The Monist, Vol. 3, 1892-1893 : $b A quarterly magazineVarious
Philosophy
The Monist, Vol. 3, 1892-1893 : $b A quarterly magazine
Various
Philosophy -- Periodicals
The present is the third work in which Dr. Paul Topinard, the well-known
pupil and successor of M. Broca, the founder of French Anthropology,
has given to the public his general ideas in relation to the science
of which he has made so profound a study. In 1876 he published his
_Anthropologie_, which reflected in great measure the teaching of his
master, Broca. Ten years later, in 1886, appeared his larger and more
important work, _Eléments d’anthropologie générale_, which treated of
the history and methods of anthropology, with various other subjects.
Now Dr. Topinard gives us his matured ideas on “Man in Nature,” by which
is meant physical nature, the object of the present work being to show
the place that man occupies physically among animals, and his probable
origin or descent. It is not surprising that a writer who was the pupil
of Professor de Quatrefages as well as of Professor Broca should declare
himself a supporter of the principle of unity of composition, formulated
by M. Etienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, from which flows that of evolution,
that is the natural derivation of beings from one another. As to the
means by which this is brought about, the author reserves his opinion
until the publication of a further work which he has in preparation.
Dr. Topinard devotes the second chapter of the present work to a
consideration of the position to be accorded to anthropology in relation
to the other sciences. He declares it to be a pure, concrete science,
essentially anatomical and observatory, and thus distinguishes it from
ethnography, which has to do with peoples under all their aspects.
Both alike are branches of the science of man in its broadest sense.
If anything can be added to the author’s explanation, it is that
anthropology has to do with mankind as a series of _individuals_, while
ethnography is concerned with the _groups_ into which such individuals
are collected. This is not inconsistent with Dr. Topinard’s definition
of anthropology as the science “which studies human races, the human
species, and the place of man in the classification of animals.” For
all the facts on which it is based are derived from the observation
of individuals, and when races are compared with each other, they are
compared as ideal individuals, formed by a generalisation of certain
prevailing qualities, just as mankind by a similar process becomes an
ideal individual, a scientific Adam, who is compared with other animals.
There is an apparent difficulty in relation to psychology which Dr.
Topinard claims entirely for anthropology, but it disappears when we
see how closely he associates psychology with physiology. He says, and
we quite agree with him, that “characters of a psychological nature,
reduced to their most simple expression, whether attributed to human
races, or to the general human type, belong to ordinary physiological
characters; the corresponding anatomical part takes its place by the side
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account