Why most sociologists don't (and won't) think evolutionarily
The general failure of sociologists to understand, much less accept, an evolutionary perspective on human behavior transcends mere ignorance and ideological bias, although it incorporates a good deal of both. It also includes a general anthropocentric discomfort with evolutionary thinking, a self-interested resistance to self-understanding, and a trained sociological incapacity to accept the fundamental canons of scientific theory construction: reductionism, individualism, materialism, and parsimony.
Key wordsevolution sociobiology environmentalism determinism reductionism, biosociology
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Andreski, Stanislav 1972 Social Sciences as Sorcery. London: Andre Deutsch.Google Scholar
- Boulding, Kenneth E. 1978 Ecodynamics: A New Theory of Social Evolution. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Harris, Marvin 1979 Cultural Materialism. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
- Kitcher, Philip 1985 Vaulting Ambition, Sociobiology and the Quest for Human Nature. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Lenski, Gerhard andJean Lenski 1987 Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
- Mills, C. Wright 1956 The Sociological Imagination. New York: Grove Press.Google Scholar
- Namboodiri, Krishnan 1988 “Ecological demography: Its place in sociology.” American Sociological Review 53:619–633.Google Scholar
- Rossi, Alice S. 1984 “Gender and parenthood.” American Sociological Review 49:1–19.Google Scholar
- Sorokin, Pitirim A. 1956 Fads and Fables in Modern Sociology. Chicago: Regnery.Google Scholar
- Westermarck, Edward A. 1891 The History of Human Marriage. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar