Page 181 - Communication and the Evolution of Society
P. 181

158                        Communication  and  Evolution  of  Society

           The  Modern  Age:  (a)  postconventionally  structured  domains
         of  action—differentiation  of  a  universalistically  regulated  domain
         of  strategic  action  (capitalist  enterprise,  bourgeois  civil  law),
         approaches  to  a  political  will-formation  grounded  in  principles
         (formal  democracy);  (b)  universalistically  developed  doctrines
         of  legitimation  (rational  natural  law);  (c)  conflict  regulation
         from  the  point  of  view  of  a  strict  separation  of  legality  and  mor-
         ality;  general,  formal,  and  rationalized  law,  private  morality
         guided  by  principles.



                                       VI
         I  would  like  now  to  illustrate  how  this  approach  can  be  made
         fruitful  for  the  theory  of  social  evolution.  I  shall  choose  the
         example  of  the  emergence  of  class  societies,  since  I  can  rely  here
         on  the  aforementioned  study  by  Klaus  Eder.*#

            1.  Class  societies  develop  within  the  framework  of  a  political
         order;  social  integration  no  longer  needs  to  proceed  through  the
         kinship  system,  it  can  be  taken  over  by  the  state.  There  have  been
         a  number  of  theories  of  the  origin  of  the  state,  which  I  would
         like  briefly  to  mention  and  to  criticize.®

           a.  The  superimposition  theory®®  explains  the  emergence  of  a  politi-
         cal  ruling  class  and  the  establishment  of a  political  order  by  nomadic
         tribes  of  herdsmen  who  subjugated  sedentary  farmers  and  set  up  a  rule
         of  conquerors.  Today  this  theory  is  regarded  as  empirically  refuted
         since  nomadism  appeared  later  than  the  first  civilization.5*  The  emer-
         gence  of  the  state  must  have  had  endogenous  causes.
           b.  The  division  of  labor  theory®®  is  usually  advanced  in  a  complex
         version.  Agricultural  production  achieved  a  surplus  and  led  (in  com-
         bination  with  demographic  growth)  to  the  freeing  of  labor  forces.
         This  made  a  social  division  of  labor  possible.  The  various  social  groups
         which  thereby  emerged  appropriated  social  wealth  differently  and
         formed  social  classes,  one  (at  least)  of  which  assumed  the  functions  of
         rule.  Despite  its  suggestive  power,  this  theory  is  not  coherent.  Social
         division  of  labor  means  functional  specification  within  the  vocational
         system;  but  vocational  groups  differentiated  by  knowledge  and  skill
         need  not  per  se  develop  opposing  interests  that  result  in  differential
   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186