Day 1 & 2 Combined A

So, first thing's first. Im reading social anthropology, which Im hoping to cleverily work into the title soon. This teacher is heaven sent. Parts of our lectures were as close to Dead Poets Soceity Im ever going to be (not a fan, but that's not the point).
In four hours total, we've covered some Wittgenstein, the problems and complications with "culture", nihonjinron, reading for all the tards who are new to it and how this course is gonna play out in general. Mouthful!

Book we're currently reading: The Multicultural Riddle - Baumann, G.
Books I want to start reading already:
Foreign News - Exploring the World of Foreign Correspondents
King Leopold's Ghost
Dreams from My Father

My first reaction, looking back on the history of anthropology and our two last courses, is in all honesty, wtf? How, exactly, did this work? And for so long. I get that there was a lot of people who "did the right thing" or whatever you wanna call it, but part of me just feel we know nothing.
I understand the times were different, present ideologies and what was probably experiences as a right way to do it, just as I am set in my track now. Im just saying it shades the actual data we do have.

(I also wondered what possessed the man behind me to shout out colonialism when we're talking about important post-45 events. Or if the latin sic. in anyway is related to the reading instructions structural - interpretive - critical. I know its not, but I kinda want it to be.)

"Whatever we see could be other than it is. Whatever we can describe at all could be other than it is. There is no order things a priori."
How is this related to anthropology?
Well, there was this thing on chairs, right. The chair is only a chair cause we named it so, in order to seperate it from non-chairs (much like ethnicity, which also only becomes relevant in relationship to someone "different").
And I wonder about sitting? We all sit. I imagine the best anthropologic place to be is much like when youre abroad, trying to communicate with someone, lets say about chairs. They dont know it, you dont know what word they use, but eventually we must sit, somehow. When you reach that level of understanding and showing "Aaah, the sitting place? Oh ok" we're halfway there.
It wont be a chair, still, but at least we're sitting together.

This naturally led into the old "the world wasnt flat, but since people then thought so, anthropologists need to think so to." Of course, the conflict between the two views is interresting.