Sociology and the Second Darwinian Revolution: A Metatheoretical Analysis

Abstract

Sociologists tend to eschew biological explanations of human social behavior. Accordingly, when evolutionary biologists began to apply neo-Darwinian theory to the study of human social behavior, the reactions of sociologists typically ranged from indifference to overt hostility. Since the mid-1960s, however, neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory has stimulated a ''second Darwinian revolution'' in traditional social scientific conceptions of human nature and social behavior, even while most sociologists remain largely uninformed about neo-Darwinian theory and research. This article traces sociology's long-standing isolation from the life sciences, especially evolutionary biology, to divergence in the metatheoretical assumptions that typify conventional sociological thought versus contemporary evolutionary biology. We conclude with a discussion of the recent emergence of a nascent ''evolutionary sociology'' that integrates sociobiological reasoning with contemporary sociological thought.

Whither the Blank Slate? A Report on the Reception of Evolutionary Biological Ideas among Sociological Theorists

“…Critics condemn sociologists' ignorance and fear of biology (e.g., Ellis 1996;Machalek and Martin 2004;Van den Berghe 1990), while marshalling a variety of evidence that the field is hopelessly out of touch with the nascent ''Darwinian Revolution'' in the sciences.…”

“…Machalek and Martin (2004) examine the 20 best-selling introductory sociology books in the United States. They find that of the 14 that discuss sociobiology at all, the textbook authors characterize the field as mired in reductionism and genetic determinism.…”

Again, What the Philosophy of Biology is not

“…It could be worthwhile for philosophers of chemistry, but also for a philosopher of biology, to look into this sort of transfer. Lots of work could also be usefully invested in clarifying "border conflicts" between disciplines such as evolutionary biology and sociology (Van den Berghe, 1990;Machalek and Martin, 2004), or, say, in comparing how evolutionary economists (e.g., Nelson, 1995) and evolutionary epistemologists (e.g., Hull, 1988) conceptualize evolution in their respective fields. And so on and so forth.…”

Better Informed, Still Skeptical

“…I considered seriously the authors' observation that it might not be simple ''biophobia'' (Ellis 1996) that had resulted in my distaste for biological explanations but my ignorance of recent developments in the field. Perhaps I was not so much a dogmatic ''secular creationist'' (Ehrenreich and McIntosh 1997) but someone who suffered from ''bioilliteracy'' (Machalek and Martin 2004).…”