who is still evolving?

Mon, 03 Jul 1995 23:40:02 EDT
BAMYEHM@aspen.uml.edu

I missed some of the discussion on the use of "evolution" as an
explanatory sort of meta-concept, but I have not seen any
reference to Joannes Fabian's important book in this regard, 'Time
and the Other.' It is written as a critique fro an anthropological
perspective of the kinds of thinking attendant to presumptions
of evolution. I myself tend to think that the term is still
problematic, EVEN when it is stripped of its originally
teleological, Spencerian package. The fact that a term has a
great "explanatory power" does not necessarily mean that it is
intrinsically meaningful. In other words, using a concept to
show that a logical or rational (both terms presumed to be
universal) path is followed/averted goes around the more
fundamental problem, which consists in demonstrating a
certain kind of systematicity , which would then call for
the introduction of appropriate concepts. In much of the
literature using the term--although there might be exceptions--
the comparability of different things (epochs, regions,
'civilzations,' etc.) and their meaningful totality and
systematicity is more often presumed than established. (In the
otherwise important books of S. N. Eisenstadt on empires or
urbanity, the least interesting parts are by far the conclusions,
rather than the more sharply focused expositions).
This is not to say that we can never do macro- and comparative
types of analysis (I myself do it all the time with a great
deal of pleasure). there are alternatives to the term in
macro-level analysis, which I don't think stands and falls
with evolution. It seems to me that much of the appeal of
the term has to do with its scientific origins (explicitly
referred to by some of the participnts), which I think is
part of a larger problem regarding some (influential)
sociologists' proclivity to model the discipline after
the natural sciences (and often, such as in our case, simply
to toss biology in as one field where the concept worked,
as if we all readily agree that sociology and biology
are so comparable).
These are just some wandering thoughts on the issue.

Mohammed A. Bamyeh
Sociology
Univ. of Massachusetts
Lowell, MA 01854
bamyehm@woods.uml.edu