Visit Biography of HarrisThe Neomaterialist, Marvin Harris, developed the approach of Cultural Materialism, which explains culture based on the practical problems of earthly human existence. Cultural Materialism identifies three universal components in all societies: infrastructure, structure, and superstructure, as shown in Figure 1 below.
The infrastructure consists of fundamental elements for human survival and has two subcomponents: the mode of production and the mode of reproduction. The structure consists of domestic and political economy. The superstructure consists of shared cognitive and ideological patterns and behaviors in the society. Harris analyzed relationships among these three components of societies and argued that they are related through the “Principle of Infrastructural Determinism.” This principle asserts that the infrastructure is the basic foundation of sociocultural life and that it determines the formation of the structure. Then the structure asserts a strong influence on the formation of the superstructure. Harris stressed that the flow of these causal relationships could operate in the reverse direction, from superstructure to infrastructure. However, opposite flow happens with less frequency and is less significant. Harris also explained an explanation on why the infrastructure is so important for sociocultural life. In his view, the infrastructure has priority over the other structures because it directly relates to human survival and physical well-being. Only after basic needs are met, can humans become concerned with social organization and ideology. Harris’ Cultural Materialism approach was based on his belief that anthropology is a science. Since science is based on laws, anthropology should focus on infrastructures because they are governed by laws.
A famous example of Harris’ Cultural Materialism approach is the analysis of sacred cows in India. He argues that the Hindu taboo on killing cattle stems from material reasons rather than cognitive ones. In Indian society, it is economically efficient to use cows as draft animals rather than as meat. This analysis shows that infrastructures determine other aspects of a society, including symbolic-ideal realms of the culture. Harris made distinctions between etic and emic perspectives in Cultural Materialism research. Etic conveys an anthropologist’s point of view; emic represents the point of view of natives observed by the anthropologist. Harris regards the etic category as more important than emic category because outside researchers are able to see the basic foundations of social structures. Therefore, his analysis of India’s cattle is based on an etic perspective, which does not necessarily match with Indians’ feelings towards cows.
Visit Biography of HarrisBarfield, Thomas. 1996 The Dictionary of Anthropology. Malden: Blackwell.
Barnard, Alan, and Jonathan Spencer. 1997 Encyclopedia of Social and Cultural Anthropology. London; New York: Routledge.
Moore, Jerry D. 1998 Visions of Culture : An Introduction to Anthropological Theories and Theorists. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.
This page was created by Minnesota State University, Mankato student. Last updated 12/15/03