Advertisement

Models, Metaphors, Lamarckisms and the Emergence of ‘Scientific Sociology’

  • Snait B. Gissis

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to answer the following question: ‘How and why were models, mechanisms, analogies, metaphors and assumptions that could be characterized as Lamarckian-Spencerian, neo-Lamarckian perceived to be especially congenial to an emerging sociology seeking to become a scientific discipline in the latter part of the nineteenth century, and even in the early twentieth century?’ In answering this question, I shall briefly address the following issues: determinism and plasticity, individuals and collectivities, heredity and inheritance, and deal primarily with Herbert Spencer and Émile Durkheim.

This essay is dedicated to the memory of Silvan S. Schweber

References

  1. Alexander, Jeffrey C., and Philip Smith, eds. 2005. The Cambridge Companion to Durkheim. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bowler, Peter J. 1988. The Non-Darwinian Revolution. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Burkhardt, Richard. 1977. The Spirit of System: Lamarck and Evolutionary Biology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Conry, Yvette L. 1974. L’Introduction du Darwinisme en France au Xixe Siècle. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  5. Corsi, Pietro. 1988. The Age of Lamarck: Evolutionary Theories in France 1790–1830. Translated by Jonathan Mandelbaum. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  6. Delage, Yves, and Marie Goldsmith. 1912[1909]. The Theories of Evolution. Translated by André Tridon, 244. New York: B.W. Huebsch.Google Scholar
  7. Durkheim, Émile. 1885. Albert Schäffle: Bau und Leben des Socialen Körpers. Revue Philosophique 19 (46): 84–101.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 1888. Cours de science social: leçon d’ouverture. Revue Internationale de l’ensiegnement 15: 23–48.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 1893. De la division du travail social: étude sur l’organisation des sociétés supérieures. Paris: Felix Alcan. (PUF 1930).Google Scholar
  10. ———. 1895. Les Règles de la methode sociologique. Paris: Felix Alcan. (PUF 1937).Google Scholar
  11. ———. 1897. Le suicide: étude de sociologie. Paris: Felix Alcan. (Alcan 1930).Google Scholar
  12. Francis, Mark. 2007. Herbert Spencer and the Invention of Modern Life. Chesham, UK: Acumen.Google Scholar
  13. Francis, Mark, and Michael W. Taylor, eds. 2015. Herbert Spencer: Legacies. Chesham: Acumen.Google Scholar
  14. Gissis, Snait B. 2002. Late Nineteenth Century Lamarckism and French Sociology. Perspectives on Science 10 (1): 69–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. ———. 2005. Biological Heredity and Cultural Inheritance in Spencer’s Principles of Psychology. In Cultural History of Heredity, ed. Hans-Jörg Rheinberger and Staffan Müller-Wille. Preprint 296: 137–152. Berlin: Max Planck Institute.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2009. Interactions between Social and Biological Thinking: The Case of Lamarck. Perspectives on Science 17 (39): 237–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. ———. 2011. Lamarckism and the Constitution of Sociology. In Transformations of Lamarckism—From Subtle Fluids to Molecular Biology, ed. B. Gissis Snait and Eva Jablonka, 89–100. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones, Greta, and R.A. Peel, eds. 2004. Herbert Spencer: The Intellectual Legacy. London: Galton Institute.Google Scholar
  19. Lamarck, Jean Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet de. 1809. Philosophie Zoologique. Paris: Dentu. Corsi—Site Lamarck.Lamarck http://www.lamarck.cnrs.fr/index.php?lang=frGoogle Scholar
  20. ———. 1815–1822. Histoire Naturelle des animaux sans vertèbres. Paris: Deterville. Corsi—Site Lamarck. Lamarck http://www.lamarck.cnrs.fr/index.php?lang=frGoogle Scholar
  21. Loison, Laurent. 2010. Qu’est-ce que le néolamarckisme? : les biologistes français et la question de l’évolution des espèces, 1870–1940. Paris: Vuibert.Google Scholar
  22. Lukes, Stephen. 1973. Emile Durkheim: His Life and Work. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  23. Peel, J.D.Y. 1971. Herbert Spencer—The Evolution of a Sociologist. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  24. Schmaus, Warren. 2004. Rethinking Durkheim and His Tradition. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Spencer, Herbert. 1855. The Principles of Psychology. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. ———. 1860. The Social Organism. The Westminster Review 17: 90–121. Reprinted in Essays Scientific, Political and Speculative vol. I, 265–307.Google Scholar
  27. ———. 1862. First Principles. London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
  28. ———. 1864–1867. The Principles of Biology. London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
  29. ———. 1873. The Study of Sociology. London: Henry S. King.Google Scholar
  30. ———. 1876–1896. The Principles of Sociology. London: Williams & Norgate.Google Scholar
  31. Turner, Stephen P., ed. 1993. Emile Durkheim : Sociologist and Moralist. London; New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Snait B. Gissis
    • 1
  1. 1.Cohn InstituteTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations