In Chapter 4, Scupin talks about the nature-nurture debate -- the extent to which humans are shaped by nature or biology (in the form of instincts and genetic factors) and nurture or culture (in the form of learning, social, and environmental conditions).  It would seem that anthropologists have reached a kind of compromise in their interactionist view.  At the same time, you'll hear people talk about "human nature" -- claiming certain types of behavior are only natural.   You'll also find that different cultures or groups in society will advocate different customs based on what they consider "natural".  For example, some societies will segregate males and females, based on what they consider natural, and some groups will claim certain types of behaviors are "unnatural," such as the argument used by some conservative and religious groups to claim homosexuality is wrong (though the book describes a number of societies where such behavior is considered quite natural).   What's your opinion on these notions about nature and nurture, and what's natural and unnatural?

In the discussion about culture and personality, there is a consideration of different "culture types," such as proposed by Ruth Benedict.  Some anthropologists have suggested that different societies can be characterized by different personalities.  In fact, there is a organization that looks at personality typing in individuals based on the Myers-Briggs personality type (it's called the Society for Personality Type), and researchers have found that there are different personality traits associated with different occupational groups, student choices of majors, and nations.   The book suggests that such personality typing for groups can lead to unwarranted stereotyping and ignore individual personality differences.  Yet, even allowing for individual differences, there can be some patterns.  For example, Americans as a culture tend to be more individualistic and independent, while as a group Native American and Japanese culture tend to stress group and cooperative relations.  So what do you think?  Do you associate personality traits with particular groups or cultures or not?

The discussion about the anthropology of "self" raises some questions about the degree to which we as individuals can distinguish ourselves from our society or social group.   In the U.S. and Western societies, there is more emphasis on individuals pursuing their own self-interests, and one French sociologist, Marcel Mauss talks about how this notion of individualism is related to the rise of modern capitalist society.  By contrast, he gives examples of other cultures (ie: the Medieval Christian world and Chinese society) where this isn't the case.   This discussion also brings to mind the use of suicide bombers in the Middle East today.  When the suicide bombings first began it was hard to conceive that anyone would knowingly do this.  But in the Middle East, there is a very different concept of the self, and many of the individuals doing this see themselves contributing to their family or making a sacrifice based on their links to a religious group.    What do you think of this notion of self and society?  To what extent are we free to pursue our own self-interests?  To what extent are we constrained or influenced by our membership in a particular social group or groups?

One of the themes in the chapter on enculturation is how flexible we are as individuals.  So not only do children learn their culture as they grow up, but when people move from one setting to another, they learn to adapt.  For example, consider when you go to a different school or get a job in a different company.  You will find there are different cultures to which you have to adapt.   Or when you join different social or friendship groups, you learn different cultural norms as well.   Another example in the modern media is the way people are suddenly thrown into different social environments in reality shows -- and when the groups or rules are change, they have to adapt, too.  For instance, if anyone is following Survivor, there are very different cultures in Chapera and Mogo Mogo, and when one woman, Amber, suddenly found herself in a different group, she had to quickly adapt to stay in the community -- and she did.  By contrast, the person who was kicked out this week, Jerri, was the one person who was something of an outsider, who played by her own rules and didn't adapt well to the group.   So what do you think about the way the enculturation process works in different settings?  What are your own personal experiences with enculturation growing up?  How difficult or easy has it been to learn the rules and adapt when experiencing changing conditions?