| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Cultural Evolution

This version was saved 13 years, 6 months ago View current version     Page history
Saved by Gabrielle Biscaye
on September 13, 2010 at 12:20:50 pm
 

Table of Contents


 

 


 

Main Points

Main Points.

When looking at cultural evolution it is important to first consider the three main elements: the individual, the community, and the society. Cultural evolution starts with the individual. When the individual decides to change his/her belief about a story, then the culture of said story has also begun to change. Though the individual plays a very important and significant role, it is through the help of the community upon which an individual is able to have new experiences and therefore is able to take action. The community amplifies the values of each individual member and essentially causes collectiveness within the group. Finally, the society must adopt the new collective ideas in order for change to occur. According to Robert Evertt, the new idea will be adopted must faster if it is presented as a better idea than the current scenario. Surprisingly, it only takes 20% of the population to accept a new idea in order for the idea to be inescapable, though 70% of the people must at least be exposed to the new idea. Overall, it is seen that culture is passed on and changed via social, environmental, and biological factors.

Memes: An idea, trait, or element passed on from one generation to the next. Memes eventually reproduce and change with the times but are not identical to the original. (ex: with time, the VHS has turned into a DVD player)

Multilinear phenomena: The concept that the evolution of individual cultures or societies is not always the same. There are special paths that different societies may take towards development.  

Horizontal transmission: This is the idea that we learn from not only our parents but also our peers, authority figures, etc. Because the individual learns new traits through many different sources, the traits may not always be the fittest trait for the individual who carries them, but inevitably, the trait is the fittest for the society as a whole.

Directional (cultural evolution): Humans are sometimes forced to change themselves due to non cultural stimulus (i.e. population growth or climate change). Since the culture is always changing it is constantly becoming more complex and moving progressively.  

Heredity: It was Darwin who believed custom, good education, imitation, example of a good man, etc would all eventually become inherited traits. Therefore, inherited traits were seen to Darwin as the most important aspects of cultural evolution.

Organic evolution: Another key aspect of cultural evolution. An example: the ability to digest milk-sugar within human populations has evolved with the consumer of milk throughout the past few thousand years.

Liberation from constraint hypothesis: A specific change throughout history can lead to an evolutionary change. Eventually the culture would be stirred to change in certain manners.   

Modern/Pre-modern cultures:  Modern cultures have the upper hand with competition due to their beliefs, values, and norms inevitably maximizing the number of years they survive. Pre-modern cultures on the other hand differ dramatically from “economically developed” cultures as can be seen through their traditional values.

Conformist bias:  It is more common for the individual to copy the typical (common) type than it is for them to not copy at all. It is also more common for the individual to pick the typical (common) type than to pick a random individual to imitate.

http://www.global-mindshift.org/discover/viewFile.asp?resourceID=231&formatID=261

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evolution-cultural/

 

 

Example Subheading

Example text...

  • Example bullet 1
  • Example bullet 2
  • Example bullet 3

 

 


 

Key Figures

 

Anthropology, like any other discipline, is influenced through time and by other disciplines. In its beginnings as what we now know as “Cultural Evolution” Charles Darwin and his Origin of Species influenced it. After Darwin came Thomas Henry Huxley, who was greatly influenced by Darwin’s ideas. Huxley developed the idea of “social Darwinism,” which “rationalized social preconceptions” (Rogers 1972) that those such as landed gentry were higher on the evolutionary scale than others. From this came the idea of cultural evolution, developed by educated men such as Lewis Henry Morgan and Edward Burnett Tylor. 

 

 

Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-1881)-          

Often cited as the father of the ethnographical approach to anthropology, Lewis Henry Morgan contributed greatly to the methodology of Evolutionism in the 19th century, providing Edward Burnett Tyler with the foundation for the unilinear path towards full or complete cultural significance. Considered the first real ethnographical text, Morgan’s 1851 text The League of the Iroquois laid the foundation for anthropological documentation to the current day. His text documents the customs, rituals, and interactions of the Iroquois, and he marks each significant tradition along the line conceived in order to track the tribes progress along a “socio-evolutionary scale”*. His text Ancient Society (1877) depicts his conceptualization of a universal scale, describing the ascent from savagery to civilization, and citing instances and examples in which his theories are demonstrated.

Other significant texts include his 1870 analysis of familial and societal interactions entitled Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family.

 

Christian Jurgensen Thomsen (1788-1865)-

Danish archeologist Christian Jurgensen Thomsen, known primarily for his development of the “Three Age System” (consisting of a Stone Age, a Bronze Age, and an Iron Age) is also said to have endorsed the systematic association of cultures along a designated scale. As head of Antiquarian Collections at the Copenhagen museum, his work required a classifications system, and the movement toward cultural evolutionism seemed natural to a man used to categorizing, labeling, and scaling the artifacts of ancient societies.

Thomsen worked for the Danish Royal Commission for the Preservation and Collection of Antiquities in 1816. His works include A Guide to Northern Antiquities published in 1847.

 

Edward Burnett Tylor (1832-1917)-

Often called the father of British anthropology, Tylor founded the department of anthropology at Oxford in England. His ideas stem from the same concept as Morgan's, but rather than including all of society and culture, he focuses on the evolution of religion. Each society has a religion, however it begins with animalism, then polytheism, monotheism, and culminating in science. The more primitive the culture, the more primitive their religion. Tylor's ideas were also heavily influence (and influential) in debates concerning Charles Darwin's Origin of Species (Moore 2009).

 


 

Key Texts

Perhaps the most influential text regarding Cultural Evolutionary theory comes from Lewis Henry Morgan’s Ancient Society, published in _____. [citation needed]. Morgan’s research was an attempt to understand the perceived differences in development across various cultures. Measured mostly by technical developments observed in different cultures, Morgan attempted to cross-culturally compare surveyed groups, aligning them as “Savage”, “Barbarian”, or “Civilized.” Jerry D. Moore, author of An Introduction to Anthropological Theories and Theorists, notes that Morgan’s purpose was to clarify that “Savagery in one culture, barbarism in another, and civilization in a third were not the result of different races being genetically condemned to backwardness or development; they were simply societies perched at different stages on a common progression of cultural evolution.” [citation needed] Morgan summarizes by saying, “The latest investigations respecting the early condition of the human race are tending to the conclusion that mankind commenced their career at the bottom of the scale and worked their way up from savagery to civilization through the slow accumulations of experimental knowledge.” [citation needed].

 

Edward Burnett Tylor, a contemporary of Morgan, noted his own theory of the evolutionary process of religion in his book, Primitive Culture, first published in 1871. [citation needed.]

 

     Edward Tylor’s Primitive Culture is one of the most important texts regarding Cultural Evolution. Through his research he attempts to explain the past and predict the future by classifying and comparing groups of people. “The phenomena of culture can be classified and staged in an order of revolution” (citation needed). Tylor makes broad generalizations about culture and quotes Dr. Johnson in his work saying, “Any one set of savages is like the other” (citation needed). Tylor recognized man as one group but claimed that all men were in different grades of civilization, which could be recognized systematically and concretely. He states also that trusting isolated statements from ethnographers was dangerous and that one needed corresponding accounts from around the world (citation needed). The bulk of his work focuses on huge generalizations. Tylor claims that even though there is great distance between groups of “savages,” they all have the same qualities. His method for studying culture relies on not focusing on individuals but rather studying the special habits of a group and then studying the prevalence of those habits. By studying those habits and their frequency, he proposes that one can place groups of people into the different levels of culture. Ways of defining culture proposed in his book are definite and systematic. He states, “The principal criteria of classification are the absence or presence, high or low development, of the industrial arts, especially metal-working, manufacture of implements and vessels, agriculture, architecture, the extent of scientific knowledge, the definiteness of moral principles, the condition of religious belief and ceremony, the degree of social and political organization, and so forth” (citation needed).

            Tylor states that one of the most important parts of studying culture was to study the use of weapons of tools within a group. The material things in the group’s life were the most important evidence to represent their culture. He states that one must “treat actions or objects like species” (citation needed).

            Origin and language section…

            Art section…

            In this text, religion is an important piece to defining one’s culture. Tylor explains how in savage cultures, the development of religion is extremely ignorant.

            Political Organization section….

 

 


 

Critiques

As this is a preliminary theory to the field of anth, it would be critqued by all of its contemporaries. Boas' thoery on cultural relativism refutes the idea that we can hold one society as a standard for others (seeBoasian Anthropology: Historical Particularism and Cultural Relativism.) 

Anthropology is supposed to be the study of culture across time and space, not in one time or space. Therefore pinning people to a static societal expectation is fallacious. Peoples lives are still unfolding, so there aren’t necessarily obvious answers, definitions, patterns to their lives. Each culture, subculture, etc. unfolds in discreet ways.

Ethnographers are looking at how different societies respond to different challenges; not necessarily looking for universals, common ground, but looking at diversity... How could Morgan, the father of enthnography (IRONY?) use one community to theorize... There is not enough research to solidify his theory, but Morgan can be blamed... Morgan and Tylor predated applied anthropology, and did not understand the intense diversity of the world, that it cannot be held to the same standard. Further, this standard, of superior western civilization...was perpetuated by these armchair anthropologists who had not immersed themselves in the cultures they were claiming knowledge of. Though they did their share of research, the information was not firsthand or personal, which are now important aspects of the study and research of anthropology.

 

Cultures do elvove over time, and differ depending on space, but these are not the only quota. Human diversity is not linear, nor can all humans be placed in the same development standards. Although it helps for the academic field, applied anthropologists know that it is not always best to categorize cultures, and even if you can, most cannot categorize distinctively.

The theory is ethnocentric, stating that all cultures have a capacity to be on same level as Western civilization of the time: post-Enlightment, modernism. Others are primitive, not yet at the level of western civ. Further, the theory holds Christianity as the ideal religion for humanity. Morgan's line of evolution  goes towards becoming christian. Therefore, a Jew in today's world would not been seen as totally civilized.

The theory further allowed for cultural hegemony of the West over the rest in the forms of colonization and ongoing impreliasm. It is still applicable today, in our globalized world, where the West holds priority and influence over the rest f the world, particularly the third world. Anti-globalizers argue...

 

The theory can misinterpret and misinform people about a culture. It is discriminatory/unequal, makes presumptions abt where cultures are supposed to go, assigning ranks and values to them. In such a soft science, how does one rank something that is not quantifiable?  

Ethnocentric- privileged the west as superior

Ahistorical

Based on very broad/general comparison, not getting to detail of cultural existence. True ethnographers go into detail on exact...

Holds Western Civ as a standard for all others,

 

For Morgan the question of how societies developed from one evolutionary level to the next was nothing if not theoretical. His typology of developmental stages aimed at nothing less than the explanation of boh human history and human diversity. The distinction between "primitive" and "modern" societies was a theoretically argued one, rather than practical.

mold of ahistorical, rural, tribe study

studying  "modernizing" peoples"who all wear pants" could hardly be central; to the more prestigeous arena of antrho theory145-6

definitively refuted in early 20thC by Boas[1]

Morgan placed emphasis on sorting societies according to their level of evolutionary development, instead of based on other criteria such as...

Ferguson asks from who's point of view can one society be seen as higher than another

James Ferguson calls the theory "emperically flawed," meaning that there isn't enough evidence and experience to back it up. (144)

ethnocentric 144

Source:

Edelman, Marc. Haugerud, Angelique. The Anthropology of Development and Globalization. From Classical Political Economy to Contemporary Neoliberalism. Blackwell: Oxford, 2008.

 

heres a link to a cartoon deal http://www.newyorker.com/images/2008/09/08/cartoons/080908_cartoon_4_a13481_p465.gif

couldn't really figure out how to make it show up as the pic

 

Gaby has a cartoon to scan?? 

 

You can see how this theory was created because of the biased/limited resources available to these authors. However, what is most important about this branch of anth, is how it served as a launch-pad for other more accurate studies of culture...encouraged people to go check out these cultures, just by mentioning them and breeding curiosity?

We cant blame these theorists for globalization, though it is important to recognize the elitist attitude that is certainly derived from a western superiority complex, and definitely circulates and continues these ideals and attitudes for future americans both scholarly and generally.

 

Critiques:

 

A primary critique of the theory is the critique of Armchair Anthropology in general, which is argued by all contemporary anthropologists. Used largely by Edward Tylor, armchair anthropology was when anthropologist worked with studies and information collected by others, like missionaries, explorers, and colonial officials.  They did not collect their own information. It is called this essentially because the anthropologists did not have to leave their armchairs to do their research.

[Lecture cited]

They based everything off of other peoples’ (possibly biased) descriptions of the culture and did not observe first hand.

[wiki books; cultural anthro/history of anthropological theory]

He states also that trusting isolated statements from ethnographers was dangerous and that one needed corresponding accounts from around the world [primative culture by tylor]

In the era of colonialism, the theorys are bound to be biased, aimed towards Western superiority. Many colonial officials used anthropological discourse to typecast the people of the area they chose to dominate. For example, British discourse of Islamic Society in Egypt as "backwards" gave them free reign to rule over the society, enforcing their superior Western, Enlightened, Christian laws, moral, principles on the people to bring them towards true civilization.

ARE WE TO CRITIQUE DEVELOPMENT THEORIES???

 

should we divide by ECON/POLITIC/SOC/CULT?

ethnocentric:

judging other cultures using one’s own cultural standards. [book]

 

this is what our culture did so all others must do that or they are not as advanced as us. Is not necessarily true, all will not follow a single path

 

Broad comparison:

Do not compare specific enough traits of a culture, leave too much out

 

They consider religion as a basis so if their religion doesn’t change, it doesn’t matter what else does they are still in the same stage i.e. ghost (animalism) [book]

 

Material aspect:

Focus on the material possessions of culture or what they produce i.e. Polynesians not making pottery [book]

 

Just cause they don’t have pottery doesn’t mean they are not advanced, they just might not have needed it [book]

 

Development theory:

Is a conglomeration of theories about how desirable change in society is best to be achieved. Such theories draw in a variety of social scientific disiplines and approaches.

 

Modernization theory:

Is a theory of development which states that the development can be achieved through following the process of development that were used by the currently developed countries [wiki]

 

Historical and traditional evidence not available as to low stages of culture [primitive culture]

 

 

 

Citing:

 

Lecture, Professor Carole McGranahan, ANTH2100 Frontiers of Cultural Anthropology, 1 September 2010

 

Conrad Kottak, Cultural Anthropology: Appreciating Cultural Diversity, New York: McGraw Hill, 2009, p. __________

 

 Edward B. Tylor, Primitive Culture,  . . . 

 

Rogers, James Allen. “Darwinism and Social Darwinism.” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Apr. - Jun., 1972), pp. 265-280.

 

Moore, Jerry.  2009.  Visions of Culture: An Introduction to Anthropological Theories and Theorists (Third Edition).  Lanham and New York: Alta Mira Press.

 

 

Footnotes

  1. Ferguson, James. IN The ANth of dev.

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.