Constructivism and selection: two opposed theories of social evolution

Chapter
Part of the Neue Bibliothek der Sozialwissenschaften book series (NBDS)

Abstract

This paper examines why natural selection is incapable of explaining social evolution, which instead requires a constructivist model. Natural selection reduces sociocultural systems to populations of traits, requires variation and selection to have distinct origins, and treats adaptation as the main explanatory principle. Constructivism, however, denies these assumptions as inappropriate to sociocultural systems. Here, variation and selection are linked together, and development occurs through an accumulation of various institutions. Because competition may often be low, these may be adaptively mediocre but, especially in combination, may still be the basis of further evolution. Necessary conditions for development include social size, sedentism, differentiated groups, and political centralisation. Social traditions, however, have core principles which may inhibit or facilitate evolutionary development.

Keywords

Migration Starch Europe Steam Explosive 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abercrombie, M., et al. 1973. The Penguin Dictionary of Biology. 6th ed. London:Penguin.Google Scholar
  2. Barkow, J., Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J. 1992. The Adapted Mind. Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Boyd, R., and Richerson, P.J. 2006. Not by Genes Alone. How culture transformed the evolutionary process. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Claessen, H.J.M. 1978. ‘The early state: a structural approach’, in The Early State, eds. H.J.M. Claessen & P. Skalnik, 535-96. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dumond, D.E. 1965. ‘Population growth and cultural change’, Southwestern Journal of anthropology, 21, 302–23.Google Scholar
  6. Dux, G. 2011. Historico-Genetic Theory of Culture. On the processual logic of cultural change. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Fisher, H.A.L. 1936. A History of Europe. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  8. Goldman, I. 1970. Ancient Polynesian Society. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hallpike, C.R. 1979. The Foundations of Primitive Thought. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hallpike, C.R. 1984. ‘The relevance of the theory of inclusive fitness to human society’. Journal of Social and Biological. Structures. 7, 131–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hallpike, C.R. 1986. The Principles of Social Evolution. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  12. Hallpike, C.R. 2008a.The Konso of Ethiopia. A study of the values of an East Cushitic society. AuthorHouse UK. Revised edition of 1st edition, 1972Google Scholar
  13. Hallpike, C.R. 2008b. How We Got Here. From bows and arrows to the space age. Bloomington, Indiana: AuthorHouse.Google Scholar
  14. Hallpike, C.R. 2011. ‘Some anthropological objections to evolutionary psychology’ in On Primitive Society, and other forbidden topics. 214-55. Bloomington, Indiana: AuthorHouse.Google Scholar
  15. Harris, M. 1960. ‘Adaptation in biological and cultural science’, Transactions of the New York Academy of Science, 23. 59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lewis, H.S. 1974. ‘Neighbours, friends, and kinsmen: principles of social organization among the Cushitic-speaking peoples of Ethiopia’. Ethnology, 13. 145–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mesoudi, A., Whiten, A., and Laland, K.N. 2004. ‘Perspective: Is human cultural evolution Darwinian? Evidence reviewed from the perspective of The Origin of Species’, Evolution, 58(1). 1–11.Google Scholar
  18. Sahlins, M. 1963. ‘Poor man, rich man, big-man, chief: political types in Melanesia and Polynesia’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 5(3). 285–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Straube, H. 1963. West Kuschitsche Völker Süd-Äthiopiens. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  20. Tomasello, M. 2009. Why We Co-operate.Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Trigger, B. 1990. Understanding Ancient Civilizations. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Williams, G.C. 1966. Adaptation and Natural selection. A critique of some current evolutionary thought. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TetburyUK

Personalised recommendations