Full House
Recently I read a book by Stephen Jay Gould entitled Full House. It was a very interesting book, explaining evolution, statistics, and the extinction of .400 hitting in baseball. If you are interested in any of these things, I heartily recommend it. I probably most enjoyed how he punctured the myth of evolution as progress, since I'm generally opposed to any theory that things are getting better. For that reason I was particularly annoyed when he began espousing a theory of cultural progress towards the end of the book.
He argues that, because of various features of cultural change, it may in fact be 'Lamarckian' rather than 'Mendelian'. That is, traits gained during a lifetime which have a cultural advantage can be passed on, where physical traits which are acquired cannot be. To be fair, Gould hedges his bets. But I still want to complain, because that's what I do best.
There are two serious problems with any theory of cultural progress. One is the problem of incommensurability. It is at the very least difficult to compare the values of two different cultures; it may be impossible. (But see Charles Taylor's arguments, republished in Philosophical Arguments.) But to know that there was cultural progress, we'd have to be able to compare, say, American culture of the early 21st century with American culture of the early 19th century. That is, there can be no empirical evidence of this progress. The second, and related problem is one of interconnectivity. Due to the pervasive nature of culture, it is impossible to make gains in some one area (say, individual rights) without changing some other area (say, community relations). And generally speaking, these changes are going to be for the worse, not for the better. I like individual rights; in fact, I prefer them to some strong notion of communality. But I do think that our communities have suffered for our emphasis on individual rights.
Another side of this second problem is the two-sided (one could even say two-faced) nature of culture. Say a culture emphasizes community. This may create certain goods, such as extensive care for the elderly. But it also creates certain harms, such as a supression of difference (and, by extension, supression of different people, often violently). And I suspect that any cultural trait is going to show such duality.
He argues that, because of various features of cultural change, it may in fact be 'Lamarckian' rather than 'Mendelian'. That is, traits gained during a lifetime which have a cultural advantage can be passed on, where physical traits which are acquired cannot be. To be fair, Gould hedges his bets. But I still want to complain, because that's what I do best.
There are two serious problems with any theory of cultural progress. One is the problem of incommensurability. It is at the very least difficult to compare the values of two different cultures; it may be impossible. (But see Charles Taylor's arguments, republished in Philosophical Arguments.) But to know that there was cultural progress, we'd have to be able to compare, say, American culture of the early 21st century with American culture of the early 19th century. That is, there can be no empirical evidence of this progress. The second, and related problem is one of interconnectivity. Due to the pervasive nature of culture, it is impossible to make gains in some one area (say, individual rights) without changing some other area (say, community relations). And generally speaking, these changes are going to be for the worse, not for the better. I like individual rights; in fact, I prefer them to some strong notion of communality. But I do think that our communities have suffered for our emphasis on individual rights.
Another side of this second problem is the two-sided (one could even say two-faced) nature of culture. Say a culture emphasizes community. This may create certain goods, such as extensive care for the elderly. But it also creates certain harms, such as a supression of difference (and, by extension, supression of different people, often violently). And I suspect that any cultural trait is going to show such duality.
posted by Mad Jurist at 2:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home