Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:39:58.479Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The substance of cultural evolution: Culturally framed systems of social organization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2014

Dwight W. Read
Dwight W. Read*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology and Department of Statistics, University of California – Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90094. [email protected]://www.ucla.edu/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Models of cultural evolution need to address not only the organizational aspects of human societies, but also the complexity and structure of cultural idea systems that frame their systems of organization. These cultural idea systems determine a framework within which behaviors take place and provide mutually understood meanings for behavior from the perspective of both agent and recipient that are critical for the coherence of human systems of social organization.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , June 2014 , pp. 270 - 271
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chapais, B. (2008) Primeval kinship: How pair bonding gave birth to human society. Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunbar, R. I. M. (1998) The social brain hypothesis. Evolutionary Anthropology 6:178–90.3.0.CO;2-8>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isbell, L. & Young, T. (1993) Social and ecological influences on activity budgets of vervet monkeys, and their implications for group living. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 32:377–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapsalis, E. (2004) Matrilineal kinship and primate behavior. In: Kinship and behavior inprimates, ed. Chapais, B. & Berman, C. M., pp. 153–76. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, D., Maxfield, R. M., Read, D. & van der Leeuw, S. (2009) From population to organization thinking. In: Complexity perspectives on innovation and social change, ed. Lane, D., Pumain, D., Leeuw, S. van der & West, G., pp. 43–84. Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
le Roux, A., Beehner, J. C. & Bergman, T. J. (2011) Female philopatry and dominance patterns in wild geladas. American Journal of Primatology 73(5):422–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leaf, M. (2009) Social organization and social theory. University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Leaf, M. & Read, D. (2012) The conceptual foundation of human society and thought: Anthropology on a new plane. Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Range, F. & Noë, R. (2002) Familiarity and dominance relations among female sooty mangabeys in the Taï National Park. American Journal of Primatology 56:137–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Read, D. (1984) An algebraic account of the American kinship terminology. Current Anthropology 25(4):417–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, D. (2001) What is kinship? In: The cultural analysis of kinship: The legacy of David Schneider and its implications for anthropological relativism, ed. Feinberg, R. & Ottenheimer, M., pp. 78–117. University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Read, D. (2007) Kinship theory: A paradigm shift. Ethnology 46(4):329–64.Google Scholar
Read, D. (2010) The algebraic logic of kinship terminology structure. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33(5):399–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, D. (2012) How culture makes us human: Primate evolution and the formation of human societies. Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
Read, D. (2013) A new approach to forming a typology of kinship terminology systems: From Morgan and Murdock to the present. Structure and Dynamics 6(1). http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/0ss6j8sh Google Scholar
Read, D., Lane, D. & van der Leeuw, S. (2009) The innovation innovation. In: Complexity perspectives in innovation and social change, ed. Lane, D., Pumain, D., van der Leeuw, S. & West, G., pp. 43–84. Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, D., Leaf, M. & Fischer, M. D. (2013) What are kinship terminologies, and why do we care? A computational approach to analyzing symbolic domains. Social Science Computer Review 31(1):16–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar