File spoon-archives/marxism2.archive/marxism2_1996/96-04-19.143, message 42


Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:59:43 -0600
Subject:  Group or individual




>>> Adam Rose <adam-AT-pmel.com>  4/10/96, 03:45am >>>

Why do I start from the "group" , when it comes to foragers ?

When it comes to modern capitalism, no one ( or at least, no
socialist ) would attempt to explain human society in terms of
genetics. Conversely, no one would attempt to explain the devlopment
of the earliest hominids in terms of the forces of production, since
there weren't any. At some point, there is a transition, where one
kind of development gives rise to, and coexists with the other.
***

I'm not trying to explain anything in terms of "genetics", not in the
way I understand that word.  I suspect my invocation of evolutionary
theory is thoroughly confusing, but I'm not what to do about it.

Is it basically your position that there are no "forces of
production" without tools?  or what is your definition of that
phrase?  Sorry, I forget if we got that clear once before.

My objection to your use of the term "group" in the way you do is
that it generally seems very fuzzy to me.  It is also quite
irrelevant in my view of evolutionary theory.  Natural selection
practically never proceeds by the extermination of groups.  Both
genetic change and cultural change take place _within_ a society. 
Genetic change only occurs _if_ there is a persistent genetic
difference between those who reproduce more and less.  Cultural
change occurs if someone finds that doing something differently
increases hir likely reproductive success, and so switches.

And another one switches, or a 'group' of probably related people
agrees to do something new ...

But Adam, you still didn't explain what you mean by "a basic unit of
production".  Also, is there some reason why there cannot be valid /
useful analysis of some things in terms of "groups" and also in terms
of individuals?  I think neither one must be the only one, but I do 
think that the individual view offers useful insights that cannot be
had any other way, and it is the only view that holds much water in
terms of evolution.  IMO [tho I'm not entirely alone on that in my
field.]

Let's work on not talking past each other.  It's tricky when we have
totally different trainings / world views / or something.

Lisa



     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005