The intellectual and Theory

 

Structural understanding as embedded in an historical context

 

History is both a structured as well as a dynamic process. The history of history begins with the proposition that it is the telling of History that is important.  Objectivity is a specific interpretation that is related to a specific subjective reference point. The social facts a historian deals with are related to dominant but changing social forces that appear dissimilar to people with different points of reference. These social facts and forces are defined in terms of historical trends interpreted differently by different historians of the same time period. Historical trends then presuppose a transformation is happening with these social facts. Changes in the social life of a nation are reflected in the changes in the class structure and ultimately changes in the productive techniques and social environment.

            Human knowledge as expressed by individual psychology develops collectively through growing up and interacting in a social setting in concert with a changing social environment. Even the language a people speak they learn through the communication within their social groupings. The world as we experience it is created out of the way we see our lives and think about our personal active participation in events of our lives. This in turn is at every point is a social creation.

            We are a product of our social upbringing. Our thoughts and ideas are the invention of a specfic set of social, cultural and historical conditions. We learn through the exchange of ideas in the social setting we participate in.

            Each culture within its own historical setting develops a unique worldview. Every culture develops along its own path with its own thought patterns that are created out of a shared but changing worldview and narration. This is reflected in the way a people respond to events in their world.

            Within each society and each ethnic group in that society different classes often develop different and sometimes competing belief arrangements and points of view. Even within classes different genders and different generations develop competing conviction and perspectives. This is true even if the people are using the same symbols and unifying ideologies. These distinctive occurrences in the collective beliefs and attitudes are built upon past historical paradigms. New sets of assumptions that constitute a way of viewing reality for the community are forged out what is left over past worldviews. Creating an acknowledged understanding that becomes recognized as real. This change develops continuously because life is always changing. Altered circumstances that are lived in the present stand in contrast with past interpretations of life.

            Because people are active within their social environment, their environment in fact reflects that activity. People in fact interact consciously with their environment. While reacting to their immediate needs they often create outcomes that have long-term effects. This is in part the nature of social evolution. The result is much the consequences of our collective action are in fact unpredicted. This leads to a need for a people to come up with new strategies to come to terms with the changes brought about in the societal ecosystem. History at this point is the story of important modifications.

             History reflects recurrent adjustment to a continually changing environment. There is constant engagement between communities, between individuals within communities, and between people within their larger environment. This alteration also coaxes persistent reinterpretation of the conventional cardinal philosophy.  This is the essence of the enduring human condition.

            To understand these changes by using both Diachronic Anthropology and  Historical Sociology we began to observe just how situational truth is. It is not enough to describe a social fact objectively.  The Historical Sociologist/ Anthropologists needs to also look at the cultural understanding of the fact in the context of the larger society. This includes the careful examination of the motives, values and interpretations of the participating actors in their lived social drama. In Social Science objective explanations are in actual fact trite, dispassionate accounts  without cultural understandings are basically dull.

            Because changes in people’s attitudes reflect changes in their existential reality a peoples beliefs and their points of view are part of any scientific study of society. The actual experience of existence is filtered through a shared Worldview that is culturally and historically specific. Each cultural historical epoch has it’s own unusual and salient worldview. The historical artifacts of socially created worldviews are the tense interaction between differing worldviews of the historian and the subject matter being studied.  The actual threat of domestic Communism during the Post World War II is going to be told differently by historians who came of age in the turmoil of the 1960’s and historians who of age in the Post Cold War thirty years later. The second set of historian does not have the same sense of moral indignation leveled against the US Government’s anti-subversive programs.

            Along similar lines the particular sociological theories are set in specific historical settings. Established Social Theories correspond to the position and point of view of the comrade initially who set up the theory. The devotees inhabit a distinctive point in the tiered social structure. Each theory then has a legitimate perspective given the social site of the researcher.

            Any serious study of Anthropology or Sociology would require that at some point students carefully read the classics while examining the historical context in which they were written. Because contemporary code of beliefs and philosophies are created out of elements of past theories, the classics remain important to any dynamic study of Sociology. Through Anthropology we can better understand the historical and social-cultural context that gives rise to any theory.

            For example the idea that a society was like an integrated organism requires the writer be living in a modern industrial nation-state. British Structural Functionalism is set in the early Twentieth Century and intellectually reflective of the British Empire. The incorporated essence of this society bears a resemblance to an organism. This analogy is derived from the structure of a Society in which different institutions, like different organ systems of a living individual tend to specialize in function. Functionalism reflects the development of modern industrial society following the French Revolution in Europe. In theses societies because of an integrated market economy the society moves in the direction of a more centralized and efficient political and economic amalgamation.

As modern industrial society cooks up a multitude of theories developed to explain the same or similar phenomena. The Anthropologist, Sociologist, or Historian is a product of this environment. The opposing theories represent conflicting social positions in the same society.

The Nineteenth Century Evolutionary thought.

      Evolutionary began to take root during the eighteenth century European Enlightenment. By the second half of the nineteenth century Evolutionary Anthropologists were developing evolutionary thought even before Darwin published Origins of Species. Biblical scholars looked upon non-European societies as being as an erosion of a basic humanity that monotheism and specific Christianity generated. The Evolutionist developed an alternative view this by hypothesizing that non-whites i.e. Europeans were a more primitive type of human subspecies. Monotheism was superior to either polytheism or animism. Science was superior to religion and Rationalism superior to mysticism. European civilization was at the apex of evolutionary development.  All other cultures were somewhere along the evolutionary trajectory from early apelike hominids to modern Europeans.

      In reaction to Universal Evolution Frantz Boas became a founding spirit of Historical Particularism, which claimed the Universal or Unilinier Evolution in which Europe was the apex of evolution was teleological not scientific. British Structural Functionalism, also became anti-evolutionary in that how the separate parts of a society interact to form a cooperating whole was the focus of their studies, this synchronic theory characterizes the most important goal of any cultural element as the harmony of the society as a whole. In doing so History is not the core in these studies. History could not be ignored. Change is a constant in all social settings, therefore societies must be studied in their historical context. Cultural evolution reemerges as a fact of life.

     

Diachronic Anthropology

Historical Sociology as a part of Diachronic Anthropology demonstrates the continuous development of groups, classes, nations and social institutions in which one set of social organizations replaces earlier examples. In doing this we learn how each small part interacts with each other to establish ever-larger units until we define a global economy.

In the study of the mixture of discrete elements we learn that  these parts come together to provide a interrelated whole.  The world is made up of combination millions of the local communities that are always in a process of transformation.  Because of the increasing tempo of change following World War II and because of the degree of external intrusion in local affairs Process Theory developed as a sharp criticism of Functionalism by a younger Anthropologist hostile to Colonialism.

Cultural motifs form themes that condition the evolution of future national designs. A modern way of looking at the world would not be possible before the advent of the Industrial and Liberal Revolutions. The modern mind set develops a way of looking at things along the lines of a concept that both the past and the future are real units of time and that this linear time frame are real and related to an ever-changing present. This Liberal worldview is a noticeable departure from the previous age in which people saw Truth both as absolute and unchanging.

Capitalism, liberal government, industrial technology and scientific development mutually feed into each other. Liberal Society began being defined during the Enlightenment of the 18^th Century and with Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nation and the Market Economy its rough outlines was delineated.  Along the same lines feudal privilege and the power of Religion was being Challenged. Science developed in this environment. Modern rational philosophy was the expression of a revolutionary capitalist bourgeoisie in their assent to power. Empiricism and science became the practical expression of the empowered Capitalist Class. The growing capitalist economy required quantitative analysis of market possibilities, production expenses, and technological innovation.

With a market economy production grows in importance replacing local subsistence economy. The new market economy was founded upon exchange values and prices that defined relationship between production units and thus individuals. Previously production and production units were embedded in social obligations. Thus, the expansion of market relations within society changed the established social relations.

Because Liberalism became the dominant worldview, political changes that followed were revolutionary. Natural Law and Human Nature became the cornerstones of the new Philosophy. National identity creates a general spirit of the time and outlook going beyond local distinctiveness and native uniqueness. “The Right of Man” and resistance against tyranny replaced theocratic absolutes.  Through Revolution in Europe and America and Colonialism everywhere else Liberal ideas spread through most of the world. As Liberal Bourgeois Society spread it destroyed much of the time honored social organization in traditional society. Ideas of John Locke, Jean Rousseau, Adam Smith and others help to define much of the Liberal thought gained a definition.

Conservative Philosophy

The reaction to the spread of Liberal Society was the expansion and fruitation of Conservative Philosophy. Conservatism came into existence with the advant of Liberal Capitalism. Because there is a specific connection between beliefs, attitudes, and values and the social circumstances of a particular group it can be seen Conservative ideology appeals to those most threatened by the spread of capitalism. By putting an end to the ancient order a call for its return is likely to follow.

Because of the rise of Liberal Society and its corresponding worldview Conservative Philosophy would be characterized by its way of following and countering in opposition to Liberalism. Conservative Philosophy was born after and not before Liberal Philosophy. Because it was a reaction against capitalism it was a dream of an either a return to feudalism in Europe or traditional society everywhere else. Because science, empiricism, rationalism and modern technology co-evolved with capitalism Conservatives find a lot to fight against. Because this progressive market economy undermines the Ancient Order and the Saga of Heroes, to free both people and resources for production for profit, those who did better under traditional society will oppose both free enterprise and science. To the Conservative Liberalism, Capitalism and Modernism was seen as the destruction of all that was decent in life to the Conservative.

The Conservative Movement was a Romantic attempt to reestablish traditional communities that existed before capitalism. The Capitalist and the working class is a product of Capitalism and stand to gain nothing by a return to the antique civilization. Thus are very much under represented in the ranks of the Conservative.

Those elements utterly damaged by the development of bourgeois capitalist society are the small property owners like small farmers, peasants, urban small business owners, independent artisans, and the self-employed. Theses factions’ joint forces with the natural leaders of the conservative movement the large landed aristocracy with ties their feudal or traditional past.

With the robust formation of a Romantic Conservative Movement a milieu is set up in which some intellectuals who feel alienated from both Bourgeois Liberalism and the Socialism of the Revolutionary Working Class can find a home within the setting of the Romantic Folklore. A vision of what Traditional Society was like before the Enlightenment of the 18^th Century, the Industrial Revolution of the 19^Th Century and modern global capitalism of the 20^th century. Community is defended against society. The Spiritual is seen as preferable to Science. Family and Kinship is understood as favored over contracts and Professional Qualifications. The conservatives like Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling or Joseph de Maistre believed society must be governed by divinely inspired internal principles that embedded in deep traditional roots that are culturally embedded and long-established with deep historical roots.

The Radical Left as an Intellectual Tradition

With the advancement of the Market Economy and the Industrial Revolution a new Industrial Working Class is formed from the disrupted elements of the previous society. These detached fragments come together to form a distinct organic class unique to capitalism. Wage labor is the minimum requirement for Industrial Capital further development. The Working Class has lost its connection to traditional society and can be fashioned into an original class within capitalism. Because the very nature of wage labor is creating a surplus for the Capitalist, the defining characteristic of the proletariat is exploitation. It is only natural workers develop an alternative perspective in opposition to Liberal Philosophy. Socialism stands in marked opposition to both Liberals and Conservatives. Because of shared common experiences Socialism can be neither Liberal nor Conservative.

Anthropology of advocacy

            Along similar lines many Anthropologist see their roles not simply as researchers but as advocates for the people they study. In 1968  Anthropologist Helga Kleivan formed the International Work Group for Ingenious Affairs as a human rights support organizations to help indigenous peoples defined their rights, maintain control over their lands and maintain their independent existence. Science has served capitalism well by creating this worldview of objectivity in which truth is independent of ethics. Now it is claimed by theses anthropologists they must offer what ever assistance they can to help the surviving indigenous peoples to resist becoming the victims of someone else’s progress must use this group science.

Rise of Fascism

Fascism is the effect of failed Liberalism and an excessive remains of Conservatism that has came to nothing. As fascism goes it absorbs disempowered liberals and disenchanted socialists. Fascism is both activist and irrational. Militant engagement and the intuitive sentiments are glorified over reason and caution. Leadership is virtually made sacred. Elite theory states history is made by elites and everyone else simply follows.  The acting without regard science or reason placing the act of conquest above ethical principles negates the need for careful analysis or interpretation of history.

Fascists believe history at the simplest level while an intellectually coherent and understandable method of knowledge disappears. Fascism is the irrational exaltation of the deed and the anti-historical myth takes priority over history as the imaginative symbols provide the edifice for simple rendition of a future golden age based upon a newly created folklore of the past this is envisioned by the leader. History becomes a lie and the myth is creative fiction become real in the hearts of the masses. Only the leader has the vision and the rest of the population are only glad for the prophet to lead them out of the wilderness.

In the beginning Fascism is anti-capitalist and anti-socialist. While destroying socialism by its strong hostility to equality, democracy and all socialist ideology it barrows from the people’s socialism in order to make the claim it speaks to the masses. While being anti-capitalist Fascism can never come to power with out making peace with the very large capitalists who not only support but also finance it in the quest for power.

Fascism is extremely patriotic use of platitudes, catchphrases, flags, symbols, songs and strong emotions to rally crowds of people into a frenzy of a unifying mania of patriotism. Xenophobia and a passionate love of one’s “country” rallies large groups of people against the treat of a common foe, i.e. anyone or thing that is different. Because of a perceived need for national security basic civil liberties and human rights are seen a luxury that needs to suspended for the greater need of security. The military our protector is given top priority in government funding until social programs must be cut to pay for the swollen military budgets. The life in the military is glorified while human rights and peace activists are vilified. Sexism is commonplace. Opposition to abortion is a high priority, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation. Religion is central to fascism. Government backing for the dominant religion receives support from many in the church hierarchies. The industrial and business upper crust support the government leaders, creating a mutually beneficial business to government relationship and strengthening the position of the power elite. In spite of a popular appeal ordinary working people are treated like expendable resources. Workers in their labor unions are severely suppressed. There is encouragement of open hostility to higher education. Intellectuals are dismissed as irrelevant. Professors who are competent are sometimes censored of fired for taking the stand politically. Openness in the arts is blatantly harassed either in the public media or government refuses to fund the arts. The mass media is either directly controlled or it range of opinion is limited through control of funding.

Elite Theory

 

            Elite theory is based upon the idea that a tiny powerful ruling elite rules all societies. Politics is but the tool of this elite to maintain control. Leaders govern because the masses are too weak to rules themselves. Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923) claimed the ruling elite was in fact an association of superior individuals, with the will to power. Because of this History is the “circulation of elites.” As one group of elites become weak they are replaced by another group of elites in a violent revolution. Gaetano Mosca (1858-1941) added that the superiority of the political elite was based upon the fact that the elites have the virtues needed to rule. Often proponents of this theory looked upon Fascism as a necessary corrective

Conflict Approach

The conflicts between classes, ethnic groups and classes within ethnic groups reflect larger social contradictions. The long lasting results are the deployment of reciprocally contradictory explanations of social reality in capitalist society. Sociology gives us the tools to study the complex interaction of a whole society within a global context. Anthropology adds a cross cultural and historical component better understand the relational connections of social interactions.  But, there is more than one kind of Sociology and Social or Cultural Anthropology is often found in a separate department at the University. Competing groups use the Sociological Method in mutually antagonistic ways.

Critical Historical Sociology is the basis of Scientific Socialism. What is largely a cultural subconsciousness of competing groups within a larger society is exposed through Historical Sociology. This why Marxism defines the rest of Sociology an either a debate with the Ghost of Marx or trying to disprove, defend or reform Marxism.

Historical studies are embedded in a rigorous theory that can be use to examine the data. Radical social scientists use the critical methods in the demanding engagement of social activism. This is analyzed in the context of power relationships to determine the possibilities of collective vigorous action as a means of achieving radical political and economic change. By becoming aware of one’s social, cultural, political and economic situation the activists becomes aware of the real conditions. From this awareness one can begin to see the possibilities in terms of strategies in order to strengthen one’s class or groups position in society.

Intellectuals exist in all classes and many for personal reasons transcend class lines by strongly identifying with another class. Because many intellectuals identify so closely with a class other than the one of their origins they bring fresh insights into their adoptive class. Communication between intellectuals of antagonistic classes is easy.  This allows for the intellectual in each of the major classes to develop counter arguments to any and all criticisms of the intellectuals theories. This creates a cross fertilization of ideas. Intellectuals are strongly influenced by their opponents. Departmental divisions and specialization at the University only weaken this trend.

At one level a group of intellectuals representing themselves as professionals structurally becomes its own class both in and for itself. With the increasing specialization and growth of bureaucracy since the end of the 19^th century the modern nation state saw the rise of a new class to challenge the Capitalists for dominance. Not the Industrial Working Class, but the Professional class is next in line to be the ruling class.

With increasing specialization within the expanding bureaus or departments staffed with educated professional. The importance of the expert means that democracy is continuously being undermined. Capital and labor both become increasingly dependent upon the expert and the professional progressively take on more responsibility for all aspects of life. The over all working class is kept permanently disempowered. At the top levels at the major Universities and research institutes a tiny group of these professionals form a power block that can be seen as a real threat to largest capitalist. Because of the capitalist dependence on these Inteligencia were there monopoly of expert knowledge.

With expert in a class of its own the two power blocks, Capitalist vs. Professional, begin to compete for dominance in the larger Capitalist Society. The prize is control over the economy and politics. A small elite vs. a not quite as small an elite, means the serious rivalry between capital and expertise, suggests the majority of the population is left out of the preponderance of decisions affecting their lives. Add to this a highly industrialized military the total domination of society by these twin oligarchies is complete. Most people because of the quality of their education are kept ignorant of the process that allows a small group of autocrats to dominate their lives.

The anxiety of the powerless is intensified because of the inability to gain any substantive insight into their lives. Personal shrewdness replaces political understanding. Because rebellion becomes undirected the repressed assert themselves through irrational outbursts. Leaders of the nation count on this and manipulate the influence of management in order to control the population. Either crime for the individual or fascism for the many allows people to avoid the worst aspects of this perfidious class structure. Crime and fascism is preferred to Revolution.

For the Proletarian intellectual the challenge is to gain an understanding of these social facts in order to direct social change by influencing people to take the action that will strengthen their choices. If a Proletarian mental laborer and cultural worker carefully examine the current social situation and its historical background, the Iron Cage can be unlocked. The essential major thinking is the hopeful knowledge of objective opportunity making it likely to coordinate tangible circumstances and capability.  Each of the competing factions within society use their own sociological theories and have drastically different understanding and analysis of what is going on, it is important to understand that the opposing theories are of the social environment and must be carefully studied. The more complete the study the more likely the activist will come up with a successful program.

If a psychological explanation fails to take into account changing goals, values and beliefs that are socially defined, we will know nothing about how changing social and cultural circumstances that mold the personality. Every judgment includes values of good and evil, beauty and unattractive or just better or worse. All knowing or learning is a group project. Individual knowledge is born in this group process and each person influences that process. This is what we study in our struggles with the opposition. Combined achievement of conflicting groups establishes daily habits while defining the struggle.

Different cultures have their own evolutionary trajectory. Individuals experience the same experience differently. Understanding and the significance of an event is viewed differently by different classes. Elites and the dispossessed live in different Universes. Each segment within the larger group has dissimilar standards and are going to decipher the ordinary contents and knowledge of daily life and the experiences in life differently. Unless an individual has a real break with their past all of experiences confirms what they already believe to be true. Only when the external world becomes in direct conflict with established beliefs does conversion become likely.

While knowing is interpreted through living experiences of a personal biography it is set in a social and historical context. The social position and life situation influences particular character of this world encounters of real people. Through the active creation of their technology, material culture and the process of survival a people reproduce and change their social relations that result in a particular way of thinking and responding to their environment.

Meaning is related to the general ideas that bring together a combination of culturally unique process and purposes for a historically explicit episode. When a person fails to understand the long-term consequences of an immediate action it can be viewed as an example of False Consciousness. Because knowledge is set in a historical context it is not relative because some statement are incorrect,. Knowledge is dependent upon historical and social relationships to be correct. However, values and goals of the observer are as important as the subject in any study. The interaction between theory and the social setting points to a relation between various elements in the social setting.

Ideology, revolution and reaction

Science has grown with the advent of the University’s independence from the Church. Science by the mid-19^th century was closely allied with industry, finance capital and the rising power of the nation-state. The prior two hundred years science had to fight against the feudal theocratic monopoly of political domination of the rest of society. With the establishment of the liberal state, science as an intellectual movement became the new symbol of hope or official creed. The Romantic Conservative Reaction fought a pitched battle retreating into idealistic reconsideration of a venerated fable of history. They established a historical tradition creating an antirational folklore of the way things should remain. Where as socialist both utopian and scientific, would steal science in support of a revolutionary transformation of society and its eventual management. This world-shattering overhaul and ultimate organization would develop not replace science.

         Science is a method of studying events and object around us. Science is the history of ideas that are developed using an evolving scientific method. What is chosen to be researched, it self is entrenched in the history that the researcher part of. These research priorities are in turned affected by and affect our living concepts of nature. The ever-changing result is the discoveries are embedded in political, social and economic historical forces. Social Science follows as similar root.

         In point of fact the economic base only set the limits of what is possible as the environmental and technological set the limits for the economy. The economy in turn is limited by the possibilities of the rest of the socio-cultural environment. All parts of the social and cultural whole have profound impact on each of the other parts that historically changing whole. Science is no exception. The history of science is the investigation of the associations. Now for the reason that while the arrow of causality goes both ways it more often than not travels from existence to consciousness. This complicates social science research making the break between science and philosophy less clear.

            The philosophy of social science like science is set inside of moving history that reflects a set of values are that reflects point of view that is overloaded with cultural biases. Theory is necessary to understand anything and theory reflects both ideologies and there underlying worldviews. These basic culturally derived assumptions saturate our scientific thinking. This in turn establishes what we consider as facts. This becomes the foundation of our scientific theories and an established theory sets up research priorities and delineates adequate scientific discoveries.

            Historical Sociologists like Weber, Mannheim and Merton and their current counter parts, find a way of rooting the history of science in society without risking tenure or promotion in the academic seen by make believing they are objective scholars. Theory and practice are forever separated in their cowardice. While attempting neutrality these scholars studied in detail the historical and social context of the development of science while avoiding the moral context of scientific research. These brilliant intellectuals carried on excellent scholarship. They even studied the close relationship between technology, economic class, and a global economy with the evolution of science, what is lacking the ethical consequences of scientific research. Much has been done in the way of research class origins of scientist. The culture of the scientific communities, patronage of individual research projects, commercial and political investments in grants to researchers, scientific accountability and to whom have been carried out in detail, without asking the difficult question of ethical responsibility.  The honors given to top scientists along with accolades, the ethos of laboratory analysis, scientific lack of responsibility to the powerless, poor and dispossessed is left unstudied.

Where is science now?

Chronological story telling would have us believe that scientific insight that develops progressively in the path of a superior gathering of more and more of factual knowledge. This myth is at the present time generally ridiculed as "a history that is overly simple and highly subjective of a romanticized fantasy of fulfillment." This fairy tale is founded upon the illusion of a universal scientific method, similar to the economic fable of marginal utility. The this literary fiction would have us believe a body of scientific knowledge was allegedly expanded by generalizing from the gathering of information of meticulous observations and experiments then to articulate universal laws was then presented as fact.

            There are convincing points of view that there are many acceptable methods in any research. We need to subject all research to rigorous assessments because it is possible to chip away at the complete scheme of a single scientific method by arguing that human action cannot be comprehended as a simple process of following general rules applicable in any research project. It may be that working scientists are not constrained by any of the rules of method that are universally applicable.

 

Summing Up

The conflicting total worldview of an entire class in contemporary society is molded by the existential condition of history. This existential moment of choice is the focus of the external manifestation of a way of life. Each particular mindset identifies itself as the psychology of an individual. What lies behind a personal set of beliefs is born out of that person’s social and historical location. Ultimately the total social and cultural origin of the psychological lies in a changing historical setting.

All philosophy, science or religion is social products that are created out of a very real living history shared differently by different groups. Each person is the product of a specific social environment. Because different classes experience life differently they develop conflicting interests and opposing values. The oppressed want change that will end their oppression. The oppressed look to the future with utopian dreams. The Liberal looks preserve the current social inequality by allowing only those reforms that will safeguard the status quo.  The Romantic looks longingly at the existing conditions of the past in the hope of re-establishing those golden days of yester year.

The predominant patterns that are socially arranged provide the raw resources for shared culture. Thinking, accepted wisdom, reasoning, imagining, judgment, conclusions, opinion and belief can be radically transformed through ever-changing social conditions. However, the new patterns of thought are formed out of the obsolete and altered outlines of thought.

At every historical period knowing is given birth to out of genuine existing phenomenon.  All elements of meaning in a given situation are interconnected causally and have reference to each part and to the whole. When shared collective set of circumstance changes, the arrangement of norms, customs and values ceases to be in harmony with real life and a rupture arises with reference to traditional beliefs.

A crisis arises within the traditional philosophy of wisdom and its corresponding historical perspective. This forms a new reciprocal interrelated framework of thought. People themselves change, as does basic human nature both of which is culturally distinct. People are always adapting and regenerating into the awareness of a new body of knowledge generating innovative factions. There are new compositions of groupings of intellectual categories. Leading to changes in patterns of social stratification in the larger society and ever changing debates between antagonistic segments of society and their differing views of that society.

Not only are competing social theories always being redefined and reinforced in order to offset potential criticism. Then the theories once articulated directly inform the participants what needs to be done, they then act in ways that change the social environment and the corresponding political culture.

The statement of any scholar maybe true or false, valid or invalid but it is so only in the context of a specific social, cultural and historical context. Because of the continuously changing social environments categorical forms of knowledge are always changing. What is right in any one period of time will be wrong in another. Validity is determined within the context in which categories themselves are changing Theory must continuously be updated to be valid.

 

 

 

 

Works Cited:

Birx, H. J. (1984). Theories of Evolution. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas.

 

Boas, Franz (1963) The Mind of Primitive Man. New York: Macmillan

 

Ehrenreich, John and Barbara (1979) The Professional-Managerial Class in       Between Labor and Capital Ed. Pat Walker. Boston: South End Press

 

Engels, Frederick (1975) The Origin of the Family, Private Property and The State. New York: International Publishers

 

Engels, Frederick (1976) Anti-Duhring: Herr Eugen Duhring’s Revolution in Science. New York: International Publishers

 

Francisconi, Michael Joseph (1998) Kinship, Capitalism Change: The Informal Economy of the Navajo 1868 – 1995. New York: Garland

Harris Marvin (1968) The Rise of Anthropological Theory: A History of Theories of Culture. New York, Thomas Y. Crowel Company

 

Harris, Marvin (1974) Cows, Pigs, Wars and Witches: The Riddles of Culture New York: Vintage Books.

 

Harris, Marvin (1977) Cannibals and Kings: The Origins of Cultures. New York: Vintage Books.

 

Harris, Marvin (1980) Cultural Materialism: The Struggle for a Science of Culture. New York: Vintage Books.

 

Harris, Marvin (1998) Theories of Culture in Postmodern Times. Walnut Creek, CA: Rowman & Littlefield.

 

 

Lenin, V. I. (1970) Left-Wing Communism an Infantile Disorder Peking: Foreign Languages Press

 

Lewellen, Ted C. (1983) Political Anthropology. South Hadley Mass: Bergin & Garvey

 

Lukacs, Georg (1971) History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialects Cambridge. MA: MIT Press

 

Luxemburg, Rosa (1951) The Accumulation of Capital. New York: Monthly Review

 

Luxemburg, Rosa (1977) The Industrial Development of Poland. New York: Campaigner

 

Malinowski, Bronsilaw  (1961) A Scientific Theory of Culture and Other Essays. London: Oxford University Press

 

Mannheim (1936) Ideology and Utopia: An Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge. San Diego: Harvest Books

 

Marx, Karl & Frederick Engels (1970) The German Ideology. New York, International Publishers

 

Polanyi, Karl (1957) The Great Transformation: The Political Economic Origins of Our Time. Boston: Beacon

 

Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. (1965) Structure and Function in Primitive Society. New York, Free Press

 

Rose, Hilary and Steven Rose (1976) The Radicalisation of Science. London: MacMillan Press

Steward, Julian H. (1955) Theory of Culture Change: the methodology of multilinear evolution. Urbana Illinois: University of Illinois Press

Szymanski, Albert (1978) The Capitalist State and the Politics of Class. Cambridge, Mass: Winthrop Publishers

 

Trotsky, Leon  (1993) Fascism: What It Is and How to Fight It. New York: Pathfinder Press

Zeitlin, Irving M. (1990) Ideology and the Development of Social Theory: Fourth    Edition. Englewood Cliffs New Jersey: Prentice Hall