Sociology of Multiple Realities and the Structure of Evolutionary Change
Robert Bellah, one of the most influential American sociologists of the twentieth century, engages with a biological theory of organisms' adaptive development and conserved core processes, highlighting the significance of cultural evolution. He emphasizes its uniqueness in contrast to biological determinism. Bellah explores the organismic perspective as presented in Marc Kirschner and John Gerhart’s book The Plausibility of Life.
In this book, the authors utilize the theory of punctuated equilibrium, which posits that long periods of stasis are interrupted by bursts of rapid innovation. This structural theory of evolutionary change, originally proposed by Stephen Jay Gould, can be applied to the history of cellular innovation—marked by both the conservation and diversification of organisms (or the biological economy). Conserved core processes, representing deep structural continuity, correspond to the “punctuated” aspect of the theory, remaining largely unchanged over time and forming the equilibrium or stasis between evolutionary leaps.
The organismic perspective on the control of variation emphasizes the concept of facilitated variation, which highlights the organism’s active role in shaping its evolutionary trajectory over long time scales. This perspective is grounded in the structural integrity of conserved core processes, which provide the stable foundation upon which mutation, variation, and diversity can occur.
A structural theory centered on these conserved processes supports the idea of facilitated variation by demonstrating how novel phenotypic developments can emerge without disrupting the underlying continuity of core biological mechanisms. This approach reconciles evolutionary innovation with the stability implied by punctuated equilibrium.
In this regard, Robert Bellah shows a deep interest in integrating the structural theory of stability and change into his seminal work Religion in Human Evolution (pp. 60–66). He highlights how major innovations in core biological processes have involved extensive modifications to both protein structure and function, leading to the development of new core processes and enabling the emergence of higher orders of life.
Periods of rapid remodeling and significant innovation are not explained solely by the logic of facilitated variation. Rather, they point to the emergence of true novelty—marked by the appearance of entirely new conserved processes that reshape the evolutionary landscape.
According to Kirschner and Gerhart, the body plan possesses an anatomical structure that is central to development and is embedded within conserved core processes—similar to those that govern catalytic metabolism and other biochemical regulatory mechanisms. In repeated episodes of major evolutionary innovation, new genes and proteins emerged, eventually stabilizing into components and processes that have been maintained through long periods of evolutionary conservation.
This perspective points to a deeply conserved structure underlying the organism's capacity to generate phenotypic variation, diversity, and novelty. It is evident in the diversification of anatomy and physiology throughout the evolutionary history of animals (Bellah, 64; The Plausibility of Life, 68–69).
Building on this, Bellah emphasizes how phenotypic variation is both organized and facilitated by conserved core processes—mechanisms capable of enabling efficient and transformative change. Rather than functioning as passive "robotic vehicles," organisms are active participants, playing a central role in the evolutionary process.
Drawing on the theory of facilitated variation, Bellah underscores the idea that organisms contribute to their own evolution through their long history of variation, selection, and heredity. This perspective becomes crucial in articulating the concept of evolvability in structural rather than purely adaptational terms (Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, p. 50).
Darwin and Spencer
According to Bellah, an analysis of evolvability through the lens of facilitated variation stands in contrast to Herbert Spencer’s social Darwinism, which diminishes the role of variation by emphasizing competition, struggle for existence, and the survival of the fittest. In opposition to Spencer’s reductionist view, a structural theory of life asserts that history—both biological and social—possesses a deep structure. This includes the organizational patterns of societies, their adaptive capacities, their potential for innovation, and possibly even their ability to harbor cryptic variation and latent diversity (The Plausibility of Life, p. 264).
Working within this structural framework, Bellah outlines a scheme of cultural evolution—mimetic, mythic, and theoretic culture, as defined by Merlin Donald—in relation to conserved core processes. Each cultural stage is never entirely discarded; instead, it is reorganized and integrated through new innovations in core processes.
Rather than being superseded, each stage continues to foster variation, adaptability, and innovation, while remaining essential to the overall coherence of cultural development. This biological theory of conservation and variation provides the conceptual foundation for Bellah’s sociology of religion, particularly in his exploration of axial religion and its profound innovations (Religion in Human Evolution, p. 65).
Bellah’s contribution lies in his sociological synthesis of cultural evolution with the structural theory of punctuated equilibrium, specifically as it relates to conserved core processes. This epistemic stance supports the emergence of new capacities and significant innovations, grounded in the structural continuity of core processes.
Bellah firmly rejects Herbert Spencer’s controversial idea of linear progress, aligning instead with Stephen Jay Gould’s interpretation of Darwin—one that resists conflating evolution with progress. Darwin himself preferred the term natural selection over evolution, precisely to avoid the implication of a predetermined direction or inherent drive toward improvement.
Darwin was primarily concerned with the slow, cumulative effects of natural selection, rather than any supposed force of progress. He argued that variation must meet three essential criteria: it must be copious in extent, small in its departures from the mean, and isotropic—that is, without directional bias. Gould regards these attributes of variation as among Darwin’s most profound insights.
Indeed, as Darwin observed, “selection could not otherwise operate as the creative force in the evolution of novelties.” He recognized that the organism must first generate a rich array of phenotypic variation for natural selection to act upon (The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, p. 60).
Gould incorporates this Darwinian emphasis on variation into a broader structural theory of evolution, challenging both the assumptions of the neo-Darwinian synthesis and the problematic implications of social Darwinism, particularly its notion of progress. In this view, the acquisition of new capacities is a demonstrable phenomenon—one that emerges through facilitated variation over the course of evolutionary history.
These capacities arise not merely through passive adaptation or fitness optimization, but through processes of self-organization and emergence, whereby organisms actively participate in their evolutionary trajectories. As Bellah notes, organisms have acquired new capacities in dynamic interaction with their environments, underscoring the role of agency in evolution (Religion in Human Evolution, p. 66).
Cultural Evolution: Parental Care and Empathy
In Bellah’s view, the evolution of new capacities can be further understood through Frans de Waal’s co-emergence hypothesis, which links intelligence, sociability, and the empathetic capacity to understand others' feelings. Advanced empathy in human childhood, Bellah suggests, is primarily rooted in parental care, though it is not confined to humans alone.
Empathy, as described in the co-emergence hypothesis, traces back to the origins of parental care in evolutionary history. If female caregivers failed to sensitively respond to their offspring’s needs—whether in times of danger, hunger, or environmental stress—their ability to propagate their genes would have been severely limited.
While the "dark side" of evolution—embodied in the phrase "nature red in tooth and claw"—is often emphasized, this is not the entirety of the evolutionary narrative. Cooperation also plays a vital role, even in the context of conflict. In moments of mutual defense or after a struggle, victims may receive comfort or solace from others.
De Waal articulates the relationship between empathy and the bodily dimension of experience: “Bodily connections come first—understanding follows.” (Bellah, p. 72). With this enactive dimension in mind, Bellah emphasizes the development of empathy and ethics as central to the emergence of religion among humans.