Bu çalışmada, sosyal bilimlerde 1950’li yıllardan başlayarak dilbilimden sosyolojiye, psikolojiden etnolojiye kadar birçok alanda kendinden söz ettiren yapısalcılık ve yapısalcılığın en önemli isimlerinden biri olan Levi-Strauss’un yaklaşımıincelenmiştir. Yanısıra Levi-Strauss’un bu yaklaşımıbenimsemesinde etkin olan temel düşünme biçimi de ele alınmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, yapısalcılığın ne olduğu, kökenin nereye dayandığı, tanım sorunu, temelleri eski Yunan’a kadar giden yapıkavramıile 20. yüzyılda bilimsel ve felsefi çalışmaların ekseni durumuna gelen “Yapısalcılık”ın ilişkisi Levi-Strauss özelinde yapısal yaklaşımın benimsediği öncüller, kavram ve tanımlar, kendi içindeki kullandığıdil, dönemin bilimsel ve felsefi konumu da göz önünde bulundurularak ortaya konmuştur.

In this study we discuss the structuralist approach popularity of which grew in a diverse range of fields, including linguistics, sociology, psychology and ethnography in social sciences starting from the 1950s and one of the most fundamental members of sructuralist movement, Levi-Strauss and the reasons his thought is based on this concept. In this context the term of structuralist approach, the origin of structuralism, the difficulty of its definition as a movement, the concept of structure whose origins can be traced back to ancient Greek and the structuralist mode of reasoning which became the focus of philosophical and scientific studies in 20th century, its founder members, concepts and definitions, the language it uses within itself, are introduced regarding the scientific and philosophical condition of the era. Claude Levi-Strauss in the 1950s, analyzed cultural phenomena including mythology, kinship the Alliance theory and the incest taboo , and food preparation. In addition to these studies, he produced more linguistically-focused writings where he applied Saussure's distinction between langue and parole in his search for the fundamental mental structures of the human mind, arguing that the structures that form the "deep grammar" of society originate in the mind and operate in us unconsciously. LeviStrauss was inspired by information theory and mathematics. In the very beginning of anthropology, the theorists believed Levi-Strauss analyzes cultural phenomena such as languages, myths and kinship systems to discover what ordered patterns, or structures, they seemed to display. These, he suggested, could reveal the structure of the human mind. He reasoned that behind the surface of individual cultures there must exist natural properties universals common to us all. Levi-Strauss focused his attention on the patterns or structures existing beneath the customs and beliefs of all cultures. Although structuralism searches universal laws of human mind but the inquiry and its analysis is fundamentally distinctive from the evolutionary point of view. He believed in mental structure on the basis of universal mental thought process, emphasizing on the perception, 'mental thought process is universal and innate'. Levi-Strauss an interpretation provided new impetus to the understanding of human mind as well as the cultural world that diffused beyond the frontier of contemporary anthropology. Levi-Strauss derived structuralism from a school of linguistics whose focus was not on the meaning of the word, but the patterns that the words form. Levi-Strauss's contribution gave us a theory of how the human mind works. Man passes from a natural to a cultural state as he uses language, learns to cook, etc... Structuralism considers that in the passage from natural to cultural, man obeys laws he does not invent it's a mechanism of the human brain. Levi-Strauss views man not as a privileged inhabitant of the universe, but as a passing species which will leave only a few faint traces of its passage when it becomes extinct. Levi-Strauss's contribution to structuralist thought is that he provides a scientific account which shows the world as a world of meanings; he believes that structuralism can be used to reveal the unity of all cultures. Levi-Strauss is interested in the structural pattern which gives the myth its meaning. Through his examination of myths from all over the world, he has identified that myths are organised in binary oppositions for example, good/evil just like the basic linguistic units. Myths can be broken down into individual units “mythemes” which, like the basic sound units of language “phonemes” acquire meaning only when combined together in particular ways. Levi-Strauss is then interested in the structural pattern which gives the myth its meaning. He believes this linguistic model will uncover the basic structure of the human mind, that is, the structure which governs the way human beings shape all their institutions, artefacts and their forms of knowledge. The rules which governed these combinations could be seen as a kind of grammar, a set of relations beneath the surface of the narrative which constituted the myth's true “meaning”. Further, modern structuralist analysis of narrative known as narratology began with Levi-Strauss's pioneering work on myth. Levi-Strauss and his type of structuralism are no longer fashionable as a theoretical approach or method, and has since been taken over by post-structuralists such as Derrida. However, it is important to remember that Levi-Strauss and his structuralism provided an important contribution for debating the nature of “meaning”. As a conclusion we can say that Levi-Strauss’s aim is to find unconscious quality of collective events and unchangeable structures related to the human mind. In spite of his important place in contemporary thinking, preoccupying many sociologists and also richness of his thoughts and results that he came through he could not make a certain and consistent comment on his method. Also the plentifulness of unclear and inconsistent points, is an another criticism about his writings. Thus his method’s structure was disrupted by post-structualist approach especially by Derrida which emerged in structuralist mediocrity. As a conclusion about structuralism, particularly about Levi Strauss’s structuralism we can say that although it is criticized as being a spiritual “fashion” or as a new “cult” etc. with its’ rejection of conceptualization of humanist, historic and empiric knowledge of method in social sciences and its’ claim about basic aim of human sciences which is not to form a person but just the opposite, it can be called as original and alternative approach