Jim Devine wrote:
Carrol writes that "Gould's 'punctuated equilibrium' is the right
metaphor."
I wonder about his punctuated equilibrium. It seems a lot like the
economists' comparative statics: the evolutionary system reaches a
(rough) equilibrium, which is then shock by some external force (e.g.,
a comet). Then the evolutionary system adjusts, moving toward a new
rough equilibrium. The main difference here is that standard economics
is essentially static, while evolutionary theory is essentially
dynamic.
Hi Jim,
I'm having a hard time seeing the comparison with comparative statics.
The general idea, as I understand Gould, is that change in and between
species does not take place in slow incremental steps. Rather there are
periods of rapid change that are punctuated by periods of stability
within and between species. Some might see David Gordon's Social
Structures of Accumulation acting like this.
The causes of mass extinctions, which lead to rapid change (Gould once
claimed that the idea was influenced by the notion of revolutionary
change he acquired from his Marxist father), may be caused by external
forces like comets, but they can also be caused by earthly forces.
Volcanism, leading to global warming, may have caused the Permian
extinction event. And Lewontin, argues that it is a mistake to view
biological evolution as somehow separate from the physical environment.
The atmosphere being an interesting example.
The problem I've always had with punctuated equilibrium as a metaphor
for social change is identifying the social entity that corresponds to
the biological specie. I can't think of any social taxonomy that makes
this biological concept useful for understanding social change.
On the other hand, for Marx, the shocks came from within the system
(though external or exogenous shocks were possible). In one version,
there is an internal dynamic that drives the rate of profit down, so
that "good times" are always temporary. While punctuated equilibrium
may be really good for evolutionary biology, it seems inadequate for
political economy.
