ABSTRACT
Some conceive of civilizations as societies; others view them as cultures. Some regard civilizations as polycultures, while others portray them monoculturally. Some define them by criteria of interaction, where others see them bound by similarities. Since Arnold J. Toynbee himself asserted that his civilizations’ religions could change while their arts or politics did not, Pitirim Sorokin rejects the idea that Toynbee’s civilizations were or could be causal systems. Given the continuity of Sorokin’s fundamental criticisms of Toynbee, one might be surprised to learn that he maintained, with equal continuity, a positive appraisal of Toynbee’s work. Ordinarily the boundaries of this cultural entity transcend the geographical boundaries of national or political or religious groups. Fundamentally the same statement appears in 1966. Sorokin’s assertions of the concurrence of macrosocial theories have incited the author to concur and to dissent with him at some length.
