Two Cradle Theory is the supposition that that the severe climate and of the two subdivisions before they met after a long separation, Dr Diop’s Theory also. the help of Cheikh Anta Diop’s two cradle. Aihegry, one cradle being the Southern. (African cradle and the other being the. Northern European) cradle. Dr. Diop. Onitaset Kumat We now look at Diop’s Two Cradle Theory. This Theory puts into focus how fundamentally the Occidental (European) and.
|Published (Last):||4 March 2007|
|PDF File Size:||13.16 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||4.31 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Have you ever wanted to know why humans have been so successful as a species? How societies function without governments, laws, or money? What life was like ten thousand years ago? This is the place to ask! Racism, “race realism” and “human biodiversity” are not science and will not be tolerated in this subreddit. Anthropology is the scientific study of humanity as a whole: Biological anthropology is the study of human evolution and physical diversity.
It encompasses palaeoanthropology the study of human fossilsprimatology the study of nonhuman primateshuman population genetics and forensic anthropology. Sociocultural anthropology is the study of human cultural diversity.
It originated in written accounts of non-European cultures in exotic locales ethnographybut today sociocultural anthropologists use the ethnographic method to document and study societies all around the world. Linguistic anthropology is the study of how language shapes cultural life. Linguistic anthropologists document language as it is spoken rather than approaching it as static and set.
They also study language acquisition, body language, the symbolism of language, and language as performance. Archaeology is the study of past peoples through the things they left behind.
It is our main source of evidence about human societies before the existence of written records prehistorybut can be used to study any period from the emergence of our species to the present day. If you have expertise i. Want to do an AMA? I decided to do some Wiki-research, and came across this. Diop’s theory is that Southern cradle – ie, African – civilizations are matriarchal, gentle, and more communal, whilst Northern cradle – ie, European – civilizations are patriarchal, warlike, and individualistic.
But I wondered what anthropologists had to say on the matter? As someone unfamiliar with the theory does it just divide the world into Africa and Europe or are other continents included as well?
This isn’t a matter of race necessarily. Tribal societies tend to be kinder and more communal while civilisations who reach a large enough population need to battle for resources. So since the African societies have generally been less technologically advanced than the rest of the world god, I hope this doesn’t get removedmaintaining tribal societies in many places, we could say that, yes, their culture is more nurturing than western culture, or beyond.
As for why the west and other places has advanced so much, so rapidly, that’s a whole other discussion.
How plausible/accepted is Cheikh Anta Diop’s Two-Cradle theory? : AskAnthropology
Alexander fheory all I can cite as source for this. Read it, it’s enlightening in so many ways. While I’m all in favor of investigation of the ills of consumerist society, including Alexander in particular, I think we need to sharpen our verbal blades here. Cheikh Anta Diop is historically important. It seems to be Diop who is generalizing though, when he writes off Europe as being culturally poisoned by its geography.
It’s all very Clash of Civilizations -y. Unless I’m misunderstanding his theory? Anthropology happily welcomed connections Diop made that the occidental canon had been ignoring. When he lumps five thousand years of human life across an entire continent, and, as you observe, jumps into Huntington’s essentialist arena, anthropology mostly returns to ethnography. Thanks for the reply – and also apologies: I’m not really familiar enough with anthropological terminology to make sense of it.
Two Cradle Theory
If it’s not too much trouble, would you be able to dumb down that answer for a stupid craele student? Thanks again for the effort. Anthropology, to the small extent that it speaks with one voice, heard Diop, applauded many of his detailed claims, and largely passed over his Two Cradles with polite silence.
For anthropology, kinship diagrams of Trobrianders of the early twentieth century, or Olmec funerary goods from three millenia ago, are real; generalizations about the psychology of all Europeans or all Africans are While Diop mattered to specific schools of anthropology, mainstream anthropology isn’t now particularly pursuing a program to confirm or falsify Two Cradles.
I’m not in Academe myself; I hope someone closer to the center of action will jump in. Until then, my summary is that Diop was important in the decolonializing era, and now anthropology thinks it has moved on. My own ignorance is vast; I’d love to know more about Diop himself, as well as his influence now in different universities across Africa.
If you insist on fretting about the bloody savages in your own Northern lineage, you ought to consider a degree of credit to the nation that produced the moral depths of Hume and Smith, alongside the expressive brilliance of Burns and Maxwell.
You have it in you to transcend any pessimism Two Cradles apparently determine. I have seen a few criticts cheimh and there about Cheikh Anta Diop cheijh being somehow “ideologicaly tainted” in favour of ideas valorising a “positive” and “pan-african compatible” version of African history. My point is just that there is probably something to look into if you want to asses Cheik Anta Diop’s theories.
I remember specificaly reading about it in: It wouldn’t be at all unusual or necessarily wrong for Diop, a stauch pan-Africanist and African patriot, to write such a history. All history is biased to a greater or lesser extent, so long as you declare your bias, don’t make mistakes, and don’t tell lies – ie, writing “King Examplename said ‘X'” when actually he said ‘Y’ – that’s fine.
Is Diouf one of these critics? I’m not sure of the exact content of Diop’s history, but I can see why a historian would consider the Two-Cradles theory, for instance, to be an appalling generalization. If you can read french, google up and a few articles with direct comments from Diouf and other will come up. Diouf is an historian but not annta, i suspect xiop he can probably be qualified of being a social scientist: Wow, that guy is horribly afrocentric, there’s no basis for anything he’s said.
Also, stop reading things on precolumbian African contact with the new world. I have always wondered why was it the Europeans who whent out antx the world with the tip of the sword and not the chinese who could have done it much earlier and probably more successfully but for some reason didn’t.
I wonder if it is a cultural thing. True that but I meant specifically the colonization of foreign lands where the mongols only did economic colonization requiring tribute the Europeans took actual land from the inhabitants. From what I understand they couldn’t have.
DIOP’S TWO CRADLE THEORY
They completely lacked the ability to cross the pacific. The ships that the Chinese had were impressive and very large but due to the fact that they were almost entirely used for coastal or river trading they would never have been able build consistent trade routes across the pacific.
Top level comments must be informed, in-depth answers to the question. Biological anthropology Biological anthropology is the study of human evolution and physical diversity. Sociocultural anthropology Sociocultural anthropology is the study of human cultural diversity. Linguistic anthropology Linguistic anthropology is the study of how language shapes cultural life.
Archaeology Archaeology is the study of past peoples through the things they left behind. Resources FAQ under development! List of flaired users. List of past AMAs. Welcome to Reddit, the front page of the internet. Become a Redditor and subscribe to one of thousands of communities. Want to add to the discussion? There is also the fact that an agricultural society: I know he’s important, that’s why I’m asking.
I feel like the Chinese could have colonized america in the 5th century if they wanted to.