Since the mid-1980s, political scientists, in particular historical institutionalists, have employed evolutionary theory to study institutional stasis and change. More recently, there have been calls for ‘taking evolution seriously’. This article will frame the earlier uses of evolutionary theory by historical institutionalists, and the recent calls for ‘taking evolution seriously’ into a hierarchy of levels of interaction between natural and social sciences. Put in this perspective, the earlier efforts can be seen as limiting the use of evolutionary theory at the lowest, metaphorical level. On the other hand, the recent calls are striving to advance political science’s interaction with biological science to analogous and homologous levels, and even make it part of the larger project of generalizing Darwinism. These are noble scientific explorations. However, they should not lead to an impression that using evolutionary theory metaphorically is necessarily unserious.
AldrichH. E.HullD. L.MokyrJ. (2008) ‘In Defence of Generalized Darwinism’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 18 (5), 577–96.
2.
Bailer-JonesD. M. (2002) ‘Models, Metaphors and Analogies’, in MachamerP.SilbersteinM. (eds), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Science. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 108–27.
3.
BaumgartnerF. R.JonesB. D. (1993) Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
4.
BlackM. (1962) Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
5.
BlackM. (1979) ‘More about Metaphor’, in OrtonyA. (ed.), Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–43.
6.
BlythM.HodgsonG. M.LewisO.SteinmoS. (2011) ‘Introduction to the Special Issue on the Evolution of Institutions’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 7 (3), 299–315.
7.
BreslinD. (2011) ‘Reviewing a Generalized Darwinist Approach to Studying Socio-Economic Change’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 13 (2), 218–35.
8.
BursteinP.MarieR.EinwohnerR. L. (1995) ‘Policy Alternatives and Political Change: Work, Family and Gender on the Congressional Agenda, 1945–1990’, American Sociological Review, 60 (1), 67–83.
9.
CampbellD. (1965) ‘Variation and Selective Retention in Socio-Cultural Evolution’, in BarringerH. R.BlankstenG. I.MackR. W. (eds), Social Change in Developing Areas: A Reinterpretation of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman, pp. 19–49.
10.
CapocciaG.KelemenD. (2007) ‘The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism’, World Politics, 59 (3), 341–69.
11.
CarminesE. G.StimsonJ. A. (1989) Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12.
CohenI. B. (1993) ‘Analogy, Homology and Metaphor in the Interactions between the Natural Sciences and the Social Sciences, Especially Economics’, History of Political Economy, 25, 7–44.
13.
CohenI. B. (1994) Interactions: Some Contacts between the Natural Sciences and the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14.
GansC. (1987) ‘Punctuated Equilibrium and Political Science: A Neontological View’, Politics and the Life Sciences, 5 (2), 220–7.
15.
GhiselinM. T. (1987) ‘Scientific Revolutions and Punctuated Equilibria’, Politics and the Life Sciences, 5 (2), 228–9.
16.
HesseM. (1965) ‘The Explanatory Function of Metaphor’, in Bar-HillelY. (ed.), Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the 1964 International Congress. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 249–59.
17.
HesseM. (1966) Models and Analogies in Science. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
18.
HodgsonG. M. (2013) ‘Understanding Organizational Evolution: Toward a Research Agenda Using Generalized Darwinism’, Organization Studies, 34 (7), 973–92.
19.
HodgsonG. M.KnudsenT. (2010) Darwin’s Conjecture: The Search for General Principles of Social and Economic Evolution. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20.
JohnsonG. R. (1987) ‘Punctuated Equilibria, Political Science and Paleopolitics’, Politics and the Life Sciences, 5 (2), 229–33.
21.
KrasnerS. D. (1984) ‘Approaches to the State: Alternative Conceptions and Historical Dynamics’, Comparative Politics, 16 (2), 223–46.
22.
KrasnerS. D. (1988) ‘Sovereignty: An Institutionalist Perspective’, Comparative Political Studies, 21 (1), 66–94.
23.
LakoffG.JohnsonM. (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
24.
LewisO.SteinmoS. (2006) ‘Taking Evolution Seriously’. Paper presented at International Society for New Institutional Economics (ISNIE) Conference, Boulder, CO, 21–23 September.
25.
LewisO.SteinmoS. (2010) ‘Taking Evolution Seriously in Political Science’, Theory in Biosciences, 129 (2–3), 235–45.
26.
LewisO.SteinmoS. (2012) ‘How Institutions Evolve: Evolutionary Theory and Institutional Change’, Polity, 44 (3), 314–39.
27.
LustickI. S. (2011) ‘Taking Evolution Seriously: Historical Institutionalism and Evolutionary Theory’, Polity, 43 (2), 179–209.
28.
MaasenS. (1995) ‘Who is Afraid of Metaphors?’, in MaasenS.MendelsohnE.WeignartP. (eds), Biology as Society, Society as Biology: Metaphors. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, pp. 11–35.
29.
MontuschiE. (2000) ‘Metaphor in Science’, in Newton-SmithW. H. (ed.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Science. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 277–82.
30.
PhillipsC. S. (1987) ‘Politics: An Aspect of Cultural Evolution’, Politics and the Life Sciences, 5 (2), 234–7.
31.
SchlesingerM.LauR. R. (2000) ‘The Meaning and Measure of Policy Metaphors’, American Political Science Review, 94 (3), 611–26.
32.
SomitA.PetersonS. A. (1992) ‘Punctuated Equilibrium: The View from the Elephant’, in SomitA.PetersonS. A. (eds), The Dynamics of Evolution: The Punctuated Equilibrium Debate in the Natural and Social Sciences. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 1–18.
33.
SteinmoS. (2010) The Evolution of Modern States: Sweden, Japan and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
StrateJ. M. (1987) ‘Review of “Punctuated Equilibria and Political Science: A Neontological View” ‘, Politics and the Life Sciences, 5 (2), 237–9.
35.
ThelenK. A. (2004) How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
VanhanenT. (1987) ‘More than Metaphors: A Comment on Gans’ Article’, Politics and the Life Sciences, 5 (2), 239–40.
37.
WayE. C. (1991) Knowledge Representation and Metaphor. Oxford: Intellect.
38.
WimmerA. (2006) ‘Models, Methodologies and Metaphors on the Move’, in WimmerA.KosslerR. (eds), Understanding Change: Models, Methodologies and Metaphors. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–33.
39.
WolbrechtC. (2000) The Politics of Women’s Rights: Parties, Positions and Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Unviersity Press.
40.
ZashinE.ChapmanP. C. (1974) ‘The Uses of Metaphor and Analogy: Toward a Renewal of Political Language’, Journal of Politics, 36 (2), 290–326.
