"Monkeys, babies, idiots" and "primitives": nature-nurture debates and philanthropic foundation support for American anthropology in the 1920s and 1930s.
There has been a long discussion among historians about the impact that foundation policies had on the development of the social sciences during the interwar era. This discussion has centered on the degree to which foundation officers, particularly from the Rockefeller boards, exercised a hegemonic influence on research. In this essay, I argue that the field of American cultural anthropology has been neglected and must be reconsidered as a window into foundation intervention in nature-nurture debates. Despite foundation efforts to craft an anthropology policy that privileged hereditarian explanations, I contend that cultural anthropologists were committed to proving the primacy of "nurture," even when that commitment cost them valuable research dollars. It was this commitment that provided an essential bulwark for the discipline. Ironically, it was the need to negotiate with foundations about the purpose of their research that helped cultural anthropologists to articulate their unique, and thus intrinsically valuable, approach to nature-nurture debates.
Biehn
Kersten Jacobson
KJ
The Emery Weiner School, Houston, Texas, USA.
D000818:Animals; D000884:Anthropology, Cultural / Q000191:economics / Q000266:history*; D005582:Foundations / Q000191:economics / Q000266:history*; D005653:Fund Raising / Q000266:history*; D000882:Haplorhini / Q000523:psychology; D049673:History, 20th Century; D006801:Humans; D016134:Organizational Policy; D011587:Psychology, Comparative / Q000266:history; D012109:Research Support as Topic / Q000266:history*; D012917:Social Adjustment; D014481:United States