Cultural anthropology is a branch of anthropology focused on the study of cultural variation among humans. It is in contrast to social anthropology, which perceives cultural variation as a subset of the anthropological constant. Cultural anthropology has a rich methodology, including participant observation and surveys. One of the earliest articulations of the anthropological meaning of the term "culture" came from Sir Edward Tylor who writes on the first page of his 1871 book: "Culture, or civilization, taken in its broad, ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes knowledge, art, law and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society." The term "civilization" gave way to definitions given by V. Gordon Childe, with culture forming an umbrella term and civilization becoming a particular kind of culture; the anthropological concept of "culture" reflects in part a reaction against earlier Western discourses based on an opposition between "culture" and "nature", according to which some human beings lived in a "state of nature".
Anthropologists have argued that culture is "human nature", that all people have a capacity to classify experiences, encode classifications symbolically, teach such abstractions to others. Since humans acquire culture through the learning processes of enculturation and socialization, people living in different places or different circumstances develop different cultures. Anthropologists have pointed out that through culture people can adapt to their environment in non-genetic ways, so people living in different environments will have different cultures. Much of anthropological theory has originated in an appreciation of and interest in the tension between the local and the global; the rise of cultural anthropology took place within the context of the late 19th century, when questions regarding which cultures were "primitive" and which were "civilized" occupied the minds of not only Marx and Freud, but many others. Colonialism and its processes brought European thinkers into direct or indirect contact with "primitive others."
The relative status of various humans, some of whom had modern advanced technologies that included engines and telegraphs, while others lacked anything but face-to-face communication techniques and still lived a Paleolithic lifestyle, was of interest to the first generation of cultural anthropologists. Parallel with the rise of cultural anthropology in the United States, social anthropology, in which sociality is the central concept and which focuses on the study of social statuses and roles, groups and the relations among them—developed as an academic discipline in Britain and in France; the umbrella term socio-cultural anthropology draws upon both cultural and social anthropology traditions. Anthropology is concerned with the lives of people in different parts of the world in relation to the discourse of beliefs and practices. In addressing this question, ethnologists in the 19th century divided into two schools of thought. Some, like Grafton Elliot Smith, argued that different groups must have learned from one another somehow, however indirectly.
Other ethnologists argued that different groups had the capability of creating similar beliefs and practices independently. Some of those who advocated "independent invention", like Lewis Henry Morgan, additionally supposed that similarities meant that different groups had passed through the same stages of cultural evolution. Morgan, in particular, acknowledged that certain forms of society and culture could not have arisen before others. For example, industrial farming could not have been invented before simple farming, metallurgy could not have developed without previous non-smelting processes involving metals. Morgan, like other 19th century social evolutionists, believed there was a more or less orderly progression from the primitive to the civilized. 20th-century anthropologists reject the notion that all human societies must pass through the same stages in the same order, on the grounds that such a notion does not fit the empirical facts. Some 20th-century ethnologists, like Julian Steward, have instead argued that such similarities reflected similar adaptations to similar environments.
Although 19th-century ethnologists saw "diffusion" and "independent invention" as mutually exclusive and competing theories, most ethnographers reached a consensus that both processes occur, that both can plausibly account for cross-cultural similarities. But these ethnographers pointed out the superficiality of many such similarities, they noted that traits that spread through diffusion were given different meanings and function from one society to another. Analyses of large human concentrations in big cities, in multidisciplinary studies by Ronald Daus, show how new methods may be applied to the understanding of man living in a global world and how it was caused by the action of extra-European nations, so highlighting the role of Ethics in modern anthropology. Accordingly, most of these anthropologists showed less interest in comparing cultures, generalizing about human nature, or discovering universal laws of cultural development, than in understanding particular cultures in those cultures' own terms.
Such ethnographers and their students promoted the idea of "cultural relativi
Major-General Abdul One Mohammed was military governor of Borno State and was leader of the ECOMOG peacekeeping force in Liberia and Sierra Leone. General Ibrahim Babangida appointed Colonel Abdul One Mohammed military governor of Borno State from December 1987 to December 1989. In 1997 Abdul One Mohammed was posted to the Economic Community of West African States Monitoring Group as Deputy ECOMOG commander and Chief of Staff, heading operation in Liberia and Sierra Leone. In November 1997 Abdul Mohammed denied ECOMOG's fighter jets had violated a ceasefire agreement in an incident where fighters had intervened against ships trying the break the UN embargo against the junta in Sierra Leone, he said "Our aircraft were shot at so we returned fire". On 9 February 1998 the ECOMOG troops launched an all-out offensive to regain control of Freetown, capital of Sierra Leone. Abdul One Mohammed said his troops were near the Freetown city centre and would continue their advance. On 24 February 1998 Abdul One Mohammed said that commercial and humanitarian cargoes could now enter the harbour of Freetown and that the airport was open.
The embargo on arms remained in force. He said he planned to soon deploy troops to gain better control of the hinterland and expected all roads in the Bo area to be reopened soon. On 25 February 1998 One Mohammed said his troops had moved in from Kenema and had taken over Bo from RUF rebels after heavy fighting. ECOMOG units held key positions in the city, backed up by Kamajor militiamen. Liberians held a parade for ECOMOG peacekeepers in January 1998, who were due to leave the country on 2 February. Abdul One Mohammed called on Liberians to "put hands together and consolidate the peace we have put together". Earlier that month, he had expressed concern that trends could lead to renewal of conflict in Liberia, including the "re-enlistment of soldiers who have been identified with the seven-year fratricidal war. In July 1998 Abdul One Mohammed said he regretted that Liberia's security forces were not retrained at the end of the civil war, he said that ECOMOG had failed to establish a gun-free society in Liberia because "former warlords" had told their fighters to keep their weapons.
In August 1998 he denied an accusation by Liberian President Charles Taylor that ECOMOG was planning to send more troops to distabilize the Liberian government. He said this was ridiculous since ECOMOG had been trying to restore peace since 1990, Nigeria alone had spent millions of dollars for that purpose. Abdul One Mohammed was replaced as ECOMOG Chief of Staff in July 1998 by Brigadier-General G. Kwabe. During hearings of the Special Tribunal on Sierre Leone in 2004, a witness said that Hinga Norman, a former Sierra Leone People's Party Interior minister and Civil Defence Forces leader had said he received arms and ammunition from Abdul One Mohammed. In 2006 Abdul One Mohammed was unable to appear at the trial of Hinga Norman since he had been receiving medical attention in Germany and was too ill to travel to Freetown
James 4 is the fourth chapter of the Epistle of James in the New Testament of the Christian Bible. The author identifies himself as "James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ" and the epistle is traditionally attributed to James the brother of Jesus, written in Jerusalem between 48–61 CE. Alternatively, some scholars argue that it is a pseudographical work written after 61 CE; this chapter continues a directive on wisdom and humility from chapter 3, followed by a warning to the rich. The original text was written in Koine Greek; this chapter is divided into 17 verses. Some early manuscripts containing the text of this chapter in Greek are: Papyrus 100 Codex Vaticanus Codex Sinaiticus Codex Alexandrinus Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus Papyrus 74 An ancient manuscript containing this chapter in the Coptic language is: Papyrus 6. Where do wars and fights come from among you? Do they not come from your desires for pleasure that war in your members?"Wars and fights": or'conflicts and disputes' not only arise in social circumstances, but can be'traced back to the war within human beings'.
But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: “God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble.”Citation from: Proverbs 3:34 This imperative section implores the readers to submit themselves to God. Only God, no human being, can be the final judge, since it is the privilege of God as the lawgiver. James 4:13-17 and James 5:1-6 are regarded as a single section by Reisner and by protestant biblical commentator Heinrich Meyer, Meyer suggests that this section "has a character plainly distinguished from other portions of the Epistle", arguing that it is addressed to the rich, forgetful of God, who "oppress the Christians and blaspheme the name of Christ". Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow, we will go to such and such a city, spend a year there and sell, make a profit”. Meyer understands "such and such a city" to mean specific places where traders would base themselves, whereas reformer Martin Luther's interpretation was "this and that city". Instead you ought to say, "If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.""If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that": this statement is rendered in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac and Ethiopian versions as "if the Lord will, we shall live, we will do this".
Here are two conditions of doing anything: first, it should be agreeable to the determining will and purpose of God, second, if we should live, since life is so precarious. Apostle Paul used it, as in Acts 18:21. All such boasting is evil."Arrogance": can lead one to'forget God, who governs life'. Related Bible parts: Proverbs 3, Matthew 26, Mark 4, Luke 12, Acts 18, Galatians 5 Davids, Peter H.. "James". In Carson, D. A.. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Inter-Varsity Press. Pp. 1354–1368. ISBN 9780851106489. Riesner, Rainer. "76. James". In Barton, John; the Oxford Bible Commentary. Oxford University Press. Pp. 1255–1263. ISBN 978-0199277186. Retrieved February 6, 2019; this article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: John. Exposition of the Entire Bible. James 4 King James Bible - Wikisource English Translation with Parallel Latin Vulgate Online Bible at GospelHall.org Multiple bible versions at Bible Gateway