University of California Riverside
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Reviving the Organismic Analogy in Sociology: Human Society as an Organism A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology by Matthew Bjorn Dunn June 2016 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Jonathan H. Turner, Chairperson Dr. Christopher Chase-Dunn Dr. Dr. Alexandra Maryanski Dr. Raymond L. Russell Copyright by Matthew Bjorn Dunn 2016 The Dissertation of Matthew Bjorn Dunn is approved: Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside AKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation would not have been possible without the help and assistance of many people. First, I would like to thank all of my family for their love and support over the years. I would specifically like to thank my parents, Doug and Linda Dunn, and my wife, Gaby Dunn, for everything. I wouldn’t be where I am today without your unconditional love and guidance and for that I will forever be grateful. I would also like to thank all of the faculty at UCR who have both shaped my understanding of the world, and helped me navigate through the complexities of graduate school. Specifically, I would like to thank Dr. Jonathan H. Turner, Dr. Alexandra Maryanski, Dr. Christopher Chase-Dunn, Dr. Raymond Russell, Dr. Stephan K. Sanderson, Dr. Jan E. Stets, Dr. Peter J. Burke, and Dr. Scott V. Savage for all of their wisdom, guidance, and support over the years. I would like to thank the friends I’ve made as a graduate student at UCR. Jenna Mead, Kevin McCaffree, Kevin ‘Akron’ Curwin, Ryan Trettevik and Tony Roberts, you have all influenced my thinking and helped keep me sane. Finally, I would like to thank all of the staff at UCR, specifically Anna Wire, for all of the assistance you have provided me with during my time as a graduate student at UCR. iv DEDICATION Dedicated to Stanton Edward Gagel (1987 – 2016). v ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Reviving the Organismic Analogy in Sociology: Human Society as an Organism by Matthew Bjorn Dunn Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Program in Sociology University of California, Riverside, June 2016 Dr. Jonathan H. Turner, Chairperson Comparing the operation of human societies to the operation of organisms was a common theme in the theories of sociology’s classical era. Despite this early prominence, the organismic analogy has received little attention from sociologists during the late 20th and early 21st centuries. The present dissertation is an attempt to revive the organismic analogy in sociological theory. In so doing, the present dissertation will first outline the organismic analogy as it appeared in the sociological theories of Auguste Comte, Herbert Spencer and Émile Durkheim. After providing that historical foundation, this dissertation will then use contemporary evolutionary theory to define an organism as a collective entity featuring a high level of cooperation and a low level of conflict among its component parts. Featuring a high level of cooperation and a low level of conflict among its component parts allows an organism to adaptively modify flows of energy in its environment, which in turn, enables its persistence. Also, organisms emerge through a vi three-part evolutionary process involving social group formation, social group maintenance, and social group transformation. After providing that background, this dissertation will then argue that a human society is a collective entity that exhibits a high level of cooperation and a low level of conflict among the individuals that compose the society. This arrangement allows the society to adaptively modify flows of energy in its environment, which in turn, enables the society’s persistence. Furthermore, human societies emerged through a three-part evolutionary process involving social group formation, social group maintenance, and social group transformation. Following from these arguments, human societies can be considered organisms. After arguing that human societies can be considered organisms, this dissertation will then argue that the organismic character of human societies has, in general, increased over time as societal evolution has unfolded. vii Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction ...........................................................................................1 Chapter 2: Organisms in Biology and Sociology Introduction ....................................................................................................11 The Organismic Analogy in Sociology ..........................................................11 Redefining the Organismic Analogy .............................................................31 Conclusion .....................................................................................................57 Chapter 3: Parallel Principles of Organization Introduction ....................................................................................................60 The Emergence of a Higher Level Organism ................................................61 The Emergence of the Human Societal Organism .........................................74 Conclusion .....................................................................................................95 Chapter 4: The Foraging Organism Introduction ....................................................................................................97 The Foraging Organism .................................................................................100 Societal Evolution and the Size-Complexity Hypothesis ..............................146 Conclusion .....................................................................................................158 Chapter 5: The Societal Organism Transformed Introduction ....................................................................................................160 From Foraging Societies to Agricultural Civilizations ..................................160 From Agricultural to Industrial Civilization ..................................................234 Conclusion .....................................................................................................271 viii Chapter 6: Conclusion ..............................................................................................274 References .................................................................................................................280 ix List of Figures Figure 1: Illustration of a Necker Cube ...................................................................3 Figure 2: The Iteration Model of World-System Transformation ...........................55 x List of Tables Table 1: GDP per capita estimates for select European countries (1 – 1700 CE) ...215 Table 2: GDP per capita estimates for select countries (1700 – 1998 CE) ..............252 Table 3: Human Society as an Evolutionary Transition in Individuality ................278 Table 4: The Evolution of the Human Societal Organism .......................................279 xi Chapter 1: Introduction The evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins is perhaps most famous for his metaphor of the selfish gene, which he first put forward in his book The Selfish Gene (1976). In writing The Selfish Gene, Dawkins was not re-inventing the wheel; a gene-centered approach to evolution had already been put forward by George C. Williams in his book Adaptation and Natural Selection, published 10 years earlier. According to Williams (1966), groups, organisms and genomes are temporary manifestations; groups break up, organisms die and genomes are destroyed through the process of recombination. Because of this temporary character, Williams argued that selection on groups, organisms and genomes cannot lead to the cumulative character seen in evolution. Genes, on the other hand, have the permanence required for cumulative evolution. Genes replicate themselves and as the genes that are better than others at replicating increase their frequency in the gene pool, evolution by natural selection takes place (Williams 1966; Dawkins 1976, 1982). As biological evolution is a process that takes place due to the differential replication of genes in a gene pool, it can be understood through the adoption of a gene-centered view of evolution (Williams 1966; Dawkins 1976, 1982). Although central to Dawkins’ work, these ideas were not unique to him, what was unique about Dawkins’ work was the metaphor he used to illuminate the gene-centered view of evolution. In order to demonstrate the explanatory power of the gene-centered view, Dawkins made the metaphor of the selfish gene. Just as selfish individuals look out for their self-interests over the interests of others, genes build and direct organisms and 1 groups in ways that promote their own best interests (replication) over the interests of other genes in the gene pool. In this way, genes are selfish. In making the metaphor of the selfish gene, Dawkins was not saying that genes make organisms selfish, although in many cases they do. What Dawkins was saying was that through building and shaping the behavior of organisms in ways that allow for their own replication, genes ‘act’ as if they are selfish; recognizing this fact brings great clarity to our understanding of evolution, specifically the evolution of social behavior. Using the metaphor of the selfish gene to illustrate the evolution of both cooperative and spiteful behavior in a vast array of species was one of the central themes of Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene. The metaphorical nature of Dawkins’ selfish gene was lost on many, who balked