On the Cultural Theories of Marx and Spencer
While I was still attempting to discover what aspect of Marx and Spencer
I was to concentrate on for this short essay, a friend noted
that Marx and Spencer were polar opposites; at first glance, I took this
as true. However, I started thinking some more about their differences
and found very little different between the two when the concepts were
abstracted from the arguments' literal presentation. I will take a look
at the conceptual differences between the two theories, and argue that
either (a) Spencer was unclear about his version of utopia, or (b) they
are similar theories leading towards the same type of utopian endpoint.
Morgan and Tylor Mirrors
There are some obvious similarities between both the ethnographic works of Morgan and the theoretical works of Tylor, and the concepts presented by Marx and Spencer. This paper will attempt to bring forth the similarities between these two pairs of scholars by examining the premises used to support their arguments and the overall conclusions of their arguments.
Historical Functionalism
I will argue that historical particularism and structural functionalism
are related in that they both concentrate on detail and pre-existing
conditions. Historical particularism was a school of thought which concentrated
on a holistic historical approach to the study of cultures and civilisations,
from the development of their language to their physical appearance. Historical
particularists believed in concentrated study of a people and their languages
to gain a full understanding on their culture. Contiguously following was
structural functionalism as a school of thought. Structural functionalism
concentrated all of its resources into describing the material, psychological,
physical, and social structures of a civilisation.
|