152 ADAPTATION AND PROGRESS 
It is difficult to select representatives from the large and grow- 
ing number of anthropologists who have contributed to our sub- 
ject.1 Spencer devoted much of his sociology to a discussion of 
primitive man but was led astray by his principle of classification 
and by reports which have since been corrected. More recent 
investigations have tended to discredit his teaching concerning 
the intellectual and emotional equipment and beliefs of primitive 
man.? We will review in this chapter the main theses of Sumner 
and Boas, the former approaching the subject from the neo- 
Darwinian point of view, the latter emphasizing the influence 
of environment and opportunity. We will also touch upon the 
conclusions of some others, adding suggestions as to the value of 
the concept of adaptation in anthropological interpretations. 
Witt1am G. SUMNER (1840-1910) 
Folkways 
Although Sumner was primarily a sociologist, we have in 
Folkways a mine of classified information concerning social origins 
which is invaluable if one would appreciate the place of adapta- 
tion in the development of folkways and mores among primitive 
groups.® 
Sumner’s general attitude of laissez faire is brought out in his 
earlier book What Social Classes Owe to Each Other. In this later 
work we have the neo-Darwinian formula applied to the develop- 
ment of folkways and social institutions. The main thesis is that 
“ the mores are always right ”; but this is not to be taken abso- 
lutely. The meaning is that the mores furnish the standard of 
right for each group at every particular period. Although many 
rites and ceremonies grew up as a response to what he terms the 
“aleatory element ” or luck,5 and many were positively injuri- 
ous,® yet on the whole, and in the long run, only those groups 
survived who built up their folkways and mores on the principle 
of utility. 
1 See ch. VI, review of W. Z. Ripley. 
? Thomas, Source Book, pp. 143 ff.; Angell, Chapters from Modern Psychology, 
pp. 247 f.; Keith, of. cit., p. 26. 
3 For distinction, see Folkways, ch. I. 5 Ibid., p. 6. 
4 [bid., pp. 28, 58, 521 £., 532. 8 Tbid., pp. 26 f. 
