The dominant theory treats cultural change as random viral contagion

Evidence

A recent book trying to explain the mechanics of taste concluded by raising a white flag, dismissing changes over time as a “random walk” akin to the stock market’s short-term fluctuations. For the last two decades, the most established theory of cultural change has cast it as “viral contagion,” arguing that we succumb to fads like we contract the measles. — W. David Marx, Status and Culture, 16

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Progress narratives fail to explain fast cultural changes like crazes — W. David Marx, Status and Culture: How Our Desire for…, 520; Demystifying economics through small viral study groups could rebuild class consciousness — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk: The Collected and Unpublished…, 1813; Social influence spreads beliefs locally, producing stable subcultural clusters instead of homogenization — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 1910 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Social influence spreads beliefs locally, producing stable subcultural clusters instead of homogenization #contradicts (0.85) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1910
• Deliberate design generates new cultural variation faster and more constructively than random mutation #contradicts (0.82) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 499
• Cultural change follows patterned diffusion from small groups outward, implying universal principles #contradicts (0.80)