# data[].attributes.body
1. Early anthropological theories perceived culture as something that evolves from simple to complex forms (evolutionist theories). For them, ancient societies were savage and primitive. What could be the issues with such theories and what consequences such perceptions might have had at the time?

These two theories may cause cultural bias, leading to culture discrimination. Because it categorizes culture into several stages, this classification ignores the rich cultural diversity and fails to appreciate the strengths and complexities of various societies.

Another issue it causes is colonialism, the development culture has to help the developing culture to evolve. Consequences: These theories often justified colonialism and imperialism. The idea that some societies were less advanced or primitive was used to legitimize the subjugation and exploitation of indigenous peoples by colonial powers.

Some people may lose their cultural identity: Indigenous cultures faced erosion of their identity and traditions as they were deemed inferior and pressured to assimilate into 'civilized' ways.

2. Franz Boas is known as the founder of ‘Cultural Relativism’. Define this concept in your own words and discuss how his view was different from the ones held by Arnold and Tylor?

Matthew Arnold's idea that only a small part of any social group "has" culture reflects a perspective that emphasizes a distinction between high culture and popular culture.

Edward Tylor's idea of cultural evolution, where societies progress from "savagery" to "barbarism" and eventually to "civilization," is seen as outdated and ethnocentric by many contemporary scholars.

Franz Boas's idea that one should not put different values on any culture is highly relevant today. This perspective aligns with the principles of cultural relativism and cultural anthropology, which emphasize understanding cultures on their terms without imposing external judgments.

3. Which of these thinkers ideas do you think is most relevant today? Offer evidence/ examples from your Culture and Heritage to support your ideas.

For me personally, whether it is to distinguish between elite culture and popular culture or to interpret human civilization by dividing it into stages. They are all a bit condescending. There is no distinction between high and low culture, class, and good or bad. Therefore, I think Boa’s theory is more applicable to today’s society.

In conclusion, while all three thinkers' ideas about culture have some relevance in contemporary discussions, Franz Boas's perspective of cultural relativism and the idea of not placing different values on cultures appears to be the most relevant and widely accepted in today's multicultural and globalized world. It promotes respect for cultural diversity, understanding, and the coexistence of various cultural traditions and practices.

# data[].attributes.body
1 The theory says that cultures evolverd from simple to complex forms, assumes the later ones are detimtely better than the former ones, which can not be 100% correct.

2 All kinds of cultures are equal, there is not such things that one is better or worse than others. lomparing to the other two thories, it emphasizes on the point of equility of different cultures.

What is an artefact? (i.e. what are its characteristics?)

An artefact, as discussed in the text, refers to objects shaped by human activity. These objects have physical form, yet they are inanimate. They are products of human desires and are inherently ambiguous in their nature, blurring the distinction between persons and non-persons. Artefacts can range from industrially produced goods to self-made creations, and their physicality makes them social things.

How does an artefact differ from a symbol?

While symbols can convey meaning through representation, artefacts, as discussed in the text, are concerned with questions of 'being' rather than 'reference.' Artefacts are concrete forms that people construct, alter, consume, and apply meaning to, contributing to their identity. The text suggests that when discussing the meaning of things, the focus is more on the 'meaningful' in the sense of 'significance,' and artefacts serve as a means by which individuals understand themselves, others, and abstract concepts.

What is the problem with artefacts according to Miller?

According to Miller, the problem with artefacts lies in the modern challenge of continually being faced with objects that individuals find difficult to assimilate. This difficulty in assimilation, as argued by Simmel and echoed by Miller, is a key problem of the modern age. The extraordinary variety of artefacts, their physical nature, and the constant striving for assimilation contribute to the complexity and ambiguity associated with artefacts.

Can any object be an artefact? Why? Why not?

The text suggests that any object shaped by human activity can be considered an artefact. This inclusivity is evident in the challenges posed by the proposal to establish a museum of contemporary material culture. Whether industrially produced or self-made, objects ranging from houses to candy floss may be considered artefacts, reflecting the broad scope of human creation and interpretation.

How would you decide on which artefacts to put in a museum?

The text acknowledges the impracticality of creating a comprehensive museum of contemporary material culture. However, deciding which artefacts to include in a museum would likely involve considerations of cultural, historical, and societal significance. The selection process would need to account for the diversity of objects and their meanings, possibly focusing on items that represent particular eras, cultural movements, or societal shifts.

How can we give meaning to an artefact?

the text suggests that artefacts are a means by which individuals give form to and come to an understanding of themselves, others, or abstract concepts. Meaning is attributed to artefacts through the construction, alteration, consumption, and application of meaning. The text implies that the meaningfulness of artefacts is closely tied to questions of 'being' and how individuals identify with or relate to these objects.

What information is necessary to understand the purpose or use of an artefact?

To understand the purpose or use of an artefact, information about its cultural, historical, and social context is essential. Questions about what the artefact means to individuals, groups, or society as a whole, how it relates to identity and symbolism, and its role in daily life or rituals would contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of its purpose. The broader cultural significance and personal connections people have with the artefact provide crucial context for interpretation.

# data[].attributes.body
1.Artifact or artefact is a general term for objects made or given shape by humans, such as tools or works of art, especially objects of archaeological interest. In archeology, the word has become a particularly nuanced term and is defined as an object recovered from archaeological work that may be a cultural artefact of cultural value.

2. Artifacts have an inherent meaning.

Symbols automatically shape every thought and action, and do not represent specific meanings. The meaning of symbols is not fixed.

3. Some things, such as houses and ships, are too big, some things, such as candy floss and daisy chains, too ephemeral.

4. no, Clearly, we cannot create such a museum, although we may observe the extraordinary variety of exhibitions that might be put on, featuring collections of anything from matchboxes to garden gnomes. To acknowledge the problems faced by such a proposal, however, is liable to produce a rather uneasy feeling that we live in a world that has gone beyond our capacities of ordering.

5. Historical relics, such as ancient artifacts, ancient documents, ancient relics, etc.

Artwork such as paintings, sculptures, jewelry, ceramics, etc.

Natural history specimens, such as animal and plant specimens, mineral specimens, geological specimens, etc.

Scientific instruments, such as astrolabes, astronomical telescopes, scientific experimental equipment, etc.

Contemporary art and cultural artifacts, such as contemporary paintings, sculptures, photography, videos, installations, etc.

Cultural heritage, local handicrafts, folk art, etc.

6. Meaning can be given to an artifact in terms of cultural context, personal connection, symbolism, function and purpose, contextual location, educational interpretation, and artistic interpretation

7. Historical Context，Cultural Background，Functionality，Archaeological and Anthropological Studies，Documentation and Inscriptions，Provenance，Expert Analysis，Oral Histories and Indigenous Knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
1.Early anthropological  theories  perceived culture as something that evolves  from simple to complex forms (evolutionist theories). For them, ancient societies were savage and  primitive. What could be the issues with such theories and what consequences such perceptions might have had at the time?

Issues with Evolutionist Theories:

Ethnocentrism: Evolutionist theories often ranked societies on a linear scale from "primitive" to "advanced," reflecting ethnocentric biases of the time. This implied a value judgment that could lead to the dismissal or devaluation of certain cultures.

Simplistic Generalizations: The theories oversimplified the diversity of human cultures by assuming a unilinear progression. This ignored the complexity and uniqueness of different societies, overlooking their distinct histories, adaptations, and social structures.

Eurocentrism: Many evolutionist theories were Eurocentric, interpreting the development of societies through a Western lens. This Eurocentrism reinforced colonialist ideologies and justified the domination of "less advanced" cultures by "advanced" ones.

Consequences:

Colonial Justification: The perception of some societies as "savage" provided a moral and intellectual basis for colonialism, as it was seen as a mission to civilize and uplift supposedly inferior cultures.

Cultural Stereotypes: Such theories contributed to stereotypes and prejudiced views, affecting the understanding of non-Western cultures and influencing policies that undermined cultural diversity.

2.Franz Boas is known as the founder of ‘Cultural Relativism’. Define this concept in your own words and discuss how his view was different  from the ones held by  Arnold and Tylor?

Cultural Relativism and Franz Boas:

Definition: Cultural relativism, as introduced by Franz Boas, rejects the idea of cultural evolution and advocates for understanding each culture within its own historical and environmental context, without imposing external value judgments.

Differences from Arnold and Tylor:

Arnold and Tylor: Both held evolutionist views, suggesting that cultures evolve from simple to complex forms. Tylor proposed a three-stage model of cultural evolution (savagery, barbarism, civilization). Arnold's views aligned with a belief in a linear cultural progression.

Boas: He emphasized the importance of studying cultures in their specific contexts, rejecting the notion of a universal cultural evolution. Boas argued for cultural relativism, understanding and respecting each culture on its own terms.

3. Which of these thinkers ideas do you think is most relevant today? Offer evidence/ examples from your Culture and Heritage to support your ideas.

Relevance Today:

Boas's Ideas: Boas's cultural relativism is more relevant today as it recognizes the diversity and complexity of cultures without hierarchical judgments. This approach aligns with contemporary values of cultural sensitivity and the importance of preserving and respecting cultural diversity.

Evidence from Today's Culture and Heritage:

Multicultural Societies: In multicultural societies, like many found today, the coexistence of diverse cultural practices is a testament to the validity of cultural relativism. Each culture contributes to the richness of the overall social tapestry.

Globalization: The interconnectedness of the world highlights the need for cultural relativism. Cultures interact, borrow from each other, and evolve in unique ways, challenging the idea of a unilinear cultural progression.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Early anthropological  theories  perceived culture as something that evolves  from simple to complex forms (evolutionist theories). For them, ancient societies were savage and  primitive. What could be the issues with such theories and what consequences such perceptions might have had at the time?

There will be colonial and cultural plunder, resulting in the loss of something. The development of culture is not synchronous and equal, but is divided into high and low levels, such as "savage" or "primitive,". For example, when European regions develop, their development level is higher than that of surrounding regions, which is prejudiced and devastating to surrounding regions.

2. Franz Boas is known as the founder of ‘Cultural Relativism’. Define this concept in your own words and discuss how his view was different  from the ones held by  Arnold and Tylor?

Culture is not a special product, and there is no distinction between high and popular. And cannot put different values on any cultures. He said we should take into consideration the context of that particular group of people.

3. Which of these thinkers ideas do you think is most relevant today? Offer evidence/ examples from your Culture and Heritage to support your ideas.

I think Franz Boaz's view is the most advanced.

Boaz's Cultural Relativism, emphasizing the uniqueness of each culture, remains highly relevant today as societies become more interconnected.

In a globalized world, understanding and respecting cultural diversity are crucial for fostering cross-cultural understanding and cooperation.

# data[].attributes.body
1.    What is an artefact? (i.e. what are its characteristics?)

Artifacts manifest in tangible forms, yet human societies consistently endeavor to integrate them into their identities by creating, modifying, using, and imbuing them with significance.

The physicality of artifacts, arising from human intent but inherently devoid of life, inherently blurs the distinction between beings and non-beings.

This intrinsic quality is fundamental to their role as elements of social life.

Characters: Human-made, existence, cultural significance, functionality

2.    How does an artefact differ from a symbol?

Objects made by people to serve practical or aesthetic ends are called artifacts. Symbols are concepts represented by abstract means, such as gestures, images, or words.

Artifacts typically possess a function related to their physical form, while symbols are employed to communicate cultural or abstract ideas.

Objects can have value to a culture, often in a practical sense, whereas symbols are created specifically to communicate cultural meaning.

Objects can deteriorate and may have a short lifespan, while symbols can survive many generations. In cultural settings, symbols and artifacts can come together to convey cultural meanings or messages when symbols are attached to or engraved on artifacts.

3.    What is the problem with artefacts according to Miller?

Daniel Miller highlights the challenges of preserving artifacts in a museum of contemporary material culture. These challenges stem from the complexity and variability of what qualifies as an "artifact" in today's society. Issues include the size and timeliness of objects, blurring boundaries between natural and human-made forms, the spread of industrially produced and branded products, the constant changes in products, and the ability for individuals to customize or create their items. Ultimately, the text suggests that creating a comprehensive museum to capture these artifacts is practically unfeasible due to the ever-evolving nature of contemporary culture and the difficulty in establishing clear boundaries and selection criteria.

4.    Can any object be an artefact? Why? Why not?

Not every object can be considered an artifact. Artifacts are typically objects that have been intentionally created or significantly modified by human beings. They carry cultural, historical, or functional significance within a specific cultural context. While many objects may be human-made, not all of them are imbued with the intentional and cultural elements that define artifacts. Furthermore, the designation of an object as an artifact can be context-dependent and subject to interpretation, and in some cases, scholarly debate may arise over whether an object qualifies as an artifact. Ultimately, the key distinguishing factors for artifacts are human intentionality, cultural relevance, and their role within a specific cultural and historical context.

5.    How would you decide on which artefacts to put in a museum?

Selecting artifacts for a museum involves a careful and thoughtful process.

First, a clear mission and thematic focus for the museum must be established, which guides the selection.

Then, criteria are developed, considering factors such as historical significance, cultural relevance, uniqueness, and condition. Curators and experts may conduct research and assessments to identify artifacts that align with the museum's mission and criteria.

Additionally, community input and collaboration with relevant stakeholders can help ensure a well-rounded and representative collection.

Ultimately, the decision-making process should prioritize objects that contribute to telling a compelling and informative story that resonates with the museum's goals and the interests of its visitors.

6.    How can we give meaning to an artefact?

Understanding the historical, cultural, and social context in which the artifact was created or used is essential. This context provides the foundation for meaning.

Conducting research and gathering information about the artifact's origins, purpose, and significance within its cultural setting is crucial. Expertise and historical records can aid in this process.

Interpretation: Analyzing the artifact's physical characteristics, symbolism, and the intentions of its creators helps in interpreting its meaning.

7.    What information is necessary to understand the purpose or use of an artefact?

Cultural Context, Functional Features, Symbolism and Iconography, Historical Records, Expertise and Consultation.

# data[].attributes.headline
Sheryl, Yinghui, Sapphire, Mico - activity 2

# data[].attributes.subject
Sheryl, Yinghui, Sapphire, Mico - activity 2

# data[].attributes.body
1. What is an artefact? (i.e. what are its characteristics?)

Artefact, definition, an object made by a human being, typically one of cultural or historical interest. Cultural relics are products of human desire, but they themselves are inanimate.

2. How does an artefact differ from a symbol?

A symbol, is an abstract representation that stands for or represents something else, often a complex idea, concept, or cultural meaning.

Symbols are not physical objects, but artefact is.

While artifacts are tangible objects created by humans with cultural and historical significance, symbols are abstract representations that convey meaning and often play a crucial role in communication and cultural expression.

3. What is the problem with artefacts according to Miller?

We faced with objects which we cannot assimilate, like artefacts, we cannot created such a museum to collections this self-made artefacts.

4. Can any object be an artefact? Why? Why not?

Yes, artefacts are made by people to achieve a certain purpose. When something is given a certain meaning, it becomes an artefact.

5. How would you decide on which artefacts to put in a museum?

When the artefacts are given meaning for groups, they can be placed in museums. For example, the artefacts represent a particular period in history, or the artefacts were valuable and unique.

6. How can we give meaning to an artefact?

The artefact hadn’t soul and meaning if we pick it as a souvenir, it will be a particular item, or we think it is a special gift, it will be valuable.

7. What information is necessary to understand the purpose or use of an artefact?

Know the context in which it was created, the materials used to make it. Consider the cultural significance of the artifact and the historical period in which it was created. Understanding these factors can understand the purpose or use of an artefact.