Introduction
Evolutionary theories are based on
the assumption that societies gradually change from simple beginnings into even
more complex forms. Early sociologists beginning with Auguste Comte believed
that human societies evolve in a unilinear way- that is in one line of
development. According to them social change meant progress toward something
better. They saw change as positive and beneficial. To them the evolutionary
process implied that societies would necessarily reach new and higher levels of
civilization. L.H Morgan believed that there were three basic stages in the
process: savagery, barbarism and civilization. Auguste Comte's ideas relating
to the three stages in the development of human thought and also of society
namely-the theological, the metaphysical and the positive in a way represent
the three basic stages of social change. This evolutionary view of social
change was highly influenced by Charles Darwin's theory of Organic Evolution.
Definition
Social change may be defined as the alteration or transformation at large scale
level in the social structure, social institutions, social organization and
patterns of social behavior in a given society or social system. Social change
can also be defined as the alteration, rearrangement or total replacement of
phenomena, activities, values or processes through time in a society
in a succession of events. The alteration or rearrangement may involve simple or complex changes in the structure, form or shape of the social phenomena. Sometimes it may mean the complete wiping out of the phenomenon and their total replacement by new forms (Calhoun et al, 1994).
in a succession of events. The alteration or rearrangement may involve simple or complex changes in the structure, form or shape of the social phenomena. Sometimes it may mean the complete wiping out of the phenomenon and their total replacement by new forms (Calhoun et al, 1994).
Evolutionary Theory
Despite the wide variety in the
possible directions change may take, various generalizations have been set
forth. Because the lot of mankind generally has improved over the long term, by
far the most numerous classes of theories of the direction of change comprise
various cumulative or evolutionary trends. Though varying in many ways, these
theories share an important conclusion that the course of man’s history is
marked up ‘upward’ trend through time.
The notion of evolution came
into social sciences from the theories of biological evolution. With the advent
of Darwinian Theory of biological evolution, society and culture began to be
regarded as undergoing the same changes and demonstrating the same trends.
It was conceived that society
and culture were subject to the same general laws of biological and organism
growth. Some thinkers even identified evolution with progress and proceeded to
project into the future more and more perfect and better-adapted social and
cultural forms.
Charles Darwin (1859), the
British biologist, who propounded the theory of biological evolution, showed
that species of organisms have evolved from simpler organisms to the more
complicated organisms through the processes of variations and natural
selection. After Darwin, ‘evolution’, in fact, became the buzz word in all
intellectual inquiry and Darwin and Spencer were the key names of an era in the
history of thought.
Herbert Spencer (1890), who is
known to be the forerunner of this evolutionary thought in sociology, took the
position that sociology is “the study of evolution in its most complex form”.
For him, evolution is a process of differentiation and integration.
Those who
were fascinated by this theory applied it to the human society and argued that
societies must have evolved from the simple and primitive to that of too
complex and advanced such as the western society. Herbert Spencer a British
sociologist carried this analogy to its extremity. He argued that society
itself is an organism. He even applied Darwin's principle of the survival of
the fittest to human societies. He said that society has been gradually
progressing towards a better state. He argued that it has evolved from military
society to the industrial society. He claimed that western races, classes or
societies had survived and evolved because they were better adapted to face the
conditions of life. This view known as social Darwinism got widespread
popularity in the late 19th century. It survived even during the first phase of
the 20th century. Emile Durkheim identified the cause of societal evolution as
a society's increasing moral density. Durkheim viewed societies as changing in
the direction of greater differentiation, interdependence and formal control
under the pressure of increasing moral density. He advocated that societies
have evolved from a relatively undifferentiated social structure with minimum
of division of labor and with a kind of solidarity called mechanical solidarity
to a more differentiated social structure with maximum division of labor giving
rise to a kind of solidarity called organic solidarity.
Types of Evolutionary Theory:
There are three main types of
evolutionary theory:
(1) Theory of Unilinear
Evolution:
It postulates the straight-line,
ordered or progressive nature of social change. According to this theory,
change always proceeds toward a predestined goal in a unilinear fashion. There
is no place of repetition of the same stage in this theory. Followers of this
pattern of change argue that society gradually moves to an even higher state of
civilization which advances in a linear fashion and in the direction of
improvement. The pace of this change may be swift or slow. In brief, linear
hypothesis states that all aspects of society change continually in a certain
direction, never faltering, never repeating them.
Theories of Saint-Simon, Comte,
Morgan, Marx and Engels, and many other anthropologists and sociologists come
under the category of unilinear theories of social evolution because they are
based on the assumption that each society does, indeed must, pass through a
fixed and limited numbers of stages in a given sequence. Such theories long
dominated the sociological scene.
(2) Universal Theory of
Evolution:
It is a little bit variant form
of unilinear evolution which states that every society does not necessarily go
through the same fixed stages of development. It argues, rather, that the
culture of mankind, taken as a whole, has followed a definite line of
evolution.
Spencer’s views can be
categorised under this perspective who said that mankind had progressed from
small groups to large and from simple to compound and in more general terms,
from homogenous to the heterogeneous. The anthropologist Leslie White has been
a leading exponent of this conception.
Similar ideas were greatly
elaborated by William Ogbum, who stressed the role of invention in social
change. On this basis he gave birth to the famous concept of ‘cultural lag’
which states that change in our non-material culture, i.e., in our ideas and
social arrangements, always lag behind changes in material culture, i.e., in
our technology and invention.
(3) Multilinear Theory of
Evolution:
This brand of evolutionism has
more recently developed and is more realistic than the unilinear and universal
brand of evolutionary change. Multilinear evolution is a concept, which
attempts to account for diversity. It essentially means identification of
different sequential patterns for different culture or types of cultures. This
theory holds that change can occur in several ways and that it does not
inevitably lead in the same direction. Theorists of this persuasion recognise
that human culture has evolved along a number of lines.
Those who share this
perspective, such as Julian Steward (1960), attempt to explain neither the
straight-line evolution of each society, nor the progress of mankind as a
whole, but rather concentrate on much more limited sequences of development.
It does identify some social
trends as merely universal: the progression from smaller to larger, simpler to
more complex, rural to urban, and low technology to higher technology but it
recognises that these can come about in various ways and with distinct
consequences. This theory is related to what is known as episodic approach,
which stresses the importance of accidents and unique historical, social and
environmental circumstances that help to explain a particular course of social
change. Later on, the views of Leslie White and Julian Steward were named as
neo-evolutionism.
Criticism of Evolutionary Theory:
Evolutionary scheme (gradual and
continuous development in stages) of any kind fell under both theoretical and
empirical attack in the last century. It was criticised heavily on many grounds
but mainly for its sweeping or over-generalisation about historical sequences,
uniform stages of development and evolutionary rate of change. The biological
evolution, from which the main ideas of social evolution were borrowed,
provided somewhat clumsy and unsatisfactory answers.
Such explanations came under
attack for lack of evidence. Evolutionary scales were also questioned from a
somewhat different, but more empirical source. The easy assumption that societies
evolved from simple to complex forms, was mainly based on a scale of
predominant productive technology turned out to be unwarranted.
The doctrine of ‘cultural
relativity’ inhibited even static or cross-sectional generalisation, provided a
new basis for satisfying the common features of societies. The evolutionary
scheme also failed to specify the systematic characteristics of evolving
societies or institutions and also the mechanisms and processes of change
through which the transition from one stage to another was effected.
Most of the classical
evolutionary schools tended to point out general causes of change (economic,
technological or spiritual etc.) or some general trend to complexity inherent
in the development of societies. Very often they confused such general
tendencies with the causes of change or assumed that the general tendencies
explain concrete instances of change.
Because of the above
shortcomings, the evolutionary theory is less popular today. A leading modern
theorist Anthony Giddens (1979) has consistently attacked on evolutionism and
functionalism of any brand. He rejects them as an appropriate approach to understanding
society and social change. Spencer’s optimistic theory is regarded with some
skepticism. It is said that growth may create social problems rather than
social progress.
Modern sociology has tended to
neglect or even to reject this theory, mainly because it was too uncritically
applied by an earlier generation of sociologists. In spite of its all
weaknesses, it has a very significant place in the interpretation of social
change. The recent tentative revival in an evolutionary perspective is closely
related to growing interest in historical and comparative studies