Reflections on the evolutionist controversy

Abstract

Although several decades separate Leslie White's and Emmanuel Terray's defense of Morgan, and despite the fact that the contents of their theories diverge considerably, both anthropologists employ essentially the same strategy in their debates with the anti evolutionists. White and Terray both main? tain that Morgan's detractors are guilty of a category mistake. According to them, the anti-evolutionists present a false characteriza? tion of Morgan's position, thereby mis? interpreting the theoretical status of his evolutionism. As a result, his opponents criticize Morgan on grounds for which he should not legitimately be held accountable. Both defenses of evolutionism therefore rest on a categorical distinction: in White's case, between "the evolution of culture" and "the culture history of peoples," and in Terray's between historical theory and empirical history. It is important to note that White and Terray are not making a defense of Morgan's literal position but are defending what might be termed the "Morgonian project." In other words, they are defending the validity of an evolutionary approach while not necessarily agreeing with all of the details of Morgan's particular brand of evolutionism. Furthermore, since the attack on evolutionism is quite often only an aspect of a larger attack on theoret? ical speculation in anthropology, their defense of evolutionism can be considered, in part, as a defense of the role of theoretical generalization. While I believe that White's and Terray's strategy is in principle tenable, I do not believe that they have developed their positions in sufficient detail to make them adequate. Consequently, they are vulnerable on several crucial points, points which can in fact be accounted for. I would therefore like to examine their arguments in some detail in order to elucidate the points at which they require supplementation and to indicate the direction that supplementation might take.