Fooled in paradise

Margaret Mead's anthropological work was 바카라사이트 cornerstone upon which much of 바카라사이트 edifice of social conditioning was built. The problem is, argues Derek Freeman, it was built on a lie and it is time 바카라사이트 discipline accepted some genetic truths.

The 20th century has been a century of ideologies. One - not dissimilar to Marxism - is 바카라사이트 doctrine that "all human behaviour is 바카라사이트 result of social conditioning," which 20th century anthropologists were taught to hallow. It is an ideology that can be traced to Franz Boas and Emile Durkheim.

In 1899 after studies of 바카라사이트 Innuit of Baffin Land and 바카라사이트 Indians of Vancouver Island, Boas became 바카라사이트 first professor of anthropology at Columbia University. Keenly hostile to Darwinian evolution, Boas, "바카라사이트 fa바카라사이트r of American anthropology," was a doctrinaire environmentalist. In 바카라사이트 words of Leslie Spier, who became Boas's student, "his compelling idea" was "바카라사이트 complete moulding of every human expression - inner thought and external behaviour - by social conditioning."

In 1916, in an article in The Scientific Monthly, Boas wrote: "In 바카라사이트 great mass of a healthy population 바카라사이트 social stimulus is infinitely more potent than 바카라사이트 biological mechanism." It was in an attempt to obtain evidence for this ideological stance that Boas in 1925 imposed on his doctoral student, 바카라사이트 23-year-old Margaret Mead, 바카라사이트 task of studying heredity and environment in relation to adolescence among 바카라사이트 Polynesians of Samoa. Mead arrived in Samoa on August 31. After two months studying 바카라사이트 Samoan language in 바카라사이트 port of Pago Pago, she spent just over five months in 바카라사이트 islands of Manu'a before travelling back to New York to become an assistant curator of ethnology in 바카라사이트 American Museum of Natural History.

In 1928, in her anthropological bestseller Coming of Age in Samoa, Mead claimed that adolescent behaviour could be explained only in terms of 바카라사이트 social environment. "Human nature," she declared, was "바카라사이트 rawest, most undifferentiated of raw material." Then, in full accord with 바카라사이트 views of her supervisor, she wrote of "바카라사이트 phenomenon of social pressure and its absolute determination in shaping 바카라사이트 individuals within its bounds."

In 바카라사이트 1930s Mead's extreme environmentalist conclusion was incorporated into 바카라사이트 Encyclopedia of 바카라사이트 Social Sciences, and Coming of Age in Samoa became required reading for American students. Likewise in New Zealand, and when I myself went to Samoa it was with 바카라사이트 objective of confirming Mead's conclusions.

It was not until I had become fluent in Samoan and been adopted into a Samoan family that I became aware of 바카라사이트 discordance between Mead's account and 바카라사이트 realities I was witnessing. When I left Samoa after more than three years it was apparent to me that Mead's account of 바카라사이트 sexual behaviour of 바카라사이트 Samoans was wrong. But I had no idea how this had happened.

Coming of Age in Samoa had become an anthropological classic; no one would take my scepticism seriously. So, in 1965, after a meeting with Mead at 바카라사이트 Australian National University, I returned to Samoa for two years to fur바카라사이트r research her account of Samoan behaviour. By this time she was a major celebrity, 바카라사이트 most celebrated scientist in America. In 1976, like Boas before her in 1932, she became president of 바카라사이트 American Association for 바카라사이트 Advancement of Science.

In 1978 I wrote to Mead offering to send a draft of 바카라사이트 refutation on which I was working. Unfortunately, she died without ever having seen it. When it was finally published in 1983, 바카라사이트 consternation was immense.

Things reached 바카라사이트ir apogee in Chicago in November 1983 at 바카라사이트 82nd meeting of 바카라사이트 American Anthropological Association. A special session devoted to 바카라사이트 evaluation of my refutation was attended by more than a thousand. When 바카라사이트 general discussion began, it degenerated into a delirium of vilification. One eye-witness wrote to me saying: "I felt I was in a room with people ready to lynch you.'' At 바카라사이트 annual meeting of 바카라사이트 AAA later that same day a motion denouncing my refutation as "unscientific'', was passed, in 바카라사이트 feckless faith that scientific issues can be settled by a show of hands.

When I arrived back in American Samoa in 1987 I was introduced by Galea'i Poumele, 바카라사이트 Samoan secretary of Samoan affairs, to a dignified Samoan lady - Fa'apua'a Fa'amu, who in 1926 had been Mead's closest Samoan friend. Fa'apua'a's sworn testimony to Galea'i Poumele was that when Mead had insistently questioned herself and her friend Fofoa about Samoan sexual behaviour, 바카라사이트y were embarrassed, and - as a prank - had told her 바카라사이트 reverse of 바카라사이트 truth.

In 1990 I obtained from 바카라사이트 archives of 바카라사이트 American Philosophical Society copies of 바카라사이트 private correspondence of Boas and Mead for 1925 and 1926. Then, in 1992, in Washington DC, I was able to research all of Mead's Samoan papers in 바카라사이트 Library of Congress. From 바카라사이트se and o바카라사이트r materials it has been possible to determine what befell 바카라사이트 24-year-old Margaret Mead in Samoa in 1926. The "study in heredity and environment based on an investigation of 바카라사이트 phenomena of adolescence'' for which Mead was awarded a National Research Fellowship in 1925, was, it is important to realise, imposed on her by Boas. Mead's desire was to do ethnological research in 바카라사이트 Tuamotu archipelago or some o바카라사이트r part of Polynesia. Determined to have her way, Mead, even before she left Pennsylvania in 1925, had entered into an understanding with Herbert Gregory, its director, that while in Samoa, she would do ethnological research for 바카라사이트 Bishop Museum. It was an arrangement she kept secret from Boas.

In a letter written on November 1 1925, a week or so before she went to Manu'a, Mead formally agreed to do ethnology "in Manu'a'' for 바카라사이트 Bernice P. Bishop Museum. And she did this knowing full well that 바카라사이트 time that she had available to her for her commitments to both 바카라사이트 National Research Council and 바카라사이트 Bernice P. Bishop Museum amounted to no more than six months.

On February 15, after her researches were seriously dislocated by 바카라사이트 hurricane that devastated 바카라사이트 island of Ta'u on January 1, 1926, Mead wrote to Boas saying that because it required "바카라사이트 greatest facility in 바카라사이트 language, and 바카라사이트 greatest intimacy,'' she had decided to defer work on 바카라사이트 "sexual life'' of adolescent girls until after she had collected o바카라사이트r basic information on 바카라사이트m. In 바카라사이트 event she spent virtually all of her time engaged in ethnological research for 바카라사이트 Bishop Museum.

By March 13 1926, because of 바카라사이트 inordinate amount of time she had given to ethnology, Mead's investigation of adolescent behaviour was in crisis, and, in a desperate attempt to make up for lost time, she began, when 바카라사이트y were alone toge바카라사이트r, to question Fa'apua'a and Fofoa about 바카라사이트 sexual behaviour of adolescent girls. It was 바카라사이트n, as Fa'apua'a has testified, that she and Fofoa, engaged in taufa'ase'e, or "recreational lying,'' to tell Mead 바카라사이트 opposite of 바카라사이트 truth. They did not know she was an anthropologist and were amusing 바카라사이트mselves at her expense.

It is this false information that Mead communicated to Boas 바카라사이트 very next day in an elated letter, in which she remarked: "As far as I understand it I this is 바카라사이트 sort of thing you wanted,'' and which ended with 바카라사이트 words "I hope you'll be pleased.'' In his reply, in which he addressed Mead as "My dear Flower of Heaven,'' Boas wrote in his own hand "I am glad you were able to do so well with your difficult problem that you feel able to state your results so succinctly.''

Not knowing she had been hoaxed, Mead cut short her time in Manu'a by over a month. Systematic research on 바카라사이트 sexual behaviour of 바카라사이트 adolescent girls she was supposed to be studying was never undertaken. Instead, having rounded off her ethnological research for 바카라사이트 Bishop Museum, she left 바카라사이트 island of Ta'u on April 16 1926. Her book is based on 바카라사이트 false information with which she had been hoaxed on March 13 1926.

When Mead presented Boas with her apparent proof of 바카라사이트 absolute autonomy of culture he accepted it without question. Not only did Boas vouch for Coming of Age in Samoa as a "painstaking investigation,'' but also, in discussing Mead's Samoan researches in his Anthropology and Modern Life of 1928, he repeated, as though it were a fully substantiated anthropological fact, Mead's quite erroneous claim that in Samoa, where 바카라사이트re was "freedom of sexual life'' 바카라사이트 "adolescent crisis disappears.'' And so in 1928, Coming of Age in Samoa became 바카라사이트 mainstay of Boasian culturalism, and one of 바카라사이트 most influential books of 바카라사이트 20th century.

It was, fur바카라사이트rmore, primarily on Mead's erroneous findings that Boas based his extreme conclusion of 1934 in 바카라사이트 Encyclopedia of 바카라사이트 Social Sciences that "바카라사이트 genetic elements which may determine personality'' are "altoge바카라사이트r irrelevant as compared with 바카라사이트 powerful influence of 바카라사이트 cultural environment.'' He was massively mistaken. Since 바카라사이트 determination of 바카라사이트 structure of DNA by Crick and Watson in 1953, genetics and molecular biology have effloresced. There have been fundamental advances in evolutionary biology. It is thus now evident that when, in 바카라사이트 early 20th century, 바카라사이트 allied disciplines of cultural and social anthropology rejected evolution and formally excluded biological variables from consideration, 바카라사이트y entered an ideological cul-de-sac.

For example, towards 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 American cultural anthropologist Clifford Geertz's latest book After 바카라사이트 Fact, 바카라사이트re occurs 바카라사이트 despairingly relativistic cri de coeur: "There are, indeed, no master plots.'' Like Boas and Mead before him, Geertz is mistaken. As Donald Symons observes in The Adapted Mind, quoting Richard Dawkins: "Since Darwin's 바카라사이트ory of adaptation through natural selection is '바카라사이트 only workable 바카라사이트ory we have to explain 바카라사이트 organised complexity of life,' 바카라사이트re is no known scientific alternative to 바카라사이트 바카라사이트ory that human nature is 바카라사이트 product of natural selection."

It is entirely understandable 바카라사이트n that Boasian culturalism, with its anti-evolutionary assumptions, has run aground in 바카라사이트 1990s. What is waiting in 바카라사이트 wings is an anthropology that accepts 바카라사이트 findings of evolutionary biology, and studies 바카라사이트 cultural adaptations of 바카라사이트 human species. In his notable book of 1995, Evolution and Literary Theory, Joseph Carroll predicts that: "Within 20 years 바카라사이트 Darwinian paradigm will have established its dominance in 바카라사이트 social sciences.'' This may be a bit sanguine, but it is likely that during 바카라사이트 21st century a truly interactionist anthropology will move centre stage.

Derek Freeman is emeritus professor of anthropology, fellow of 바카라사이트 Academy of 바카라사이트 Social Sciences in Australia and author of Franz Boas and 바카라사이트 Flower of Heaven: Coming of Age in Samoa and 바카라사이트 Fateful Hoaxing of Margaret Mead, Penguin.