The Evolution of Human Sociality: A Darwinian Conflict Perspective

Abstract

The Evolution of Human Sociality: A Darwinian Conflict Perspective STEPHEN K. SANDERSON ROWMAN AND LITTLEFIELD PUBLISHERS, LANHAM, MARYLAND, 2001. 416 PP. $32.95 PAPER, $89.00 CLOTH. Broad-ranging perspectives uniting biological ecology and human ecology are lacking in the study of the human condition (cf. Kuchka 2001; Redman, Grove and Kuby 2000) and Sanderson's appeal about the fragmented state of sociological theory builds toward a resolution by linking human biology and material existence with behavior and social institutions, continually encouraging the audience to adopt Darwinian thinking or watch the demise of sociology. The Evolution of Human Sociality is a fleshing-out of materialism and the epilogue of a revised edition of Social Transformations (Sanderson 1999), bringing biology and evolutionary principles to sociology. The book's broad scope is highly admirable, and the attempt to theoretically unite the atomistic sub-disciplines and sub-sub-disciplines of social science is welcome. The Evolution of Human Sociality may be appealing to instructors of upper level undergraduate sociology and anthropology theory survey courses, as the first half of it presents all major theories of society. Graduate courses in anthropology and sociology could focus on evaluating Darwinian conflict theory and attempting to either build upon it or use its shortcomings to synthesize something anew. Sanderson's introductory chapter is his synopsis of theory building and philosophy of science. The next several chapters evaluate the effectiveness of the following sociological explanations and their corollaries: functionalism, structuralism, post-structuralism, social constructionism, conflict theory (Marx, Weber), exchange/rational choice, cultural materialism, sociobiology. Sanderson considers the last four of these to be broadly effective theoretical frameworks, and attempts to pull them together into what he calls Darwinian conflict theory (rather than his earlier synthetic materialism), relying most heavily on Marx, Darwin, Weber and Harris. He evaluates each of the aforementioned frameworks individually, his criteria including logical coherence, empirical success, parsimony, explanatory power compared to other theories, and the capacity to provide for new insights and investigation. All of these are sound criteria for evaluating theory, although I find parsimony is often overrated in social science due to parsimony's multiple characteristics and the arbitrariness with which these characteristics are employed. Sanderson's critiques are not reviews of the literature nor discussions of the particular historical context out of which theories were borne, but involve the application of a given theory to one or two cases to evaluate a framework's utility. As a result, the critiques often appear to create straw men. Sanderson argues for the utility of these theoretical caricatures, because parsimony demands that the barebones and causal relationships of frameworks have maximum explanatory value. The latter half of the book is dedicated to quantitative and qualitative evidence for Darwinian conflict theory for most of the major anthropological categories of study: reproduction, infanticide, demographic transition, sexuality, sexual violence, gender, incest, residence, descent, marriage, family, food, subsistence, altruism, reciprocity, redistribution, surplus, rise of capitalism, status, hierarchy, politics and war. The most symbolic aspect of human society-religion-is omitted purposefully. Darwinian conflict theory states that society is socially constructed by individuals who are constrained by the material conditions of human environments. Sanderson does not intend to explain everything nor to exclude all other theories, but to provide a framework under which all social science should work. Population pressure sends everything in motion, forcing individuals to find new ways to biologically, ecologically (technology, economy, etc. …