Anthropology, Philosophical

Anthropology, a discipline that encompasses five areas or subdisciplines, provides a comprehensive view of our species' origin, present state, and future. As a science, anthropology can be considered as a recent academic discipline; however, the fundamental inquiry into human origin, social structure, and human interaction has its roots in the tradition of philosophy. From the first materialists of Ionian (ca 585BCE) to the metaphysics of Aristotle (384–322 BCE) and later the theology by Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274 CE), the geocentric and anthropocentric positions concerning our species' epistemology, ontology, and teleology has a directly impacted the conduct of science. As illustrated in foundational philosophic masterpieces (for example,Aristotle's Physics and Metaphysics and Aquinas's Summa Theologica), these metaphysical concepts directly influence the context by which both the evidence and interpretations are sought or derived. Given this established logical necessity of metaphysics, any modern theoretical reference must be able to sufficiently depict these metaphysical views based on current available scientific evidence. From these dialectics, science and metaphysics work in unison, via logic, to produce a coherent and accurate explanation concerning human existence within a dynamic universe.

As for anthropology, the influences of Charles Darwin (1809–1882)upon the metaphysics that govern science are profound. Darwin's theory of organic evolution had permanently refuted the fixity (eternal)of species as depicted by either Aristotle or Aquinas. Cosmologically, and theologically for Aquinas, the Great Chain of Being was reduced to mere conceptual links. The traditional views concerning our own species' epistemology, ontology, and teleology have been far removed from its previous dogmatic position. In its wake, an “arc of interpretations” of evolution and dynamic integrity, as postulated by H. James Birx, resulted in differing metaphysical views. However, not all metaphysical interpretations of evolution are correct. It is the duty of the philosopher of science, via philosophical anthropology, to construct and implement a theoretical framework that correctly reflects this metaphysical foundation; all of which is based on rational speculation based on current physical evidence.

It becomes obvious that the philosophical framework that stimulated this inquiry into human existence and its origin precedes the academic structure of anthropology that is known today. However, it becomes necessary to acknowledge that it is the evolutionary framework that both accounts for and is the sustaining factor in the philosophical cohesion of the scientific basis for anthropology; for without this evolutionary framework, what remains is incoherent, unsubstantiated conjecture that is sometimes accompanied with cosmological innuendo. When examining the plethora of theoretical constructs or paradigms, it becomes evident that the foundational structures of anthropology have become obscured from the original esprit de corps set forth by rational and critical inquiry based on this evolutionary approach. Ultimately, the lack of a philosophically sound grand theoretical framework has caused fracturing among the subdisciplines of anthropology. The greatest strength of anthropology stems from its multidisciplinary approach to the study of our species, and that approach is now in jeopardy. Though the theoretical construct for physical anthropology and forensic anthropology remains stable, philosophically speaking, [Page 173]it is the subdisciplines of archaeology, linguistics, and to the greatest extent, cultural anthropology that have become subjected to the greatest risk.

...