Ethnoscience has been defined as an attempt "to reconstitute what serves as scie nce for others, their practices

of looking after themselves and their bodies, th eir botanical knowledge, but also their forms of classification, of making conne ctions, etc." (Aug?, 1999: 118). Contents 1 Origins of Ethnoscience 2 Early Approaches of Ethnoscience 3 Development of Ethnoscience 3.1 Ethnolinguistics 3.2 Taxonomy and Classification 3.3 System of Classification Among Cultures 3.4 Contemporary Research 4 See also 5 References Origins of Ethnoscience Ethnoscience s focus was not always different from the ideas of cognitive anthropol ogy , component analysis, or the New Ethnography ; it is a specialization of indigenous knowledge systems, such as Ethno-botany, ethno-zoology, ethno-medicine, etc. (A tran, 1991: 595) . According to Scott Atran, ethnoscience looks at culture with a scientific perspective (1991: 650), although most anthropologists abhor this def inition. Ethnoscience helps to understand how people develop with different form s of knowledge and beliefs, and focuses on the ecological and historical contrib utions people have been given (Atran, 1991: 650). Tim Ingold describes ethnoscie nce as being a cross-discipline (2000: 160). He writes that ethnoscience is base d on increased collaboration between social sciences and humanities (e.g., anthr opology, sociology, psychology, and philosophy) with natural sciences such as bi ology, ecology, or medicine (Ingold, 2000: 406-7). At the same time, ethnoscienc e is increasingly transdisciplinary in its nature (Ingold, 2000: 407). Of course, naturally over time, the ways in which data has been collected and st udied has changed and it has evolved, becoming more detailed and specific (Urry, 1972: 45). The ideas, mechanics, and methods of ethnoscience evolved from somet hing else- a combination of several things. This pretext amalgamation of theorie s, processes, and isms led to the evolution of today s ethnoscience. Early Approaches of Ethnoscience Early on, Franz Boas established cultural relativism as an approach to understan ding indigenous scientific practices (Uddin, 2005: 980). Cultural relativism ide ntifies people s differences and shows how they are a result of the social, histor ical, and geographical conditions (Uddin, 2005: 980). Boas is known for his work in Northern Vancouver, Canada, working with the Kwakwaka'wakw Indians, which is where he established the importance of culture (Uddin, 2005: 980). L?vi-Strauss structuralism was a strong contributor to the ideas of ethnoscience (Uddin, 2005 : 980). It?, itself, was the leading idea of providing structure to the research and a guide to organizing and relating different cultures. Ethnoscience refers t o a reduction of chaos achieved by a particular culture, rather than to the highest possible and conscious degree to which such chaos may be reduced; basically, the ethnoscience of a society creates its culture (Sturtevant, 1964: 100). Much of t he influence of anthropology, e.g., geographical determinism, was through the co ntributions of Jean Bodin (Harris, 1968: 42). In his text, he tried to explain w hy northern people were faithful, loyal to the government, cruel, and sexually un interested, compared to why southern people were malicious, craft, wise, expert in science but ill-adapted to political activity (Harris, 1968: 52). The Greek hi storian, Polybius, asserted we mortals have an irresistible tendency to yield to climatic influences; and to this cause, and no other, may be traced the great di stinctions that prevail among us in character, physical formation, complexion, a s well as in most of our habits (quoted in Harris, 1968: 41).

Another aspect of anthropology prior to ethnoscience is enculturation. Newton an d Newton described enculturation as a process whereby the novice, or outsider, lea rns what is important to the insider (1998). Marvin Harris writes, One of [encultur ation s] most important technical expressions is the doctrine of psychic unity, the belief that in the study of sociocultural differences, hereditary (genetic) diff erences cancel each other out, leaving experience as the most significant variable (Harris, 1968: 15). This is one of the many starts of people opening up to the i dea that just because people are different, doesn t mean they are wrong in their t hinking. Harris describes how religious beliefs hinder and affect the progress o f anthropology and ethnography. The moral beliefs and restrictions of religion f ought against anthropological ideas, possibly due to (especially at the time) to the newly hyped idea of evolutionism and Darwinism (Harris, 1968). Bronislaw Malinowski was one of many who contributed heavily to the precursor of ethnoscience. His earlier work brought attention to sociological studies; his e arliest publication focused on a family in Australia, using a sociological study perspective (Harris, 1968: 547). After the First World War, anthropological wor k was at a stand still; nothing had evolved, if not regressed (Urry, 1972: 54). This allowed him to start from scratch, and rebuild his ideas and methods (Harri s, 1968: 547). Later, however, Malinowski branched out to political evolution during World War II. The period after World War II is what led to ethnoscience; anthropologists l earned their skills could be applied to problems that were affecting modern soci eties (Mead, 1973: 1). Malinowski said with his tables of kinship terms, genealog ies, maps, plans and diagrams, proves an extensive and big organization, shows t he contribution of the tribe, of the clan, of the family, and he gives a picture of the natives subjected to a strict code of behavior and good manners, to whic h in comparison the life at the Court of Versailles or Escurial was free and eas y (1922: 10). After World War II, there was an extreme amount of growth in the an thropological field, not only with research opportunities but academically, as w ell (Mead, 1973: 2). The anthropologist Robin Horton, who taught at several Nigerian universities, co nsidered the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples as incorporated within conceptual world views that bear certain similarities to, and differences from, the modern scientific worldview. Like modern science, traditional thought provid es a theoretical structure that "places things in a causal order wider than that provided by common sense" (Horton, 1967, p. 53). In contrast to modern science, he saw traditional thought as having a limited awareness of theoretical alterna tives and, consequently, displaying "an absolute acceptance of the established t heoretical tenets" (Horton, 1967, pp. 155 6). There are dozens, if not hundreds, of related methods and processes that precede d ethnoscience. Ethnoscience is just another way to study the human culture and the way people interact in society. Taking a look at the ideas and analyses prio r to ethnoscience can help understand why it was developed in the first place. A lthough, it is not widely used and there is criticism on both ends, ethnoscience allows for a more comprehensive way to collect data and patterns of a people. T his is not to say the process is its best or that there will be nothing better. That is the best part: everything evolves, even thought. Just as the ideas did i n the past, they can improve over time and regress over time but change is inevi table. Development of Ethnoscience Ethnoscience is a new term and study that came into anthropological theory in th e 1960s. Often referred to as "indigenous knowledge," Ethnoscience introduces a perspective based on native perceptions. It is based on a complete emic perspect ive, which excludes all observations, interpretations and or any personal notion

s belonging to the ethnographer. The taxonomy and classification of indigenous s ystems, to name a few, used to categorize plants, animals, religion and life is adapted from a linguistic analysis. The concept of Native Science is also related to the understanding the role of the environment intertwined with the meaning hu mans place upon their lives. Understanding the language and the native people s li nguistic system is one method to understand a native people s system of knowledge of organization. Not only is there categorization for things pertaining to natur e and culture thought language, but more importantly and complex is the relation ship between environment and culture. Ethnoscience looks at the intricacies of t he connection between culture and its surrounding environment. There are also po tential limitations and shortcomings in interpreting these systems of knowledge as a dictation of culture and behavior. Since an ethnographer is not able to physically enter inside an indigenous perso ns mind, it is essential to not only create a setting or question-answer format to understand perspective but to analyze semantics and word order of given answe r to derive an emic understanding. The main focus on a particular component of t he languages is placed on its lexicon. The terms etic and emic are derived from the linguistic terms of phonetic and phonemic. As introduced by Gregory Cajete,some limitations the concept of indigenous knowl edge, is the potential to bypass non-indigenous knowledge as pertinent and valua ble. The labels of indigenous are overly accepted by those who seek more support b y outsiders to further their cause. There might also be an unequal distribution of knowledge amongst a tribe or peoples. There is also the idea that culture bou nd by environment. Some theorists conclude that indigenous people s culture is not operated by mental concentrations but solely by the earth that surrounds them. Some theorists go the extent to state that biological processes are based upon t he availability, of lack thereof, environmental resources. The methods for susta inability are founded through the workings of the land. These techniques are exe rcised from the basis of tradition. The importance of the combination of ecologi cal process, social structures, environmental ethics and spiritual ecology are c rucial to the expression of the true connection between the natural world and eco logical consciousness.

The origin of Ethnoscience began between the years 1960 to 1965; deriving from t he concept of ethno- + science . Ethno- a combining form meaning race, culture, people, sed in the formation of compound words: ethnography. The two concepts later emer ged into ethno-science. The origin of the word science involves the empiric observat ion of measurable quantities and the testing of hypotheses to falsify or support them. Ethnoscience refers to the system of knowledge and cognition typical of a given culture...to put it another way a culture itself amounts to the sum of a g iven society s folk classifications, all of that society s ethnoscience, its particu lar ways of classifying its material and social universe (Videbeck and Pia, 1966) . The aim of ethnoscience is to gain a more complete description of cultural kno wledge. Ethnoscience has been successful used on several studies of given cultur es relating to their linguists, folk taxonomy, and how they classify their foods , animals and plants. Ethnolinguistics Ethnoscience is the examination of the perceptions, knowledge, and classificatio ns of the world as reflected in their use of language, which can help anthropolo gists understand a given culture. By using an ethnographic approach to studying a culture and learning their lexicon and syntax they are able to gain more knowl edge in understanding how a particular culture classifies its material and socia l universe. In addition, this approach adopted provides simultaneously a point at which the discipline of linguistics, or at least some of its general attitudes, may sensibly be used in anthropology and as a means of gaining insight not only into the nature of man but also into the nature of culture (Videbeck and Pia, 19 66).

Researchers can use linguistics to study what a given culture considers importan t in a given situation or unforeseen event, and can rank those potential situati ons in terms of their likelihood to recur. In addition, understanding the conting encies is helpful in the task of comprehending folk taxonomies on the one hand, and, on the other, an understanding of the taxonomy is required for a full scale appreciation of criteria considered relevant in a given culture (Videbeck and P ia, 1966). Taxonomy and Classification Ethnoscience can be used to analyze the kinship terminology of a given culture, using their language and according to how they view members of their society. Ta xonomies are models of analysis whose purpose is the description of particular ty pes of hierarchical relationships between members of a given set of elements (Per chonock and Werner, 1969). For example, in our society we classify family groups by giving members the title of father, mother, sister, daughter, brother, son, grandfather, grandmother, etc. System of Classification Among Cultures Ethnoscience deals with how a given culture classifies certain principles in add ition to how it is express through their language. By understanding a given cult ure through how they view the world, anthropologists attempt to eliminate any bi as through translation as well as categorized their principles in their own ways . The new methods, which focus on the discovery and description of folk systems, have come to be known as Ethnoscience. Ethnoscience analysis has thus far concen trated on systems of classification within such cultural and linguistic domains as colors, plants, and medicines. (Perchonock and Werner, 1969) An ethno-scientif ic approach can be used to better understand a given culture and their knowledge of their culture. Using an ethnographic approach can help anthropologists under stand how that given culture views and categorizes their own foods, animal kingd om, medicines, as well as plants. Contemporary Research Ethnoscience can be effectively summed up as a classification system for a parti cular culture in the same way that a botanist would use a taxonomic system for t he classification of plant species. Everything from class levels, food consumpti on, clothing, and material culture objects would be subjected to a taxonomic cla ssification system. In essence, ethnoscience is a way of classifying cultural sy stems in a structured order to better understand the culture. The roots of ethno science can be traced back to influential anthropologists such as Franz Boas, Br onislaw Malinowski, and Benjamin Whorf who attempted to understand other culture s from and insider's perspective. Ward Goodenough is accredited for bringing eth noscience to the stage when he define cultural systems of knowledge by stating: "A societies culture consists of whatever it is one has to know or believe i n order to operate in a manner acceptable to its members. Culture is not a mater ial phenomenon; it does not consist of things, behavior,or emotions. It is rathe r an organization of these things. It is the form of things that people have in mind, their models for perceiving, relating, and otherwise interpreting them." ( Goodenough 1957:167) In order to properly put ethnoscience in context we must first understand the de finition of ethnoscience. it is defined as "an attempt at cultural description f rom a totally emic perspective (a perspective in ethnography that uses the conce pts and categories that are relevant and meaningful to the culture that is insid er analysis) standpoint, this eliminating all of the ethnographer's own categori es." (Morey and Luthans 27) Ethnoscience is also a way of learning and understan ding how an individual or group perceive their environment and how they fit in w ith their environment as reflected in their own words and actions.

Ethnoscience has many techniques when applied to an emic perspective. Ethnoseman tics, ethnographic semantics, ethnographic ethnoscience, formal analysis, and co mponential analysis are the terms that apply to the practice of ethnoscience. Et hnosemantics looks at the meaning of words in order to place them in context of the culture being studied. It allows for taxonomy of a certain part of the cultu re being looked at so that there is a clear breakdown which in turn leads to a d eeper understanding of the subject at hand. Ethnographic semantics are very simi lar to cognitive anthropology in that its primary focus is the intellectual and rational perspectives of the culture being studied. Ethnographic semantics speci fically looks at how language is used throughout the culture. Lastly, ethnograph ic ethnoscience is related to ethnosemantics such that, it uses a taxonomic syst em to understand how cultural knowledge is accessible through language. Ethnogra phic ethnoscience uses similar classification systems for cultural domains like ethnobotany and ethnoanatomy. Again, ethnoscience is a way of understanding a ho w a culture sees itself through its own language. Understanding the cultural lan guage allows the ethnographer to have a deeper and more intimate understanding o f the culture. See also Ethnoastronomy Ethnobiology Ethnobotany Ethnoecology Ethnomathematics Ethnomedicine Ethnopharmacy Ethnozoology Traditional knowledge Traditional medicine References Atran, Scott. 1991. Social Science Information / Sur Les Sciences Sociales. Ethn oscience Today 30(4): 595-662. Aug?, Marc. 1999. The war of dreams: exercises in ethno-fiction, London: Pluto P ress, 1999 Cajete, Gregory. 2000."Native Science: Natural Laws of Interdependence."Santa Fe ,N.M.: Clear Light Publishers. Harris, Marvin. 1968. The Rise of Anthropological Theory: A history of Theories of Culture. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company. Horton, Robin (1967), "African Traditional Thought and Western Science", Africa 37: 50 71, 155 187 Ingold, Tim. 2000. The Perception of The Environment: Essays on livelihood, dwel ling and skill. London, UK: Routledge. Malinowski, BC. 1922. Argonauts of the western pacific. London, UK: Routledge. Mead, Margaret. 1973. Changing Styles of Anthropological Work. Annual Review of Anthropology 2: 1-16. Meehan, Peter M. 1980. Science, ethnoscience, and agricultural knowledge utiliza tion. In: Warren DM, Brokensha D, Werner O (Eds). Indigenous knowledge systems a nd development. Lanham, MD, USA: University Press of America. p 383-91.

Newton DP, Newton LD. 1998. Enculturation and understanding: Some differences be tween sixth formers and graduates conceptions of understanding in history and scie nce. Teaching in Higher Education 3: 339 64. Perchonock, Norma and Oswald Werner. 1969. Navaho Systems of Classifications: So me Implications for Ethnoscience. Northwestern University. Ethnology, Vol. 8, No . 3 (Jul., 1969), pp. 229 242. Sturtevant, Willliam C. 1964. Studies in Ethnoscience. American Anthropologist66 (3): 99-131. Uddin, Nasir. 2005. Facts and Fantasy of Knowledge: Retrospective of Ethnography for the Future of Anthropology. Pakistan Journal of Social Science 3(7): 978-85 . Urry, James. 1972. Notes and Queries on Anthropology. Royal Anthropological Inst itute of Great Britain and Ireland 1972: 45-57. Videbeck, R. and J. Pia. 1966. Plans for Coping: An Approach to Ethnoscience. Sy racuse University. Anthropological Linguistics, Vol. 8, No. 8. Ethnoscience: A S ymposium Presented at the 1966 Meeting of the Central States Anthropological Society (Nov., 1966), pp. 71-77. Werner, Oswald. 1972. Ethnoscience 1972. Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 1 ( 1972), pp. 271 308.