Abstract
Adams' monistic concept of social evolution is understood as the most coherent theoretical proposition on this matter available today. And yet, the theory of Monistic Materialism fails to retain its materialist stance at the methodological level; it falls back on the mind-matter-dichotomy. Consequently, "power" based on the mindful control of matter turns into the most fundamental term of reference in social studies. This limits the analytical potency of Materialism in the study of social evolution and in offering alternatives for society's future. This paper suggests that a dialectical appropriation of Monism promises to overcome these difficulties.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
