Search

Tocqueville's juxtaposition of aristocracy and democracy as the regimes characteristic of different historical periods gives rise to the question whether he accepts or rejects the category of human nature. In the juxtaposition of the distinct “worlds” of aristocracy and democracy and their respective conceptions of “man,” some perceive an implicit rejection of the idea of a universal human nature. Others, however, see an attempt to portray human nature comprehensively by highlighting the truth of both aristocratic inequality and democratic equality. While generally endorsing this latter interpretation, the essay maintains that most of its variants are too “democratic” in two respects. First, they underestimate the difficulties Tocqueville must confront in establishing the naturalness of the equality principle, and second, they wrongly insist that he understands nature to privilege the democratic principle. Tocqueville ultimately defends the naturalness of equality, but his claims about the greater justice of the equality principle should be understood as rhetorical rather than as reflective of his conclusions about nature. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article examines the impact of values on a key phenomenon of modern politics: non-violent protest. Previous studies have examined only the individual-level effects of values. Studying in addition the 'ecological' effects - how the social prevalence of values affects protest - generates new insights. Focusing on 'emancipative values', two ecological effects are shown: (1) the prevalence of emancipative values lifts people's protest above the level that their own emancipative values suggest (elevator effect); (2) the prevalence of these values enhances the impact of people's own emancipative values on protest (amplifier effect). We conclude that examining values in models of protest (and possibly of other activities), not only as individual attributes but also as ecological properties, gives 'culture' its full weight in explaining behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Jablonka & Lamb's (J&L's) book is refreshing in that it debunks the exclusively gene-centered approach used these days to explain almost anything about life and human behavior. The book is very accessible and most convincing when the authors discuss biological theories of genetic and epigenetic inheritance, but it does not shy away from the more slippery terrain of behavioral and symbolic inheritance, and specifically the origins of language. But is the analogy appropriate? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clarifies the opinion of David Sloan Wilson and Elliott Sober on `Reintroducing Group Selection to the Human Behavioral Sciences.' Group selection theory; Views of the author regarding the article of Wilson and Sober; Importance of this study for sociobiologists; What the evidence of contemporary evolutionary psychology suggests; Reason the insight is an evolutionary psychological one.