Responses are to be restricted to 3 pages each,  so they must be carefully crafted: part of the exercise is the compression of a strong, well-grounded position into a very small space. (Normal type size --this one [12]-- double spaced.)  They are to be written in full sentences, proper essay format, etc, not in point form. You are making an argument, and must follow its steps. Citation can be as simple as possible. If you refer only to readings done for this course, the author's name will usually be enough in itself, since we know what you've read. If sources outside the course readings are referred to, a simple footnote or endnote with the usual publishing details and page numbers should suffice. If we, as readers, have enough info to locate your source and check your reference, you've done enough.

Essay #2   On readings in Sections I through V:  due 5 Nov in class (or before)

Do one of these:

a)    Among many others in the period from the late 1600's up to the present, writers like Locke, Smith, Tylor, Morgan, and Marx presented schemes of progressive sociocultural development through a series of stages. Discuss what you regard to be two of the key features common to such schemes, using at least two of these authors' works as examples.

b)    Smith's economic theory suggests that there is a sort of 'universal human being': one who acts in individual greed/selfishness, who is rational, and who is - in effect - lazy and does not act unless moving towards pleasure or away from pain.  Geertz shows how enlightenment thought saw all people as essentially the same and Tyler argues for a 'psychic unity of mankind'.  How are these notions of 'unity' or 'universality' problematic?  How is this further complicated by theories of 'social evolution' that rank cultural/racial groups of human beings?