100% of Steem Dollars from this post will be donated to Project Curie. You can read more about Project Curie [here](https://steemit.com/steemit/@donkeypong/announcing-project-curie-bringing-rewards-and-recognition-to-steemit-s-undiscovered-and-emerging-authors).

---

The pictures in this post are the first chapter of a book that I created. The book was an assignment for a class titled "Latin American Culture and Identity". I took the class while studying abroad at Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez in Chile. All drawings were done by myself while I was bored in class (I couldn't stand lecture classes). All photography was taken by my father, Bill Baumeister, some decades ago. I would love to hear your own take on culture in the comment section!

<center>![](https://s12.postimg.org/u8zellibh/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_12_01_54_PM.png)</center>
<center>![](https://s12.postimg.org/d9qg6c73x/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_12_02_03_PM.png)</center>
<center>![](https://s12.postimg.org/ubja8flz1/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_12_02_14_PM.png)</center>
<center>![](https://s12.postimg.org/k2qt2lxx9/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_12_02_25_PM.png)</center>
<center>![](https://s12.postimg.org/8ro5e8r25/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_12_02_36_PM.png)</center>
<center>![](https://s12.postimg.org/gyg55th4t/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_12_02_43_PM.png)</center>
<center>![](https://s12.postimg.org/5ndhhga9p/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_12_02_56_PM.png)</center>
<center>![](https://s12.postimg.org/uusyvg2rh/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_12_03_05_PM.png)</center>
<center>![](https://s12.postimg.org/ujbiiombh/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_12_03_14_PM.png)</center>

---

---

#### In case the text is too small to read in the pictures, I have copied the words here:

### Culture as an Adaptive System

Culture as an adaptive system is a theory that views culture through an evolutionary perspective. It utilizes the idea of natural selection and argues that the human biological design is open ended and changes based on environmental needs. Cultural and biological crossroads include aggression and sexuality. However Keesing emphasizes that there is no Primal Man underneath layers of culture but rather culture and biology are interwoven (Keesing 1974: 74). Within the theory of culture as an adaptive system, there are four main consensuses. The first is that culture is a behavior pattern that connects people to their ecological environments. The next is that cultures adapt in the same process as natural selection. There exist feedback mechanisms that allow cultures to change based on the needs of a changing environment (Keesing 1974: 75). The third consensus is that technology, subsistence economy, and social order tied to production are the most adaptive sectors of culture.The last is that ideational parts of a culture (religion, ceremonial practices, ect) also allow cultures to adapt in a more subtle manner, however they are often overlooked because they are harder to measure and identify (Keesing 1974: 76). 

### Culture as a Cognitive System

While culture as an adaptive system is concerned with practices and the routines in which one lives life, culture as a cognitive system is concerned with knowledge and structures of thought. This theory defines culture as the way one thinks, interprets, and organizes things in order to survive in their society and environment. It is compared to the role of language as both are seen as inferred codes that are not in the material realm (Keesing 1974: 78). 

### Culture as a Structural System

In the theory of culture as a structural system, Levi-Strauss focuses on universal processes of thought that are formed from the intersection of the physical world with the human mind. These symbolic systems that people create are in essence binary thought patterns that are used to interpret the chaos of the physical world. Levi-Strauss focuses on a universal culture rather than on particular cultures because he sees many overlaps and similarities in different societies’ thought patterns (Keesing 1974: 79).

### Culture as a Symbolic System

Culture as a symbolic system is similar to culture as a structural system as both are ideational, however culture as a symbolic system focuses on how culture is a system of “shared symbols and meanings” (Keesing 1974: 79). The main difference is the word “shared” such that culture is not found within the minds of individual people but rather found between multiple minds. Clifford Geertz contrasts his definition of culture as a symbolic system with that of Levi-Strauss’ culture as a structural system by defining his theory as “a matter of interpretation not decipherment” (Keesing 1974: 79). He also focuses more on individual cultures rather than on a universal culture, honoring the differences between and contradictions within many cultures. 

### Linguistic Relativity

The theory of linguistic relativity looks at how the structures of a particular language create one’s structure of thought. Benjamin Lee Whorf focuses on how grammar structure and the use of language directly affects how one perceives the world (Unknown Author: 3). He gives the example that many indigenous cultures have multiple words for an object that the english language only has one word for, such as snow. In this sense, native english speakers do not conceptualize the physical object in the same way that the indigenous speakers do. He also argues that the words a language has to describe time greatly affects a culture’s perception of the world. For example, Mayans have a circular concept of time while many European cultures have a linear concept of time (Unknown Author: 4).

### Keesing’s Definition of Culture

In interpreting the various definitions of culture that Keesing introduces, each is distinct however they are not necessarily isolated from each other. That is ideational theories of culture, evolutionary theories of culture, and theories of culture in a sociocultural systems approach do not have to be exclusive of one another. I believe that Keesing also sees the validity in the various theories and attempts to combine the theories and account for the contradictions in his definition of culture as a system of competence. He defines culture as one’s “theory of what his fellows know, believe, and mean” (Keesing 1974: 84). Though this definition falls most closely into the camp of ideational theories I think there exists a false binary between the ideational realm and the evolutionary or scientific realm, and believe that culture as a system of competence takes into account both. It also takes into account the ability of a person to see culture as external and the possibility of stepping out of said culture (Keesing 1974: 84).

### My Definition of Culture

In reading and analyzing various definitions of culture, the concept that stuck out to me the most was the idea of consciences collectives. This is defined as: “When individuals engaging in social relations—even if there are only two of them—share common meanings, common understandings of one another's acts, then these shared meanings are greater than the sum of their "parts," their realizations in individual minds. Social meanings transcend, by some mysterious alchemy of minds meeting, the individuation of private experience” (Keesing 1974: 84). This concept of consciences collectives is most closely related with the definition of culture as a symbolic system. In this definition, culture is not within the individual but rather within the connection between two or more people. 

#### I choose to define culture as shared symbols between two or more people that transcend the individual, so that individuals are able to connect with others and survive together both within a given society and a given ecological environment. 

### My Wordview and Identity

It is much easier to theoretically define culture than to define one’s own worldview and identity. Many paradoxes arise when attempting to define myself. At a basic level, I am from San Francisco, am a part of my mother who is from China and a part of my father who is from the United States. I am a 21 year old female in university. However, this is surface level and not necessarily the whole of what creates my identity. Also I cannot define my culture and identity with umbrella labels such as “Chinese”, “San Franciscan”, “Female”, because what creates my identity is the sum and effect of every experience I have ever had. That is, my culture and how I identify is actually every part of my entire life, and there is no way of defining this without defining every moment. 

Further, to have a set worldview I have to define, categorize, and create binaries of all things. In this I must take into account my practices of Zen Buddhism where I believe in nonduality and see binaries all as part of the same whole. I also realize the binary between identification and non identification, between which the truth lies. Therefore I am not saying that I do not have an identity but rather that I both identify as Anwen, the San Franciscan 21 year old female, and also identify as every person and human experience in the world. Perhaps it is in the combination of and tension between these dualities that creates my identity. 

### Bibliography

Keesing, Roger. 1974. “Theories of Culture”. Institute of Advanced Studies, Australian Nationai Universily.

Unknown Author. Linguistic Relativity. http://www.bsu.by/Cache/pdf/203213.pdf