Abstract
This paper discusses articles by Roger M. Keesing and Anne Ryen and David Silverman on what culture is, and how we study it, and see what is different in one culture, as opposed to a different culture, or in a small aspect of culture. The paper explains that Keesing seems to be more inclined to see culture in dynamic ways, as always changing or developing, or that has to do with thinking processes, where Ryen and Silverman discuss culture in more material terms that can affect how people of different cultures understand each other. The paper also discusses how Keesing looks at cultures as structural systems so that the scholar will look at how a culture or a structure began and how it continues to influence human life. The writer believes that Ryen and Silverman seem more tied up in how an outsider looks at a culture, the dynamics of importance of what go on between human beings, as individuals, as opposed to the cultural system that Keesing tried to understand. The writer concludes that both articles manage to get across the care that must be taken when researching cultures that are not one's own, but the writer feels that Keesing's work is still not out-dated.

Outline:
Introduction
Theories of Culture
The Human Factor
Last Remarks

From the Paper
"A culture may adapt because new technology or kinds of organization have come along, or it may change so that a people survive, as in cultures that begin to conserve something so that they can survive in their environment. A desert people, for instance, may show a culture that is protective of water, does not waste water, or whose art shows themes of happiness as the coming of the rain, or safely getting to a place where water is available. Keesing then begins to look at ideational theories of culture that have to do with cognitive systems and how people decide what is special, appealing or what must be done, as all can influence culture. (1974:77f)."

Tags:boundries, structural, systems, anthropology, ethnic, pride, socio-cultural

Abstract
This paper describes a society different from ours by examining elements known to us - education, religion, economy, politics. It portrays this "other world" as almost perfect. The writer questions this utopian existence.

From the Paper
"In Ata, the education of the society is communal. There is no television or commercialized entertainment to purvey standardized messages of how an individual should live his or her life. In "our world" education is relegated to certain individuals and institutions. As a result, education is imparted in an intellectually homogenous fashion, for better or for worse. Individuals from poorer economic circumstances usually receive a poorer education. Education for all individuals is not tailored to the specific academic needs of every child. When an individual goes home, he or she receives all of the prejudices of his or her family in totality, with little contrasting moral values, except from popular culture. In Ata, because education takes place communally, an individual's wealth or poverty does not play into his or her learning. Also, different people can teach children different things. The parents and teachers are not solely responsible for the child. The child's uniqueness as an individual and a learner is respected. This is also true of adults, who have much to learn from children in Ata. Learning is mutual, rather than hierarchical."

Tags:society, boundries, judgement, utopia, guilt