Social evolutionism

Social Evolutionism refers to 19th century Anthropological theories of social development whereby societies are thought to start out in a primitive state and gradually become more civilized over time. In this context, primitive is associated with animalistic behaviour (see state of nature, caveman, barbarian, savage); while civilization is associated with 19th century European culture--see Western civilization.

Social Evolutionism is related to Social Darwinism, and represents the earliest form of theories of Cultural evolution.

Contents

1 History & Theoretical Basis

2 Critique

3 Social Evolutionism in the 21st Century (additional critique)

4 See Also

5 External Links

History & Theoretical Basis

Social evolutionism was the prevailing theory of early Socio-Cultural Anthropology (see Tylor and Lewis Henry Morgan), and represented an attempt to formalize social thinking along scientific lines, modeled after the biological theory of evolution. If organisms could develop over time according to discernable, deterministic laws, then it seemed reasonable that societies could as well. This really marks the beginning of Anthropology as a scientific discipline and a departure from traditional religious views of "primitive" cultures.

As well as borrowing from biology, social evolutionism had roots in enlightenment & post-englightenment philosophy. Hegel, for example, argued that social development was an inevitible and determined process, similar to an acorn which has no choice but to become an oak tree. Likewise, it was assumed that societies start out primitive, perhaps in a Hobbesian state of nature, and naturally progress toward something resembling industrial Europe.

Although the idea that societies evolve over time has not disappeared, more modern theories are much more culturally sensitive, and generally incorporate more progressive understandings of evolutionary theory. See Cultural evolution.

Critique

Cultural Anthropology rejected social evolutionism due to various theoretical problems:

The theory is deeply ethnocentric--it makes heavy value judgements on different societies; with Western civilization seen as the most valuable.
It assumes all cultures follow the same path or progression and have the same goals.
It equates civilization with material culture (technology, cities, etc.)
It equates evolution with progress or fitness, based on deep misunderstandings of evolutionary theory.
It is greatly contradicted by evidence. Many (but not all) supposedly primitive societies are arguably more peaceful and equitable / democratic than many modern societies, and tend to be more healthy with regard to diet and ecology.

Naturally, because social evolution was posited as a scientific theory, it was often used to support unjust and often racist social practices--particularly colonialism, slavery, and the unequal economic conditions present within industrialized Europe.

Franz Boas is typically regarded as the leader of anthropology's rejection of social evolutionism, in the early part of the 20th century. As a result, modern anthropological approaches are careful to avoid ethnocentric speculation, comparisons, or value judgements; more or less regarding individual societies as existing within their own historical contexts.

Social Evolutionism in the 21st Century (additional critique)

The reasoning, language, and ethnic & intellectual bias of social evolutionism persist into the 21st century. Words like primitive, civilized, advanced, evolved and developed, and the implied value judgements, are still quite common, embedded in the media, entertainment, politics, academia, and everyday speech.

Examples include international relations (esp. post-9/11), ongoing debates between ideologies (such as science vs. religion), in video games such as Age of Empires and Civilizations, and in many works of fiction.

Even efforts aimed at ending conflict and inequality, such as the United Nations, or works of utopian fiction such as Star Trek, often employ language that places societies along a roughly linear scale of social, political, and economic advancement.

While this is generally harmless on the surface, extreme forms of social evolutionary thinking put a psuedo-scientific gloss on ethnic & intellectual biases that in the past justified social agendas ranging from colonialism to slavery and the Nazi holocaust.

External Links

Social Evolutionism