argued that culture provides the framework through which people learn how to behave, think, feel, and relate to others. Her work showed that many characteristics considered “natural” or biologically fixed are shaped by social learning and cultural expectations.
Margaret Mead: Background
Margaret Mead was one of the best-known anthropologists of the twentieth century. She studied how human beings develop within different cultural environments and became widely recognised for her research on childhood, adolescence, gender, family life, and social change. Her work was influenced by Franz Boas (Franz Uri Boas, 1858–1942; he was a German-American Anthropologist widely known as the "Father of American Anthropology"), who emphasised the importance of studying cultures in their own historical and social contexts, and Ruth Benedict, who examined how societies organise and value different patterns of behaviour.
Mead’s research focused especially on societies in the Pacific, including Samoa, Manus, and New Guinea. Her aim was not simply to describe unfamiliar customs. She used cross-cultural comparison to ask a broader question: Which aspects of human behaviour are universal, and which are shaped by particular social environments?
Mead’s Definition of Culture
Mead described culture as the shared system of learned and transmitted behaviour through which human beings organise social life. Culture includes customs, values, knowledge, beliefs, language, moral rules, social practices, and ways of interpreting the world. It is learned by individuals as members of society and passed from one generation to another.
In her discussion of culture and civilisation, Mead distinguished between culture in general and a particular culture:
“Culture” refers to the system of transmitted and learned behaviour of all human beings everywhere on the planet.
“A culture” refers to the particular forms of behaviour belonging to a particular group of people (Mead, 1968).
This distinction is significant. All human beings participate in culture, but they do not all participate in the same culture. For example, Samoan culture, Indian culture, American culture, and Japanese culture may have different languages, traditions, family arrangements, religious practices, and social expectations. However, each is a culture because each provides its members with learned patterns of behaviour and meaning.
Culture as Learned Behaviour
According to Mead, culture is acquired through social learning rather than inherited biologically. A child is not born knowing a particular language, religion, dress code, moral system, or form of politeness. These are learned through interaction with parents, relatives, teachers, peers, religious institutions, media, and the wider community.
The process through which individuals learn the culture of their society is called enculturation. Enculturation begins in infancy and continues throughout life. Through this process, individuals learn:
- How to communicate.
- How to express emotions.
- What food is acceptable.
- How to behave toward elders and children.
- Which behaviours are considered moral or immoral.
- What roles are expected of men and women.
- How to form families and friendships.
- What forms of work and achievement are respected.
- How to understand illness, death, religion, and identity.
Culture is therefore not merely an external influence. It becomes part of an individual’s habits, values, emotional responses, self-image, and understanding of reality.
Culture and Personality
The culture-and-personality approach examines how cultural learning influences the development of personality. Mead did not argue that every individual in a society has exactly the same personality. Rather, she argued that culture provides common patterns, expectations, and experiences that influence how individuals develop.
Culture influences personality in several ways.
Formation of the Self
Culture provides the categories through which people understand who they are. Individuals may define themselves in relation to family, religion, caste, class, gender, nationality, language, ethnicity, occupation, or community. In some societies, personal identity is strongly associated with independence and individual achievement. In others, identity is closely connected with family obligations, social relationships, and community membership.
These differences influence how people answer questions such as:
- Who am I?
- What responsibilities do I have?
- What does it mean to be successful?
- Should I prioritise personal choice or family expectations?
- How should I respond to social criticism?
Emotional Development
Culture shapes the acceptable expression of emotions. Every society teaches people how, when, and toward whom emotions may be expressed. Some cultures encourage open displays of affection, sadness, or anger, while others emphasise self-control and emotional restraint.
Culture also influences the meaning of emotional behaviour. Silence may represent respect in one cultural context but disagreement or discomfort in another. Eye contact may be interpreted as confidence in one society and disrespect in another. Thus, emotional expression cannot always be understood without considering cultural context.
Gender Roles
Mead’s work challenged the assumption that masculinity and femininity have identical meanings everywhere. Societies differ in their expectations concerning:
- Appropriate occupations for men and women.
- Child-care and household responsibilities.
- Dress and bodily behaviour.
- Emotional expression.
- Leadership and authority.
- Marriage and sexuality.
- Independence and dependence.
Children learn gender roles through family practices, toys, stories, school activities, religion, media, and observation of adults. Because gender expectations vary across cultures and historical periods, Mead argued that many gender behaviours are socially learned rather than biologically fixed.
Childhood and Child-Rearing
Child-rearing practices are important in personality development. Families teach children discipline, responsibility, obedience, cooperation, independence, affection, and respect. Some cultures encourage children to make individual choices at an early age. Others emphasise obedience, family interdependence, and respect for authority.
Child-rearing practices influence personality, but they do not produce identical individuals. Children have different temperaments and interpret experiences differently. Family relationships, social class, education, historical events, and personal experiences also affect development.
Adolescence
One of Mead’s most influential contributions concerned adolescence. In Coming of Age in Samoa (1928), she argued that adolescence is not experienced in the same way in every society. In some social settings, adolescence may be marked by conflict, anxiety, competition, and uncertainty. In others, young people may move more gradually into adult roles with less psychological tension.
Mead’s argument was that adolescence cannot be understood only as a biological stage. Its emotional and social meaning depends on cultural expectations. Societies differ in the ways they organise education, sexuality, work, marriage, authority, and responsibility. These differences influence whether adolescence is experienced as a period of crisis, freedom, cooperation, or gradual transition (Mead, 1928).
Mead and Cultural Determinism
Mead is often associated with cultural determinism, the view that social and cultural conditions strongly shape human behaviour. However, her position should not be interpreted as meaning that culture controls every action mechanically. Mead emphasised the power of culture, but individuals still possess biological capacities, personal experiences, creativity, and the ability to respond differently to social expectations.
A more accurate interpretation is that culture provides a framework within which personality develops. It influences the possibilities available to individuals, the behaviours that are rewarded or punished, and the meanings attached to different actions. Individuals may accept, negotiate, reinterpret, or reject cultural expectations.
For example, a society may value respect for elders, but individuals may demonstrate respect in different ways. One person may follow traditional practices, another may express respect through care and support, and another may challenge an elder’s decision while maintaining a respectful relationship.
Challenge to Biological Determinism
Biological determinism is the belief that human behaviour is mainly fixed by biology or inherited racial characteristics. Mead challenged this perspective by demonstrating that societies differ greatly in personality patterns, gender roles, childhood experiences, and emotional expectations.
Her work suggested that:
- Human beings share a common biological capacity for learning.
- Cultural environments direct that learning in different ways.
- Social roles are not identical across societies.
- Personality is influenced by upbringing and social institutions.
- Behaviour considered natural in one society may be unusual in another.
- Differences among groups should not automatically be explained as biological differences.
Mead’s work therefore contributed to the rejection of racist theories that ranked societies according to supposed biological superiority or inferiority. She argued that differences in behaviour are often the result of enculturation, historical experience, and social organisation.
Culture, Society, and Civilization
Mead distinguished culture from civilization. Every human group has a culture, including small communities with limited populations and technology. Civilization refers to a more complex form of social organisation, generally associated with cities, dense populations, record-keeping, division of labour, administration, and complex institutions (Mead, 1968).
Civilization should not be used as a synonym for moral superiority. A technologically complex society is not automatically more ethical, happier, or psychologically healthier than a smaller or less technologically complex society. Mead warned that modernization should not destroy the distinctive identity of particular cultures. Scientific and technological developments can be adopted while preserving local traditions, social relationships, and cultural dignity.
Cultural Relativism
Mead’s approach is closely connected with cultural relativism. Cultural relativism means studying beliefs and practices within their own cultural context instead of immediately judging them according to the standards of one’s own society.
This approach does not mean that all practices must be accepted uncritically. It means that researchers should first understand the historical, social, and cultural meanings of a practice. Without this understanding, people may mistake unfamiliarity for inferiority.
Cultural relativism is especially important in education, counselling, health care, social work, and intercultural communication. Professionals who understand cultural differences are better able to avoid stereotypes and respond to individuals with sensitivity.
Culture and Human Universals
Although cultures differ, Mead also recognised that human societies share certain general features. All societies must provide ways to:
Care for children.
- Teach younger generations.
- Organise family and social relationships.
- Communicate through language or symbolic systems.
- Produce and distribute food.
- Establish rules of conduct.
- Explain suffering, death, and the natural world.
- Organise cooperation and social responsibilities.
The existence of cultural universals does not mean that all societies express them in the same way. Families, education, religion, marriage, authority, and morality take different forms in different cultures.
Culture and Individual Differences
Culture influences people, but individuals within the same culture are not identical. Differences may result from:
- Biological temperament.
- Family structure.
- Social class.
- Gender and age.
- Education.
- Religion.
- Urban or rural location.
- Migration and intercultural contact.
- Personal experiences.
- Historical and political conditions.
Modern individuals may participate in several cultural worlds at the same time. A person may be influenced by family traditions, regional culture, national identity, professional culture, religious beliefs, peer culture, and global media. As a result, personality may reflect cultural continuity as well as cultural change.
Contemporary Relevance
Mead’s ideas remain relevant in many fields.
Education
Teachers need to recognise that students may differ in communication style, family expectations, participation patterns, and attitudes toward authority. Culturally responsive education can improve inclusion and reduce unfair judgements.
Mental Health
Culture influences how people understand distress and communicate psychological difficulties. Some people may describe emotional problems through physical symptoms, religious explanations, family concerns, or social difficulties. Mental-health professionals should consider cultural meanings when assessing and supporting clients.
Family and Social Work
Social workers who understand cultural variations in family organisation, parenting, marriage, and care for older people can avoid imposing inappropriate assumptions.
Gender and Social Policy
Mead’s work encourages policymakers to examine how gender roles are socially produced and how institutions may reinforce or challenge inequality.
Globalisation
Global communication brings cultures into closer contact. This can encourage learning and exchange, but it may also create cultural conflict, stereotyping, and pressure toward cultural uniformity. Mead’s perspective supports exchange while emphasising the importance of cultural dignity and diversity.
Contribution of Mead
- Mead made several major contributions:
- She demonstrated the value of cross-cultural comparison.
- She challenged biological and racial determinism.
- She showed that adolescence and gender roles vary across societies.
- She connected child-rearing with personality development.
- She made anthropology accessible to a wide public audience.
- She emphasised that culture is learned and transmitted socially.
However, her work has also been criticised. Some scholars have questioned the accuracy of certain ethnographic interpretations and argued that the cultures she studied were more complex than her published accounts suggested. Later anthropologists have also criticised the tendency to describe whole societies as if all members shared one personality pattern. Contemporary anthropology therefore combines cultural analysis with attention to individual variation, social inequality, historical change, and internal conflict.
These criticisms do not eliminate the importance of Mead’s work. Instead, they encourage a more careful approach that recognises both cultural influence and individual diversity.
Conclusion
Margaret Mead’s contribution to the culture-and-personality approach lies in her demonstration that human behaviour cannot be understood apart from the cultural environment in which people grow up. Culture is learned, shared, transmitted, and expressed through social institutions and everyday relationships. It shapes personality by influencing identity, emotional expression, gender roles, child-rearing, adolescence, morality, and social expectations.
Mead challenged the idea that behaviour is fixed entirely by biology. Her work showed that people in different societies may develop different personalities and life experiences because they are taught different values and behavioural patterns. At the same time, culture does not completely determine the individual. People interpret, negotiate, and sometimes transform the cultural patterns they inherit.
The continuing importance of Mead’s work is that it encourages us to understand personality within its social context. It reminds us that many behaviours considered natural or universal are shaped by history, socialisation, and cultural meaning.
Mead’s
Book and their core cultural argument/ focus in Brief
- Coming of Age in Samoa (1928) Argues that adolescence and youth are shaped by cultural norms rather than biological inevitability.
- Growing Up in New Guinea (1930) Examines child-rearing practices to demonstrate how societies
systematically transmit their cultural
traits to the next generation.
- Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies (1935) Demonstrates that gender roles and
behaviors are entirely malleable products of culture rather than biological traits.
References
Benedict, R. (1934). Patterns of culture. Houghton Mifflin.
Mead, M. (1930). Growing Up
in New Guinea
Library of Congress. (2001, November). Margaret Mead: Human nature and the power of culture. https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/0111/mead.html
Mead, M. (1928). Coming of age in Samoa: A psychological study of primitive youth for Western civilisation. William Morrow.
Mead, M. (1935). Sex and temperament in three primitive societies. William Morrow.
Mead, M. (1968). On what is a culture? What is a civilization? In C. F. Madden (Ed.), Talks with social scientists (pp. 16–27). Southern Illinois University Press. https://www.berghahnbooks.com/downloads/chapters/MeadStudying_Ch02.pdf
Margaret Mead (Talk) - What is
a Culture? What is a Civilization? 1968 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kiRSpftpyO0i5SyzXn2WHkixqSt1O74f/
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica.
(2026, September 10). Margaret Mead. Encyclopaedia
Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Margaret-Mead
University of Alabama Department of Anthropology. (n.d.). Culture and personality. https://anthropology.ua.edu/theory/culture-and-personality/
Wolfskill, Mary, & Francis, Patricia. (2001, November). 'Human
Nature and the Power of Culture': Exhibition marks Margaret Mead centenary. Library of Congress
Information Bulletin, 60(11). https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/0111/mead.html
Clifford Geertz (1926–2006)
American anthropologist best known for symbolic and interpretive
anthropology.
Clifford Geertz (1926–2006) was an influential American anthropologist and a leading figure in symbolic and interpretive anthropology. He defined culture as “an historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in symbols” through which people communicate, preserve, and develop their knowledge and attitudes toward life (Geertz, 1973). For Geertz, culture is not simply a collection of customs or social behaviours. It is a system of meanings that helps people interpret their experiences and give importance to everyday actions.
Geertz described human beings as being suspended in “webs of significance” that they themselves have created. These webs include language, religion, rituals, values, traditions, symbols, and social practices. Culture is therefore a semiotic system because it communicates meaning through signs and symbols. A religious ceremony, national flag, dress style, or traditional festival may express ideas about identity, morality, history, and social relationships.
Geertz also treated culture as a text that can be read and
interpreted. Anthropologists should practise “thick description” by examining
not only what people do but also what their actions mean within a particular
cultural context. Thus, anthropology becomes the interpretation of meanings
rather than the search for universal laws of behaviour.
Reference
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. Basic Books.
Culture in Sociology: How sociologists view culture as a social construct shaping identity.
Classical Thinkers:
Karl
Marx: Base and superstructure (how the economy affects culture?)
Max
Weber: Protestant ethics and capitalism (How culture affects the economy)
Antonio
Gramsci: Cultural hegemony (How culture of dominant dominate in society)
Pierre
Bourdieu: Habitus and social capita (How social capital reproduce itself)
Karl Marx (5 May 1818 – 14 March 1883)
A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (1859 Preface)
Marx famously summarizes the premise of historical materialism here:
"In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production."
Base and Superstructure: The totality of these production relations forms the economic structure of society—the real base—on which a legal and political superstructure rises, and to which definite forms of social consciousness correspond.
The German Ideology (1845–1846) (Co-written
with Friedrich Engels)
This book first systematically laid out the materialist conception of history (historical materialism), arguing that history is driven by material and economic conditions rather than abstract ideas.
Das
Kapital (Volume 1, 1867)
Marx briefly returns to and
reiterates this exact formulation in a footnote, reaffirming that the economic
structure of society is the real basis upon which the juridical and political
superstructure is raised.
Max
Weber (April 21, 1864 – June 14, 1920)
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905)
Max Weber's thesis on the relationship between Protestant ethics and the
emergence of modern capitalism is presented in his foundational 1905 work, The
Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
Original Publication: Published originally as a two-part essay in German (Die protestantische
Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus) in the journal Archiv für
Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik (1904–1905).
Revised Version: Included in Weber’s collected essays on the sociology of religion, Gesammelte
Aufsätze zur Religionssoziologie (1920–1921)
English Translation: First translated into English by sociologist Talcott Parsons in 1930.
Key Concepts
The Spirit of Capitalism: Defined not merely as the acquisition of wealth, but as a moral and systematic obligation to work diligently, practice thrift, and reinvest profits.
The Concept of a "Calling" (Beruf): Reformation theology (originating with Martin Luther and expanded by John Calvin) elevated secular, everyday work to a spiritual vocation or divine duty.
Predestination and Psychological Anxiety: Calvinist doctrine held that God had predestined souls for salvation or damnation before birth, and human actions could not change this decree. To cope with the deep spiritual insecurity of not knowing their status, believers sought tangible signs of divine favor in worldly success and disciplined labor.
Asceticism and Capital
Accumulation: Inner-worldly
asceticism—abstaining from the luxurious or extravagant consumption of
wealth—led believers to continuously reinvest their accumulated capital back into
productive enterprises, directly fueling the takeoff of modern industrial
capitalism.
Major Criticisms
Materialist Precedents: Historians like Fernand Braudel argued that sophisticated capitalist systems and banking practices existed long before the Protestant Reformation in Catholic regions.
Empirical Validity: Critics note a lack of generalized statistical data proving that Protestant areas developed capitalism faster or more extensively than Catholic counterparts across all historical eras.
The "Iron Cage": Weber himself acknowledged that as modern capitalism matured, it shed its religious justifications, leaving individuals trapped in a secular, highly rationalized economic system driven purely by material and systemic compulsion.
Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937)
An influential Italian Marxist
Philosopher, Journalist, and a founding leader of the Italian Communist Party)
Antonio Gramsci’s
theory of cultural
hegemony explains how a dominant social class maintains power not
through physical force, but by shaping the cultural norms and values of a society so that their rule
appears natural and inevitable.
Core Concept
Definition: The way the ruling class uses cultural institutions to impose its own worldview, beliefs, and values on the rest of society.
Consent vs. Coercion: Power is sustained by gaining the willing consent of the subordinate classes, rather than relying strictly on police, military, or legal coercion (political society).
Role of Civil Society: Dominance is organized through everyday institutions like schools, the media, religion, and family, which socialize people into accepting the status quo as "common sense".
Naturalization: Inequalities and existing social orders are perceived as normal or ordinary rather than human-made arrangements that benefit a privileged few.
References
Gramsci, Antonio. Prison
Notebooks (written 1929–1935 during his imprisonment under Mussolini's fascist
regime).
Pierre Bourdieu (1930–2002.
French Sociologist,
Anthropologist, and Public Intellectual who revolutionized modern social theory
by studying how Power, Class, and Social Inequality are reproduced across
generations)
Pierre
Bourdieu, developed a framework to
explain how social inequalities persist across generations. He argued that inequality is not just economic,
but deeply rooted in cultural and social mechanisms that reproduce the existing
class structure.
Habitus: The
Internalized Structure
Definition: Habitus refers to a system of deeply ingrained, durable dispositions,
habits, skills, and ways of thinking.
Origin: It is acquired through early socialization, primarily within the family
and immediate social class environment.
Mechanism: It acts as an internal "feel for the game." It dictates how a person carries themselves, speaks,
tastes, and reacts without conscious thought.
Role in Inequality: Because habitus is shaped by one's social class, individuals from
privileged backgrounds naturally develop dispositions that align with the expectations
of elite institutions (like top universities or high-paying corporate
environments).
Social Capital: The
Network of Relationships
Definition: Social capital is the sum of actual or potential resources linked to
the possession of a durable network of institutionalized relationships of
mutual acquaintance and recognition.
Core Elements: It consists of
social networks, memberships, titles, and family connections.
Value: It provides individuals with "shortcuts" to success, such as
insider information, job referrals, and influential introductions.
How Social Capital
Reproduces Itself
Bourdieu argues that social
capital does not exist in a vacuum; it constantly regenerates and multiplies
through specific mechanisms:
Conversion of Capitals: Economic capital (money) is invested to buy elite education or access
to exclusive clubs. This investment converts economic capital into social capital (valuable
connections). Later, these connections are used to secure high-paying
jobs, converting social capital back into economic capital.
Deliberate Investment Strategies: The reproduction of
social capital requires continuous, conscious, or unconscious effort. Elite
families spend time, energy, and money maintaining relationships through galas,
country clubs, and networking events.
The Role of Habitus: Social capital requires the correct habitus to be unlocked. A person cannot leverage an elite
network if they do not know the unwritten social codes, manners, or language of
that network. The habitus ensures that elite networks remain exclusive
by screening out those who do not "fit in."
Institutionalization: Social capital is reinforced through formal institutions. Attending elite universities or
joining specific professional associations formalizes and legitimizes network
ties, giving them permanent value.
Intergenerational
Transmission: Parents pass their
social networks down to their children. By introducing children to family
friends, securing them internships through acquaintances, and placing them in
environments with peers of similar status, the network reproduces itself for
the next generation.
Culture in India & Personality
·
Major Cultural Studies in India:
o M.N.
Srinivas – Sanskritization and Westernization.
o
Yogendra Singh – Modernization
of Indian tradition
§
Causes of Modernisation
§
Westernization – British
Government
§
Modern Institution
§ Internal Factors – Social
Reform, Infrastructural Development
§ External factors –
Globalisation of Thoughts, Culture, Material, Economy
§ English Education
§ Inclusive Education and
Opportunity (including Govt Jobs for Power Balance)
·
Personality in Psychology & Sociology:
o Psychological
view: Traits, Behavior, Cognition. It refers
to a comprehensive framework used to understand human personality and actions
by examining three core dimensions: who people are (traits), what people do
(behavior), and how people think (cognition)
§
Traits (Who
you are):
§
Enduring,
stable patterns of thoughts, feelings, and tendencies that define an
individual's personality.
§ Examples include the Big Five personality traits: openness,
conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism.
§
Behavior (What
you do):
§
The observable
actions, responses, and outward expressions of a person in various environments
or situations.
§ Examples include how someone reacts under stress, communicates, or
completes a task.
§
Cognition (How
you think):
§ Internal mental processes, including perception, memory,
problem-solving, decision-making, and language. It explains the hidden
"software" of the mind that processes information and directly
influences both traits and visible actions.
o
Sociological view: Personality as socially
constructed. (Karl Marx, Antonio Gramsci, Pierre Bordieu) (Whatever you are thinking is
not your thinking it is mostly socially constructed, affected, and depended. -
ANIL)
§ Antonio Gramsci and Pierre
Bourdieu are two foundational theorists of cultural power, both arguing that ruling classes maintain control
not just through physical force or economics, but through culture, ideas, and
consent. (These
consent is voluntary, rather have no option to follow that. It is not looking
coercive but has no open ended option too. Since it is not coercive, it is
working in the form of reward and punishment. And these punishment is not on
the form of coercive or harsh punishment preferably not recognising your worth,
sidelining you, or eventually you will be sidelined you yourself, and gradually
it will look natural to the observer, and after a period of time ot will look a
natural to self too. – ANIL)
§ Karl Marx is defining it in
the form of Class Behaviour
·
Major Studies on Personality & Society:
o Freud’s
psychoanalytic theory.
§ Sigmund
Freud’s psychoanalytic theory argues that human behavior and personality are
shaped by the dynamic conflict between unconscious primal drives and societal
moral constraints.
§ Freud
proposed that personality consists of three interacting structures:
§
Id: The primitive, unconscious
part driven by biological instincts and the pleasure principle, seeking immediate gratification.
§
Superego: The moral
conscience and internalized societal values that push for perfection and societal rules.
§ Ego: The conscious decision-maker operating on the reality principle, mediating the demands of
the id, the superego, and reality
o Erikson’s
psychosocial stages.
§ Erik Erikson’s main argument in his theory of psychosocial development
is that personality develops in a predetermined sequence across the entire lifespan, shaped by a
lifelong interaction between individual biological needs and societal or cultural expectations.
§ Lifespan
Growth: Unlike Sigmund Freud, who
focused only on childhood, Erikson argued that people continue to change and face new challenges until
the end of life.
§ Psychosocial
Crisis: Every person must face a turning
point or conflict at each stage.
§ Virtues: Successfully solving a conflict gives a person a basic strength or
virtue. Failing a stage leads to a weaker personality or trouble with later
stages.
o C.G.
Jung’s archetypes.
§ Carl
Jung’s theory of archetypes argues that all humans share a collective
unconscious filled with inherited, universal patterns of thought, imagery, and
behavior.
§
The Collective
Unconscious: A deep layer
of the psyche shared by all human beings, distinct from our personal life
experiences.
§
Universal
Inheritance: Innate
psychological structures passed down through human evolution that shape how we
perceive reality.
§
Individuation: The lifelong psychological process of integrating conscious and
unconscious elements to achieve wholeness and self-realization.
§ Four
Major Archetypes
§ The Persona: The social
mask we wear to interact with the world and fit into societal expectations.
§ The Shadow: The hidden
or repressed side of our personality containing traits we reject or deny.
§ The Anima / Animus: The
unconscious feminine inner personality in men (anima) and the masculine inner
personality in women (animus).
§ The Self: The central
archetype representing total unity, balance, and integration of the entire
psyche
· National Character Studies:
o Ruth
Benedict’s work.
o
Indian perspectives on
collective personality traits.
Linking Culture and
Personality
·
Relationship Between Culture and Personality:
o Culture
shapes personality through socialization.
o Personality
influences cultural reproduction.
·
Indian Context:
(Analyse as we had seen Marx, Antonio Gramsci and Pierre Bourdieu)
o Caste,
religion, and family as cultural determinants of personality.
o Modernization
and globalization reshaping Indian personality traits.
·
Major Sociological Thinkers on Culture & Personality:
o Talcott
Parsons – personality as part of social system.
o C.
Wright Mills – sociological imagination linking personal troubles and public
issues.
o Clifford
Geertz – culture as a system of meaning.
0 Comments