Sociological theory

Sociologists develop theories to explain social phenomena. A theory is a proposed relationship

between two or more concepts. In other words, a theory is explanation for why or how a

phenomenon occurs. An example of a sociological theory is the work of Robert Putnam on the

decline of civic engagement.[1] Putnam found that Americans involvement in civic life (e.g.,

community organizations, clubs, voting, religious participation, etc.) has declined over the last

40 to 60 years. While there are a number of factors that contribute to this decline (Putnam's

theory is quite complex), one of the prominent factors is the increased consumption of television

as a form entertainment. Putnam's theory proposes:

The more television people watch, the lower their involvement in civic life will be.

This element of Putnam's theory clearly illustrates the basic purpose of sociological theory: it

proposes a relationship between two or more concepts. In this case, the concepts are civic

engagement and television watching. The relationship is an inverse one - as one goes up, the

other goes down. What's more, it is an explanation of one phenomenon with another: part of

the reason why civic engagement has declined over the last several decades is because

people are watching more television. Putnam's theory clearly contains the key elements of a

sociological theory.

Sociological theory is developed at multiple levels, ranging from grand theory to highly

contextualized and specific micro-range theories. There are many middle-range and micro-

range theories in sociology. Because such theories are dependent on context and specific to

certain situations, it is beyond the scope of this text to explore each of those theories. The
 purpose of this chapter is to introduce some of the more well-known and most commonly

used grand and middle-range theories in sociology.

The Main Sociological Theories

Sociologists study social events, interactions, and patterns, and they develop a theory in an

attempt to explain why things work as they do. A sociological theory seeks to explain social

phenomena. Theories can be used to create a testable proposition, called a hypothesis, about

society (Allan 2006).

Theories vary in scope depending on the scale of the issues that they are meant to

explain. Macro-level theories relate to large-scale issues and large groups of people,

while micro-level theories look at very specific relationships between individuals or small

groups. Grand theories attempt to explain large-scale relationships and answer fundamental

questions such as why societies form and why they change. Sociological theory is constantly

evolving and should never be considered complete. Classic sociological theories are still

considered important and current, but new sociological theories build upon the work of their

predecessors and add to them (Calhoun 2002).

In sociology, a few theories provide broad perspectives that help explain many different aspects

of social life, and these are called paradigms. Paradigms are philosophical and theoretical

frameworks used within a discipline to formulate theories, generalizations, and the experiments

performed in support of them. Three paradigms have come to dominate sociological thinking,

because they provide useful explanations: structural functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic

interactionism.
 Sociological Paradigm Level of Analysis Focus

Structural Functionalism Macro or mid The way each part of society functions together to contrib

Conflict Theory Macro The way inequalities contribute to social differences and

Symbolic Interactionism Micro One-to-one interactions and communications

Sociological Theories or Perspectives. Different sociological perspectives enable sociologists to view soc

useful lenses.

Social Force

Social forces are any human created ways of doing things that influence, pressure, or force

people to behave, interact with others, and think in specified ways. Social forces are considered

remote and impersonal because mostly people have no hand in creating them, nor do they know

those who did. People can embrace social forces, be swept along or bypassed by them, and most

importantly challenge them.

Social force can be understood with many examples such as the usage of the universal credit card

to defer payment for products and services. This human-created invention became a "social

force" that encouraged unprecedented numbers of people to spend money ahead of their

earnings. While credit cards afforded those who could acquire them opportunities to delay

paying for things they needed or wanted, it took special effort, discipline, and/or an advantaged

position in life to resist using them.

In late 80s in USA another social force emerged when banks moved away from a system in

which they had made loans and issued credit cards to borrowers only after doing careful credit

checks documenting real income, job stability, and credit history. Banks shifted to a system in
which they knowingly issued loans to those with poor credit histories, gave loans larger than

many borrowers could realistically afford to repay, and extended spending limits on credit cards

to levels that many consumers found hard to resist.

The cell phone is a technology that was invented to free them from landline phones and to allow

them to communicate with others while on the move. Undoubtedly this social force has changed

the way people communicate.

Social forces in the development of Sociological Theory

All intellectual fields are profoundly shaped by their social settings. This is particularly true of

sociology, which is not only derived from that setting but takes the social setting as its basic

subject matter.

Following are few of the most important social conditions of the 19th and early 20th

centuries, conditions that were of the utmost significance in the development of sociology.

1. Political Revolutions-

 Long series of political revolutions lead in by the French Revolution in 1789 and carrying

over through the 19th century was the immediate factor in the rise of sociological

theorizing.

 Impact- enormous and many positive changes resulted.

 But, the negative effects of such changes attracted the attention of many early theorists

(who were disturbed by the resulting chaos and disorder, especially in France).

 United in a desire to restore order to society. Some of the more extreme thinkers of this

period literally wanted a return to the peaceful and relatively orderly days of the middle
 Ages. The more sophisticated thinkers recognized that social change had made such a

return impossible. Thus they sought instead to find new bases of order in societies that

had been overturned by the political revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries.

 The interest in the issue of social order was one of the major concerns of classical

sociological theorists, especially Comte and Durkheim.

2. The Industrial Revolution and the Rise of Capitalism-

 (as important as political revolution)

 (swept through many Western societies, mainly in the 19th and early 20th centuries).

 The Industrial Revolution was not a single event but many interrelated developments that

culminated in the transformation of the Western world from a largely agricultural to

an overwhelmingly industrial system.

 Large numbers of people left farms and agricultural work for the industrial

occupations offered in the burgeoning factories.

 The factories themselves were transformed by a long series of technological

improvements.

 Large economic bureaucracies arose to provide the many services needed by industry

and the emerging capitalist economic system.

 In this economy, the ideal was a free marketplace where the many products of an

industrial system could be exchanged. Within this system, a few profited greatly while the

majority worked long hours for low wages. A reaction against the industrial system and

against capitalism in general followed and led to the labor movement as well as to

various radical movements aimed at overthrowing the capitalist system.

  The Industrial Revolution, capitalism, and the reaction against them all involved an

enormous upheaval in Western society, an upheaval that affected sociologists greatly.

 Four major figures in the early history of sociological theory- Karl Marx, Max Weber,

Emile Durkheim, and Georg Simmel- were preoccupied, as were many lesser thinkers,

with these changes and the problems they created for society as a whole. They spent their

lives studying these problems, and in many cases they endeavored to develop programs

that would help solve them.

3. The Rise of Socialism-

 One set of changes aimed at coping with the excesses of the industrial system and

capitalism can be combined under the heading “socialism.”

 Although some sociologists favored socialism as a solution to industrial problems, most

were personally and intellectually opposed to it.

 On the one side, Karl Marx was an active supporter of the overthrow of the capitalist

system and its replacement by a socialist system. Although he did not develop a theory

of socialism per se, he spent a great deal of time criticizing various aspects of capitalist

society. In addition, he engaged in a variety of political activities that he hoped would

help bring about the rise of socialist societies. However, Marx was a typical in the early

years of sociological theory.

 Most of the early theorists, such as Weber and Durkheim, were opposed to socialism

(at least as it was envisioned by Marx). Although they recognized the problems within

capitalist society, they sought social reform within capitalism rather than the social

revolution argued for by Marx. They feared socialism more than they did capitalism. This
 fear played a greater role in shaping sociological theory than did Marx’s support of the

socialist alternative to capitalism. In fact, as we will see, in many cases sociological

theory developed in reaction against Marxian, and, more generally, socialist theory.

4. Feminism–

 While precursors of feminism can be traced to the 1630s, high points of feminist activity

and writing occurred in the liberationist moments of modern Western history:-

 A first flurry of productivity in the 1780s and 1790s with the debates surrounding the

American and French revolutions;

 A far more organized, focused effort in the 1850s as part of the mobilization against

slavery and for political rights for the middle class;

 And the massive mobilization for women’s suffrage and for industrial and civic reform

legislation in the early 20th century, especially the Progressive Era in the United States.

 All of the above had an impact on the development of sociology, in particular on the

work of a number of women in or associated with the field- Harriet Martineau,

Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Jane Addams, Florence Kelley, Anna Julia Cooper, Ida

Wells-Barnett, Marianne Weber, and Beatrice Potter Webb, to name just a few. But

their creations were, over time, pushed to the periphery of the profession, annexed or

discounted or written out of sociology’s public record by the men who were organizing

sociology as a professional power base. Feminist concerns filtered into sociology only on

the margins, in the work of marginal male theorists or of the increasingly marginalized

female theorists.
  The men who assumed centrality in the profession- from Spencer, through Weber and

Durkheim- made basically conservative responses to the feminist arguments going

around them, making issues of gender an inconsequential topic to which they responded

conventionally rather than critically in what they identified and publicly promoted as

sociology. They responded in this way even as women were writing a significant body of

sociological theory. The history of this gender politics in the profession was also part of

the history of male response to feminist claims, is only now being written.

5. Urbanization–

 Partly as a result of the Industrial Revolution, large numbers of people in the 19th and

20th centuries were uprooted from their rural homes and moved to urban settings.

This massive migration was caused, in large part, by the jobs created by the industrial

system in the urban areas.

 But it presented many difficulties for those people who had to adjust to urban life. In

addition, the expansion of the cities produced a seemingly endless list of problems-

overcrowding, pollution, noise, traffic, and so forth.

 The nature of urban life and its problems attracted the attention of many early

sociologists, especially Max Weber and Georg Simmel. In fact, the first major school of

American sociology, the Chicago school, was in large part defined by its concern for the

city and its interest in using Chicago as a laboratory in which to study urbanization and

its problems.

6. Religious change-
  Social changes brought on by political revolutions, the Industrial Revolution, and

urbanization had a profound effect on religiosity.

 Many early sociologists came from religious backgrounds and were actively, and in some

cases professionally, involved in religion. They brought to sociology the same objectives

as they had in their religious lives. They wished to improve people’s lives.

 For some (such as Comte), sociology was transformed into a religion.

 For others, their sociological theories bore an unmistakable religious imprint.

 Durkheim wrote one of his major works on religion.

 A large portion of Weber’s work also was devoted to the religions of the world.

 Marx, too, had an interest in religiosity, but his orientation was far more critical.

6. The Growth of Science-

 As sociological theory was being developed, there was an increasing emphasis on

science, not only in colleges and universities but in society as a whole. The

technological products of science were permeating every sector of life, and science was

acquiring enormous prestige. Those associated with the most successful sciences

(Physics, Biology, and Chemistry) were accorded honored places in society.

 Sociologists (especially Comte and Durkheim) from the beginning were preoccupied

with science, and many wanted to model sociology after the successful physical and

biological sciences.

 However, a debate soon developed between those who thought that distinctive

characteristics of social life made a wholesale adoption of a scientific model difficult and

unwise.
  The issue of the relationship between sociology and science is debated to this day,

although even a glance at the major journals in the field indicates the predominance of

those who favor sociology as a science.

Deductive Versus Inductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning are two different approaches to conducting

scientific research. Using deductive reasoning, a researcher tests a theory by collecting and

examining empirical evidence to see if the theory is true. Using inductive reasoning, a researcher

first gathers and analyzes data, then constructs a theory to explain her findings.

Within the field of sociology, researchers use both approaches. Often the two are used in

conjunction when conducting research and when drawing conclusions from results.

Deductive Reasoning

Many scientists consider deductive reasoning the gold standard for scientific research. Using this

method, one begins with a theory or hypothesis, then conducts research in order to test whether

that theory or hypothesis is supported by specific evidence. This form of research begins at a

general, abstract level and then works its way down to a more specific and concrete level. If

something is found to be true for a category of things, then it is considered to be true for all

things in that category in general.

An example of how deductive reasoning is applied within sociology can be found in a 2014

study of whether biases of race or gender shape access to graduate-level education. A team of

researchers used deductive reasoning to hypothesize that, due to the prevalence of racism in

society, race would play a role in shaping how university professors respond to prospective

graduate students who express interest in their research. By tracking professor responses (and
lack of responses) to imposter students, coded for race and gender by name, the researchers were

able to prove their hypothesis true. They concluded, based on their research, that racial and

gender biases are barriers that prevent equal access to graduate-level education across the U.S.

Inductive Reasoning

Unlike deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning begins with specific observations or real

examples of events, trends, or social processes. Using this data, researchers then progress

analytically to broader generalizations and theories that help explain the observed cases. This is

sometimes called a "bottom-up" approach because it starts with specific cases on the ground and

works its way up to the abstract level of theory. Once a researcher has identified patterns and

trends amongst a set of data, he or she can then formulate a hypothesis to test, and eventually

develop some general conclusions or theories.

A classic example of inductive reasoning in sociology is Émile Durkheim's study of suicide.

Considered one of the first works of social science research, the famous and widely taught book,

"Suicide," details how Durkheim created a sociological theory of suicide—as opposed to a

psychological one—based on his scientific study of suicide rates among Catholics and

Protestants. Durkheim found that suicide was more common among Protestants than Catholics,

and he drew on his training in social theory to create some typologies of suicide and a general

theory of how suicide rates fluctuate according to significant changes in social structures and

norms.

While inductive reasoning is commonly used in scientific research, it is not without its

weaknesses. For example, it is not always logically valid to assume that a general principle is

correct simply because it is supported by a limited number of cases. Critics have suggested that
Durkheim's theory is not universally true because the trends he observed could possibly be

explained by other phenomena particular to the region from which his data came.

By nature, inductive reasoning is more open-ended and exploratory, especially during the early

stages. Deductive reasoning is narrower and is generally used to test or confirm hypotheses.

Most social research, however, involves both inductive and deductive reasoning throughout the

research process. The scientific norm of logical reasoning provides a two-way bridge between

theory and research. In practice, this typically involves alternating between deduction and

induction.

Auguste Comte 

(1798–1857)

French philosopher Auguste Comte greatly advanced the field of social science, giving it the

name "sociology" and influenced many 19th-century social intellectuals.

Who Was Auguste Comte?

French philosopher Auguste Comte grew up in the wake of the French Revolution. He rejected

religion and royalty, focusing instead on the study of society, which he named "sociology." He

broke the subject into two categories: the forces holding society together ("social statics") and

those driving social change ("social dynamics"). Comte's ideas and use of scientific methods

greatly advanced the field.

Early Life
Auguste Comte was born on January 19, 1798, in Montpellier, France. He was born in the

shadow of the French Revolution and as modern science and technology gave birth to the

Industrial Revolution. During this time, European society experienced violent conflict and

feelings of alienation. Confidence in established beliefs and institutions was shattered. Comte

spent much of his life developing a philosophy for a new social order amidst all the chaos and

uncertainty.

Comte’s father, Louis, a government tax official, and his mother, Rosalie (Boyer) Comte, were

both monarchists and devout Roman Catholics. While attending the University of Montpellier,

Comte abandoned these attitudes in favor of republicanism inspired by the French Revolution,

which would influence his later work.

In 1814, he entered École Polytechnique and proved to be a brilliant mathematician and scientist.

He left school before graduating and settled in Paris with no viable way to support himself. He

earned a meager living teaching mathematics and journalism while deep in the study of

economics, history and philosophy.

At 19, Comte met Henri de Saint-Simon, a social theorist interested in utopian reform and an

early founder of European socialism. Deeply influenced by Saint-Simon, Comte became his

secretary and collaborator. In 1824, the partnership ended over disputed authorship of the pair’s

writings, but Saint-Simon’s influence remained throughout Comte’s life.

Philosophical Ideas and Sociology

On his own, Comte developed a social doctrine based on scientific principles. In 1826, he began

presenting a series of lectures to a group of distinguished French intellectuals. However, about

one-third of the way through the lecture series, he suffered a nervous breakdown. Despite

periodic hospitalization over the next 15 years, he produced his major work, the six-

volume Course of Positive Philosophy. In this work, Comte argued that, like the physical world,

society operated under its own set of laws.

Comte’s efforts furthered the study of society and the development of sociology. During this

time, he supported himself with a post at École Polytechnique, but clashed with administrators

and was dismissed in 1842. That same year, he divorced his wife, Caroline Massin Comte, after

17 years of acrimonious marriage. From then on, he relied on friends and benefactors to support

him.

In 1844, Comte became involved with Clotilde de Vaux, a French aristocrat and writer. Since she

wasn’t divorced from her philandering husband, her relationship with Comte remained platonic,

though the two were deeply in love. After her death, in 1846, Comte wrote the System of Positive

Polity. In his formulation of a “religion of humanity,” Comte proposed a religious order based on

reason and humanity, emphasizing morality as the cornerstone of human political organization.

Death

Comte continued to refine and promote his “new world order,” attempting to unify history,

psychology and economics through the scientific understanding of society. His work was widely

promulgated by Europe’s intellectuals and influenced the thinking of Karl Marx, John Stuart
Mill and George Eliot. Comte died of stomach cancer in Paris on September 5, 1857. Though

self-centered and egocentric, Comte devoted himself to the betterment of society.

Comte’s Positivism and Its Characteristics

As a philosophical ideology and movement positivism first assumed its distinctive features in the

work of the French philosopher Auguste Comte, who named the systematized science of

sociology. It then developed through several stages known by various names, such as

Empiriocriticism, Logical Positivism and Logical Empiricism and finally in the mid-20th century

flowed into the movement known as Analytic and Linguistic philosophy. In its basic ideological

posture, positivism is worldly, secular, anti-theological and anti meta-physical.

Comte’s positivism was posited on the assentation of a so-called law of three stages of

intellectual development. There is a parallel, as Comte saw it, between the evolution of thought

patterns in the entire history of man; on the one hand and in the history of an individual’s

development from infancy to adulthood on the other.

In the first or so-called theological stage, natural phenomena are explained as the result of

supernatural or divine powers. It does not matter whether the religion is polytheistic or

monotheistic; in either case miraculous powers or wills are believed to produce the observed

events. This stage was criticized by Comte as anthropomorphic, i.e. as resting on all too human

analogies.

The Second stage called metaphysical, is in some cases merely a depersonalized theology. The

observable processes of nature are assumed to arise from impersonal powers. The sort of

fruitfulness that it lacks can be achieved only in the third stage, the scientific or positive stage.
Hence the title of Comte’s magnum opus; the Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte 1853

because it claims to be concerned only with positive facts.

The task of the sciences and of knowledge in general, is to study the facts and regularities as

laws, explanations of phenomena can consist in no more than the subsuming of special cases

under general laws. Mankind reached full maturity of thought only after abandoning the pseudo-

explanations of the theological and metaphysical stages and substituting an unrestricted

adherence to scientific method.

In his three stages Comte combined what he considered to be an account of the historical order

of development with a logical analysis of the leveled structure of the sciences. By arranging the

six basic and pure sciences one upon the other in a pyramid, Comte prepared the way for Logical

positivism to ‘reduce’ each level to the one below.

He placed at the fundamental level the science that does not presuppose any other sciences-

Mathematics—and then ordered the levels above it in such a way that each science depends upon

and makes use of, the sciences below it on the scale ; thus Arithmetic, geometry and mechanics,

astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology and sociology. Each higher level science, in turn adds to

the knowledge content of the science or sciences on the levels below, thus enriching this content

by successive specialization.

Positivism is a term which designates a philosophical tendency oriented around natural science

and striving for a united view of the world of phenomena both physical and human, through the

applications of the methods and the extension of the results whereby the natural sciences have

attained their unrivaled position in the modern world. From the point of view of methodology,
the term ‘positive’ is conceived in polemical opposition to the metaphysical abstractions of

traditional philosophy.

Philosophy of science is positivism; Positivism is more a philosophy, method rather than a

theory. It is that philosophy which preaches that the interpretation of the world is based on

human experience. It insists on the application of scientific method of natural sciences to the

study of social world.

It deals with the application of scientific method by natural scientists and by the sociologists in

understanding human-behaviour. The idea of positivism can be traced back to Bacon, Berkeley,

Locke and Hume. Before Comte, Saint Simon also advocated positivism. He proposed scientific

reorganization of society and promotion of science, since he believed that progress depended on

it. The idea of positivism was present in an embryonic form in the mind of Saint Simon and

Comte expanded this idea.

Positivism brought a revolution or renaissance in the field of social science. It combined a belief

in progress and a passion for serving humanity. It is based on the belief that a scientific analysis

of history would show the way to cure for the ills of society.

The characteristics of positivism are:

(a) Science is the only valid knowledge.

(b) Fact is the object of knowledge.

(c) Philosophy does not possess a method different from science.

(d) The task of philosophy is to find the general principles common to all sciences and to use

these principles as guides to human conduct and as the basis of social organization.

(e) Positivism denies intuition, prior reasoning, theological and metaphysical knowledge.

Comte used positivism as a weapon against the negative philosophy prevalent before the French

Revolution. That negative philosophy was more concerned with emotional than practical

questions. Comte regarded such speculations as negative, since it was neither constructive nor

practical. As an alternative, Comte invented ‘positivism’ which remains concerned with the

questions about how things are in reality.

Comte’s positivism is described in several ways. One salient point is that it is scientific. Science

should not be confused with empiricisms or mere collection of facts. Comte believed that the

whole universe is governed by natural laws and these laws could be learned through the method

of science.

Positive knowledge is based on experience and considers only real phenomena. Comte did not

deny the existence of unknown, but positivism was no way concerned with the supernatural.

Chambliss has presented the essence of Comtean positivism in this following words, “positivism

is not fatalistic, or optimistic or materialistic. It is concerned with the real, rather than fanciful,

useful rather than all knowledge.”

Law of Three Stages:

The Law of three stages is the corner stone of Auguste Comte’s approach. Comte’s ideas relating

to the law of three stages reveal that man is becoming more and more rational and scientific in

his approach by gradually giving up speculations, imagination etc. He has shown that there is a
close association between intellectual evolution and social progress. The law of three stages is

the three stages of mental and social development. It is the co-ordination of feeling, thought and

action in individuals and society. There are three important aspects of our nature. Such as our

feelings, our thought and our actions.

Our feelings:

The emotions and impulses which prompt us.

Our thought:

Which are undertaken in the service of our feelings but also helps to govern them.

Our actions:

Which are undertaken in the service of our feelings and thought. For the continuity and existence

of society there must be some order of institutions, values, beliefs and knowledge which can

successfully co-relate the feelings, thought and activity of its members. In the history of mankind

—during which the social order bringing these elements into relation with each other has been

worked out—three types of solution, three stages of development can be distinguished.

According to Comte, each of our leading conceptions-each branch of our knowledge passes

successively through different theoretical conditions:

1. The Theological or fictitious,

2. The Metaphysical or abstract,

3. The Scientific or positive.

Comte considered his law of Three stages based upon belief in social evolution to be the most

important. There has been an evolution in the human thinking, so that each succeeding stage is

superior to and more evolved than the preceding stage. It can hardly be questioned that Comte’s

law of three stages has a strong mentalist or idealistic bias. He co-related each mental age of

mankind with its characteristic accompanying social organisation and type of political

dominance. This law appeared in, the year 1822 in his book Positive Philosophy.

The Theological or Fictitious stage:

The theological stage is the first and it characterised the world prior to 1300. Here all theoretical

conceptions, whether general or special bear a supernatural impress. At this level of thinking
there is a marked lack of logical and orderly thinking. Overall the theological thinking implies

belief in super natural power.

This type of thinking is found among the primitive races. In theological stage, all natural

phenomena and social events were explained in terms of super natural forces and deities, which

ultimately explaining everything as the product of God’s will. This stage is dominated by priests

and ruled by military men.

Human mind is dominated by sentiments, feelings and emotions. Every phenomenon was

believed to be the result of immediate actions of super-natural beings. Explanations take the form

of myths concerning spirits and super natural beings.

Man seeks the essential nature of all beings, first and final causes, origins and purposes of all

effects and the overriding belief that all things are caused by super natural beings. Theology

means discourse in religion. Religion dominates in this state of development. This state is

characterised by conquest. The theological—military society was basically dying. Priests were

endowed with intellectual and spiritual power, while military exercised temporal authority.

It has three sub-stages:

(i) Fetishism:

‘Fetish’ means inanimate and ‘ism’ means philosophy. This is a philosophy which believes that

super natural power dwells in inanimate object. Fetishism as a form of religion started which

admitted of no priesthood. When everything in nature is thought to be imbued with life

analogous to our own, pieces of wood, stone, skull etc. are believed to be the dwelling place of

super natural powers, as these objects are believed to possess divine power. But too many
fetishes created confusion for people. Hence they started believing in several gods. Thus arose

polytheism.

(ii) Polytheism:

‘Poly’ means many. So the belief in many Gods is called polytheism. Human being received

variety or diversity of natural phenomena. Each phenomenon was kept under the disposal of one

God. One God was believed to be in charge of one particular natural phenomenon. In

polytheism, there is an unrestrained imagination person the world with innumerable Gods and

spirits. People created the class of priests to get the goodwill and the blessings of these gods. The

presence of too many gods also created for them mental contradictions. Finally they developed

the idea of one God, i.e. monotheism.

(iii) Monotheism:

It means belief in one single God. He is all in all. He controls everything in this world. He is the

maker of human destiny. Monotheism is the climax of the theological stage of thinking. The

monotheistic thinking symbolizes the victory of human intellect and reason over non-intellectual

and irrational thinking. Slowly feelings and imaginations started giving place to thinking and

rationality. In monotheism a simplification of many gods into one God takes place, largely in the

service of awakening reason, which qualifies and exercises constraint upon the imagination.

In theological stage, soldiers, kings, priests etc. were given respect in the society. Everything was

considered in terms of family welfare. Love and affection bonded the members of a family

together. In this stage social organisation is predominantly of a military nature. It is the military

power which provides the basis of social stability and conquest which enlarges the bounds of

social life.
(a) Progress is observable in all aspects of society: physical, moral, intellectual and political.

(b) The intellectual is the most important. History is dominated by the development of ideas

leading to changes in other areas.

(c) Auguste Comte says on the “Co-relations” between basic intellectual stages and stages of

material development, types of social units, types of social order and sentiments.

Metaphysical or Abstract Stage:

The metaphysical stage started about 1300 A.D. and was short lived roughly till 1800. It forms a

link and is mongrel and transitional. It is almost an extension of theological thinking. It

corresponds very roughly to the middle Ages and Renaissance.

It was under the sway of churchmen and lawyers. This stage was characterised by Defence. Here

mind pre-supposes abstract forces. ‘Meta’ means beyond and physical means material world.

Supernatural being is replaced by supernatural force. This is in form of essences, ideas and

forms. Rationalism started growing instead of imagination.

Rationalism states that God does not stand directly behind every phenomenon. Pure reasoning

insists that God is an Abstract being. Under metaphysical thinking it is believed that an abstract

power or force guides and determines the events in the world. Metaphysical thinking discards

belief in concrete God. It is characterised by the dominance of “ratiocination.”

In metaphysical stage speculative thought is unchecked by any other principle. Human body was

considered to be the spark of divinity. This kind of thinking corresponded with the legal type of

society; and law, lawyers and churchmen dominated the society. Law remained under the control

of the state.

The Positive or Scientific stage:

Finally in 1800 the world entered the positivistic stage. The positive stage represents the

scientific way of thinking. Positive thought ushers in an industrial age. The positive or scientific

knowledge is based upon facts and these facts are gathered by observation and experience. All

phenomena are seen as subject to natural laws that can be investigated by observations and

experimentation.

The dawn of the 19th Century marked the beginning of the positive stage in which observation

predominates over imagination. All theoretical concepts have become positive. The concept of

God is totally vanished from human mind. Human mind tries to establish cause and affect

relationship. Mind is actually in search of final and ultimate cause.

The scientific thinking is thoroughly rational and there is no place for any belief or superstition

in it. This stage is governed by industrial administrators and scientific moral guides. At this stage

of thought, men reject all supposed explanations in terms either of Gods or essences as useless.
They cease to seek ‘original causes’ or ‘final ends’. This stage is dominated by the entrepreneurs,

technologists etc. Unit of society was confined to the mankind as a whole, vision of mind was

broad and there is no parochial feeling. Kindness, sympathy etc. to the cause of humanity

prevailed.

This is the ultimate stage in a series of successive transformations. The new system is built upon

the destruction of the old; with evolution, come progress and emancipation of human mind.

Human history is the history of a single man, Comte, because the progress of the man mind gives

unity to the entire history of society. For Comte, all knowledge is inescapably human knowledge;

a systematic ordering of propositions concerning our human experience of the world.

Corresponding to the three stages of mental progress; Comte identified two major types of

societies. The theological-military society which was dying, the scientific-industrial society

which was being born during his life time. Here the main stress is on the transformation of the

material resources of the earth for human benefit and the production of material inventions. In

this positive or scientific stage the great thought blends itself with great power.

Comte’s law of three stages have been criticized by different philosophers and sociologists.

(i) According to Bogardus, Comte failed to postulate a fourth mode of thinking, i.e. socialized

thinking, a system of thought which would emphasize the purpose of building the constructive,

just and harmonious societies. Bogardus also says, Comte however, should be credited with

opening the way for rise of socialized thinking.

(ii) According to Prof. N.S. Timasheff, Comte’s law of three stages could not stand the test of

facts. He opines, “Neither the later approaches (metaphysical and scientific) wholly supersedes

the religious approach; rather there has been accumulation and often admixture of the three”.

(iii) C.E. Vaughan has said, “But its foundation is purely negative and destructive. It is powerless

to construct and when credited with the ability to do so, it brings forth nothing but anarchy and

bloodshed.”

Hierarchy of the Sciences According to Auguste Comte

Comte’s second-best known theory, that of the hierarchy of the sciences or classification of

sciences is intimately connected with the law of three stages. Just as mankind progresses only

through determinant stages, each successive stage building on the accomplishments of its

predecessors; so scientific knowledge passes through similar stages of development. But

different sciences progress at different rates. “Any kind of knowledge reaches the positive stage

early in proportion to its generality, simplicity and independence of other departments.”

Since time immemorial thinkers have tried to classify knowledge on one or the other basis. Early

Greek thinkers had made a tripartite classification of knowledge. These were Physics, Ethics and

Politics. Bacon made the classification on the basis of the faculties of man namely memory,

imagination and reason. The Science which was based upon memory is called History,

imagination is poetry and reason is Physics, Chemistry etc.

Comte classified knowledge on the basis of observation of scientific or positive level of human

thinking. The main aim of the classification of science by Comte is to prepare the background

and basis for the study of society, Sociology, a science invented by him. On this also he
determined the methodology of sociology. Comte thought that each Science came into being not

arbitrarily. It has come to seek the “Laws” of a particular kind or level of facts which man had

encountered in his experience of the world. Each Science is concerned with some definite event

or subject matter and these constitute the subject of its study.

Comte spoke of sociology is the “crowning edifice” of the hierarchy of sciences. He did not

mean that it is in any sense superior to any other science; but only that it serves to bring all other

sciences into relationship with each other, in the overall intellectual history of man. Comte says,

Astronomy, the most general and simple of all natural sciences develops first. It is followed by

physics, chemistry, biology and finally sociology. Each science in this series depends for its

emergence on the prior developments of its predecessors in a hierarchy marked by the law of

increasing complexity and decreasing generality.

According to Comte behind and before all these sciences however lies the great science of

mathematics—the most powerful instrument the mind can employ in the investigation of natural

law. The Science of mathematics must be divided into abstract mathematics or the calculus, and

concrete mathematics embracing general geometry and rational mathematics. So we have thus

really six great sciences.

The classification of sciences follows the order of development of the sciences. It indicates their

social relation and relative perfection. In order to reach effective knowledge the sciences must be

studied in the order named. Sociology cannot be understood without knowledge of the anterior

sciences.
Comte arranged the sciences so that each category may be grounded on the principal laws of the

preceding category and serve as a basis for the next ensuing category. The order hence, is one of

increasing complexity and decreasing generality. The most simple phenomena must be the most

general – general in the sense of being everywhere present. In the hierarchy, Comte places

mathematics on the lowest rung and the topmost rung is occupied by Sociology.

It was possible to arrange the Sciences systematically in a way which coincided with:

1. The order of their historical emergence and development. Sciences have developed in course

of history.

2. The order of their dependence upon each other. A science cannot develop without dependence

upon each other.

3. Their decreasing degree of generality and the increasing degree of complexity of their subject

matter.

4. The increasing degree of modifiability of the facts which they study.

The modifiable facts are one which can be modified. Sociology deals with social phenomenon

which undergoes constant modification.

In establishing the hierarchy of sciences, Comte also distinguished the methodological

characteristics of the various disciplines.

Mathematics:

Mathematics may be defined briefly as the indirect measurement of magnitudes and the

determination of magnitudes by each other. It is the business of concrete mathematics to discover

the equations of phenomena; it is the business of abstract mathematics to reduce results from the

equations. Thus concrete mathematics discovers by actual experiment the acceleration which

takes place per second in a falling body and abstract mathematics educes results from the

equations so discovered and obtains unknown quantities from known.

Astronomy:

Astronomy may be defined as the science by which we discover the laws of the geometrical and

mechanical phenomena presented by heavenly bodies. To discover these laws we can use only

our sense of sight and our reasoning power, the reasoning bears a great proportion to observation

here than in any other science.

Sight alone would never teach us the figure of the earth or the path of a planet, and only by the

measurement of angles and computations of times can we discover astronomical laws? The

observation of these invariable laws frees man from servitude to the theological and

metaphysical conceptions of the universe.

Physics:

Physics may be defined briefly as the study of the laws which regulate the general properties of

bodies regarded masse, their molecules remaining unaltered and usually in a state of aggregation.
In the observations of physics all the senses are employed and mathematical analysis and

experiment assist observation. In the phenomena of astronomy human intervention was

impossible. In the phenomena of physics man begins to modify natural phenomena. Physics

includes the sub-divisions: statics, dynamics, thermo-logy, optics and electro logy. Physics is still

handicapped by metaphysical conceptions of the primary courses of phenomena.

Chemistry:

Chemistry may be briefly defined as the study of the laws of the phenomena of composition and

decomposition which result from the molecular and specific mutual action of different

substances, natural or artificial. In the observations of chemistry the senses are still more

employed, and experiment is still more utility. Even in chemistry metaphysical conceptions

linger.

Biology:

The physiology of plants and animals is studied under Biology. Physiology may be defined as

the study of the laws of organic dynamics in relation to structure and environment. Placed in a

given environment, a definite organism must always act in a definite way, and physiology

investigates the reciprocal relations, between organism, environment and function.

In physiology observation and experiment are of the greatest value, and apparatus of all kinds is

used to assist both observation and experiment. Physiology is most closely connected with

chemistry, since all the phenomena of life are associated with compositions and decompositions

of a chemical character.
Sociology:

In the series of classification of Sciences, each science depends for its emergence on the prior

developments of its predecessors in a hierarchy marked by the law of increasing complexity and

decreasing generality. The Social Sciences, the most complex and the most dependent for their

emergence on the development of all the others, are the “highest” in the hierarchy. “Social

Science offers the attributes of a completion of the positive method. All others…. are preparatory

to it.”

Although sociology has special methodological characteristics that distinguish it from its

predecessors in the hierarchy; it is also dependent upon them. It is especially dependent on

biology, the science that stands nearest to it in the hierarchy. What distinguishes biology from all

other natural sciences is its holistic character.

Unlike physics and chemistry, which proceed by isolating elements, biology proceeds from the

study of organic wholes. And it is this emphasis on organic or organism unity that sociology has

in common with biology. “There can be no scientific study of society either in its conditions or

its movements, if it is separated into portions and its divisions are studied apart.” The only proper

approach in Sociology consists in “viewing each element in the light of the whole system.”

Comte invented the specific hybrid term sociology which rests in turn upon biological, chemical,

physical and astronomical knowledge and uses Mathematics as its tool.

The positive method which has triumphed in all abstract sciences must essentially prevail in

history and politics and culminate in the founding of a positive science of society, namely

sociology, which is the root of all sciences. Sciences are no longer analytic but necessarily
synthetic. In the inorganic sciences, the elements are much better known to us than the whole

which they constitute, so that we can proceed from simple to compound.

Man and society as a whole is being better known to us, than the parts which constitute them.

Just as biology cannot explain an organ or a function apart from the organism as a whole,

sociology cannot explain social phenomena without reference to the total social context.

Comte developed social physics or what in 1839 he called sociology. The use of the term Social

physics made it clear that Comte sought to model sociology after the hard sciences. This new

science which in his view would ultimately become the dominant science was to be concerned

with both social statics (existing social structure) and Social Dynamics (Social change).

Although both involved the search for laws of social life.

According to Comte, the social organic science is sociology. It is relatively new science. Being

young it has not yet attended the status of a full-fledged science. Sociology is still a growing and

developing science. However; it is quite clear that sociology is gradually moving towards the

goal of a definite science.

Comte spoke of sociology is the ‘crowning edifice’ of the hierarchy of sciences. He did not mean

that it is in any sense superior to any other science; but only that is serves to bring all other

sciences into relationship with each other, in the overall intellectual history of man.

Concept of Social Statics and Social Dynamics

The study of social statics and dynamics are the two fundamentals of Comte’s study of the

organic phase or  social stability . The study of social statics and dynamics are not two distinct

classes of facts but are two components of a theory. These studies are not separate but are
complementary to each other as static is the study when society is in equilibrium and dynamics is

the study of evolution which is a slow and steady process. This slow and steady process can only

occur during the phase in which the society is in equilibrium and not disequilibrium or critical

phase. Despite the fact that it seemed desirable for methodological and heuristic purposes to

separate the study of statics and dynamics, in empirical reality they were correlative.  Comte

believed that social structures could not be reduced to the properties of individuals. Rather, social

structures are composed of other structures and can be understood only as the properties of, and

relations among, these other structures

Social Statics and Social Dynamics

Comte considers Sociology into two Theoretical Aspects;

Social Statics and Social Dynamics

Social static focuses on how order is maintained in the society and social dynamic focuses on

how society changes over time.

Comte separated social statics from social dynamics. Social statics are concerned with the ways

in which the parts of a social system (social structures) interact with one another, as well as the

functional relationships between the parts and to the social system as a whole. Comte therefore

focused his social statics on the individual, as well as such collective phenomena as the family,

religion, language, and the division of labor.

Comte placed greater emphasis on the study of social dynamics, or social change. His theory of

social dynamics is founded on the law of the three stages; i.e., the evolution of society is based

on the evolution of mind through the theological, metaphysical, and positivist stages. He saw

social dynamics as a process of progressive evolution in which people become cumulatively

more intelligent and in which altruism eventually triumphs over egoism. This process is one that

people can modify or accelerate, but in the end the laws of progressive development dictate the

development of society. Comte’s research on social evolution focused on Western Europe, which

he viewed as the most highly developed part of the world during his times.

This distinction between social statics and social dynamics is one of his lasting contributions to

sociology. His aim was to create a naturalistic science of society, which would explain the past

development of mankind and predict its future course.

Social Statics

Comte separated social statics from social dynamics. Social statics are concerned with the ways

in which the parts of a social system (social structures) interact with one another, as well as the

functional relationships between the parts and to the social system as a whole. Comte therefore

focused his social statics on the individual, as well as such collective phenomena as the family,

religion, language, and the division of labor.

Social statics is a branch of social physics that deals with the fundamental laws of the social

order and the equilibrium of forces in a stable society, It is an approach to sociology focusing on

the distinctive nature of human societies and social systems in abstract rather than empirical

terms.

It is the study of social systems as they exist at a given time. that examines human societies as

they exist in a certain time that is relative to the level of development.

Comte defined social statics as the study of social structure, its elements, and their relations. He

first analyzed “individuals” as the Elements of social structure. Generally, he viewed the

individual asa series of capacities and needs, some innate and others acquired through
participation in society. He did not view the individual as a . “true social unit”; indeed, he

relegated the study of the individual to Biology—an unfortunate oversight because it denied the

legitimacy of psychology as a distinct social science. The most basic social unit, he argued, is

“the family.” It is the most elementary unit, from which all other social units ultimately evolved:

Comte believed that social structures could not be reduced to the properties of individuals.

Rather, social structures are composed of other structures and can be understood only as the

properties of, and relations among, these other structures. Comte’s analysis of the family then

moves to descriptions of its structure—first the sexual division of labor and then the parental

relation. The specifics of his analysis are not important because they are flawed and inaccurate.

Main Features of Social Statics

 It is concerned with the present structure of the society. Social Statics refers to the

study of the conditions and pre-conditions of social order.

 It studies the issues of social stability and social order.

 It studies the current laws, rules and present conditions of the society. It observes how

these laws and rules are affecting the present society.

 It investigates the law of action and reaction of the different parts of the social

system.

 It is concerned with the study of major institutions, which preserve the social order.

For example, family; it occupies an important position in social structure. It provides

the base for the social order and progress of the society.

 Individual, family and social combinations are three levels of society. Family is the

smallest and basic unit of sociology.

Factors of Social Statics:

Auguste Comte refuses to place individuals as the base of the society. It is erroneous to derive

man’s social tendencies out of his utilitarian considerations as it makes the existence of social

state impossible. He places family at the base of society and allows resizing it if necessary to a

couple. Family curbs the egoistic nature of a person to make him adaptable to the society this

makes it the base of a social feeling causing stability. According to his thought of collective

organism he places families at the level of an element, classes and caste of a tissue and cities and

towns of an organ. Aware of the limitations of such analogy Comte concluded them by stating

language, religion and division of labour as the unifying or binding forces of society.

He finds language, religion and division of labour as the three key factors for the stability of the

body social According to Comte, there are three factors of social statics. They are;

 Language; language is the “easiest and common way of communication”, making it

an essential tool for binding people closely to each other in a community. Language is

a common mode of communication between generations. It helps impart the future

generations with the knowledge and skills of the older generation, providing it with a

base to progress on. It is the means of storing thoughts and culture for proceeding

generations. Without a common language, attaining solidarity and social order is not

possible.

 Religion; religion compensates the weaknesses of language by binding the society on

the basis of a few common beliefs, acting as a “positive guide”. It ties the society by

morality not letting it fall apart because of the disparities among peopleIt provides the

guidance for behaviour and it is the root of social order.

  Division of Labor; labor binds the society together on basis of “similarity of classes”

but is feared of distancing men from a larger mass as they are more driven towards

their personal interests over the societies. Men in this stage become more conscious

of their personal needs and feebly relate them to the needs of society It is essential for

the success of the state cooperation as it creates interdependence among the people in

the society.

In presenting this analysis, Comte felt that he had

uncovered several laws of social statics because he believed that differentiation, centralization of

power, and development of a common morality were fundamentally related to the maintenance

of the social order.

Far more important is the view of structure that he implied: social structures are composed of

substructures and develop from the elaboration of simpler structures.

Social Dynamics

Social dynamics is a branch of social physics that deals with the laws, forces, and phenomena of

change in society ,it is an approach to sociology focusing on the empirical studies of societies

and social systems in the processes of change in years gone by.  The processes and forces of

change at work in any social group.. Social dynamics is a mathematically inspired approach to

analyses societies, building upon systems theory and sociology.

Social dynamics looks at all of the things that can change a social group. It is the study of the

ability of a society to react to inner and outer changes and deal with its regulation mechanisms. It

deals with the forces in society that provide for change and or conflict., and with those aspects of

social life that pattern institutional development and have to do with social change

Comte placed greater emphasis on the study of social dynamics, or social change. For the

dynamical view is not only the more interesting . . . , but the more marked in its philosophical

character, from its being more distinguished from biology by the master-thought of continuous

progress, or rather of the gradual development of humanity.

Social dynamics studies the “laws of succession,” or the patterns of change in social systems

over time..

His theory of social dynamics is founded on the law of the three stages;
the evolution of society is based on the evolution of mind through the theological, metaphysical,

and positivist stages.

He saw social dynamics as a process of progressive evolution in which people become

cumulatively more intelligent and in which altruism eventually triumphs over egoism. This

process is one that people can modify or accelerate, but in the end the laws of progressive

development dictate the development of society.

Main Features of Social Dynamics

 Dynamics begin when the functions of the social institutions are altered or changed. It

begins with the study of the process of social changes. Therefore, it is concerned with

the matter of social progress.

 Social dynamics refers to the pattern of the revolutionary progress in which the

sequence of the development is necessary and inevitable. The term ‘Progress’ refers

to the orderly development of the society, which are according to the natural law.

Hence, the order and progress or statics and dynamics are co-related to each other.

 According to Comte, social dynamics describe the successive and necessary stages in

the development in the human mind and the society. Moreover, it is natural that the

social systems, such as institutions are interrelated and interdependent, so they can

make a harmonious whole

 Further, he opined that the social dynamics should depend on the historical

perspectives in order to study the process of social change and progress. Thus, the

social dynamics are found in all the aspects of the society, such as physical, moral

and intellectual. However, the intellectual is the most important.

Max Weber

German sociologist

Max Weber, (born April 21, 1864, Erfurt, Prussia [Germany]—died June 14, 1920, Munich,

Germany), German sociologist and political economist best known for his thesis of the

“Protestant ethic,” relating Protestantism to capitalism, and for his ideas on bureaucracy.

Weber’s profound influence on sociological theory stems from his demand for objectivity in

scholarship and from his analysis of the motives behind human action.

Theory of Social action

Purposeful logical action

Value oriented action

Affective action

Traditional action

Theory of Authority

1 Bureaucratic authority

2 Traditional Authority

3 Charismatic authority
Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism According to Weber

Weber located a positive relationship between the protestant ethics and the spirit of capitalism.

Western capitalism according to weber, assumed its shape because it was supported by a certain

belief system, namely the “protestant ethic”. Weber argued that the protestant ethic is closely

associated with the spirit of capitalism. In order to bring out this inter-relationship, Weber

constructed ideal types of both, the protestant ethics and the spirit of capitalism. However, it is

the inter-relationship and interdependence of “ideational” and “material” factors in history.

The Spirit of Capitalism:

Capitalism in Weber’s thought:

As far as capitalism is concerned Weber says it is a huge historical movement in a specific

geographical and cultural area. The desire for wealth or profit is as old as human history. Wealth

has long been regarded as a symbol of power, status and prestige. But never before in human

history did the desire for wealth assume the organized and disciplined form that it did in modern

or rational capitalism. It is this rational capitalism that Weber wanted to study. He distinguishes

between traditional or adventurist capitalism of former times and rational capitalism of modern

times.

According to Weber, the capitalists desired wealth not for enjoyment or luxurious living. They

wanted it so that they could use it to make more wealth. The thirst for money-making for its own

sake is the very essence of modern capitalism. Capitalism is an economic system which aims at

the unlimited accumulation of profit through the rational organization of production.

Capitalism arose in the western nations like England and Germany, which experienced what we

call the “Industrial Revolution.” The growth of the factory system, new techniques of production,
new tools and machines made it possible for the capitalists or the owners to earn vast amounts of

money. The production process had to be rationally organized; in other words, efficiency and

discipline were essential.

The worker was a means to an end, the end being profit. The attitude towards work was that it

should be done well not because are had to do it, but because it carried an intrinsic reward. Hard

work and efficient work were an end in itself. Weber contrasted this work-ethic with another

type which he termed traditionalism.

Here, workers prefer less work to more pay, relaxation to exertion. They are either unable or

unwilling to take up new work method and techniques. In capitalism, the worker is regarded by

the capitalist as a means to an end. But under traditionalism, the worker-employer relationship is

informal, direct and personal.

Traditionalism hampers the growth of capitalism. Capitalism stresses individualism, innovation

and the relentless pursuit of profit. Traditionalism, as described above is characterized by a much

less disciplined and efficient system of production.

The spirit of capitalism is a work-ethic which calls for the accumulation of wealth for its own

sake. To do so, work has to be organized in an efficient disciplined manner. Hard work is a

quality that carries fundamental rewards. The spirit of capitalism demands individualism,

innovation, hard work and the pursuit of wealth for its own sake. It is thus an economic ethic.

Protestantism and the Ethics:

Protestantism, as the name suggests, it is a religion of protest. It arose in the 16th century in

Europe in the period known as the “Reformation”. Its founding fathers like Martin Luther and

John Calvin broke away from the Catholic Church. They felt that the church had become too

deep in doctrines and rituals. It had lost touch with the common people. Greed, Corruption and

vice had gripped the church. Priests had a life-style more suitable for princes.

The protestant sects that sprang up all over Europe tried to recapture the lost spirit of the church.

They stressed simplicity, austerity and devotion. Calvinism, founded by the Frenchman John

Calvin was one such sect. The followers of Calvin in England were known as the Prudes.

They migrated to the continent of North America and were the founders of the American nation.

Weber observed that in the west, it was by and large the Protestants who had made greatest

progress in education and employment. They were the top bureaucrats, the most skilled technical

workers and the leading industrialists.

The brand of capitalism that weber was most interested in was Calvinism. If we study the main

features of Calvinism, it would show us how there is the link between religion and economy.

William Graham Sumner

American sociologist

William Graham Sumner, (born Oct. 30, 1840, Paterson, N.J., U.S.—died April 12,

1910, Englewood, N.J.), U.S. sociologist and economist, prolific publicist of Social Darwinism.

Like the British philosopher Herbert Spencer, Sumner, who taught at Yale from 1872 to 1909,

expounded in many essays his firm belief in laissez-faire, individual liberty, and the innate

inequalities among men. He viewed competition for property and social status as resulting in a
beneficent elimination of the ill adapted and the preservation of racial soundness and cultural

vigour. For him the middle-class Protestant ethic of hard work, thrift, and sobriety

was conducive to wholesome family life and sound public morality. Foreseeing the drift toward

the welfare state, but considering poverty the natural result of inherent inferiorities, he opposed

all reform proposals that smacked of paternalism because they would impose excessive

economic burdens on the middle class, his “forgotten man.” In his best-known

work, Folkways (1907), he stated that customs and morals originate in instinctive responses to

the stimuli of hunger, sex, vanity, and fear. He emphasized the irrationality of folk customs and

their resistance to reform. Sumner’s notes became the basis of The Science of Society, 4 vol.

(1927–28), edited by Albert G. Keller.

Folkways and Mores

Societal norms, or rules that are enforced by members of a community, can exist as both formal

and informal rules of behavior. Informal norms can be divided into two distinct groups: folkways

and mores. Folkways are informal rules and norms that, while not offensive to violate, are

expected to be followed. Mores (pronounced more-rays) are also informal rules that are not

written, but, when violated, result in severe punishments and social sanction upon the

individuals, such as social and religious exclusions,

William Graham Sumner, an early U.S. sociologist, recognized that some norms are more

important to our lives than others. Sumner coined the term mores to refer to norms that are

widely observed and have great moral significance. Mores are often seen as taboos; for example,

most societies hold the more that adults not engage in sexual relations with children. Mores

emphasize morality through right and wrong, and come with heavy consequences if violated.
Sumner also coined the term folkway to refer to norms for more routine or casual interaction.

This includes ideas about appropriate greetings and proper dress in different situations. In

comparison to the morality of mores, folkways dictate what could be considered either polite or

rude behavior. Their violation does not invite any punishment or sanctions, but may come with

reprimands or warnings.

An example to distinguish the two: a man who does not wear a tie to a formal dinner party may

raise eyebrows for violating folkways; were he to arrive wearing only a tie, he would violate

cultural mores and invite a more serious response.

Key Points

 Societal norms, or rules that are enforced by members of a community, can exist as both

formal and informal rules of behavior. Informal norms can be divided into two distinct

groups: folkways and mores.

 Both “mores” and “folkways” are terms coined by the American sociologist William

Graham Sumner.

 Mores distinguish the difference between right and wrong, while folkways draw a line

between right and rude. While folkways may raise an eyebrow if violated, mores dictate

morality and come with heavy consequences.

Key Terms

 mores: A set of moral norms or customs derived from generally accepted practices.

Mores derive from the established practices of a society rather than its written laws.
 William Graham Sumner: An American academic with numerous books and essays on

American history, economic history, political theory, sociology, and anthropology.

 folkway: A custom or belief common to members of a society or culture.

 Ingroups and Outgroups

All groups set boundaries by distinguishing between insiders. who are members, and

outsiders? who are not Sociologist Willian Graham Sumner (1959/1906) coined the terms

ingroup and outgroup to describe people's feelings toward members of their own and

other groups. An ln group is a group to which a person belongs and with which the

person feels a sense of identity, an outgroup is a group to which a person does not

belong and toward which the person may feel a sense of competitiveness or hostility.

Distinguishing between our ingroups and our outgroups helps us establish our individual

identity and self-worth. Likewise, groups are solidified by ingroup and outgroup

distinctions; the presence of an enemy or hostile group binds members more closely

together (Coser, 19S6).

Group boundaries may be formal, with clearly defined criteria for membership. For

example, a country dub that requires an applicant for membership to be recommended by

four current members and to pay a $25,000 initiation fee has clearly set requirements for

its members (see "Sociology Works!" on pages 180-181). However, group boundaries are

not always that formal. For example, friendship groups usually do not have clear

guidelines for membership; rather, the boundaries lend to be very informal and vaguely

defined. Ingroup and outgroup distinctions may encourage social cohesion among

members, but they may also promote classism, racism, sexism, and ageism. Ingroup

members typically view themselves positively and members of outgroups negatively,

 these feelings of group superiority, or ethnocentrism, are somewhat inevitable. However,

members of some groups feel freer than others to act on their beliefs. If groups are

embedded in larger groups and organizations, the large organization may discourage such

beliefs and their consequences (Merton; 1968). Conversely, organizations may covertly

foster these ingroup/outgroup distinctions by denying their existence or by failing to take

action when misconduct occurs.

Rules of Sociological Methods According to Durkheim

“Rules of Sociological Methods” of Durkheim was published in the year 1895. The

methodological framework for all of his subsequent work was developed in his “The Rules of

sociological methods.” He has successfully analyzed social facts which facing up to the

methodological problems of .using empirical research in scientific study of society.

According to Durkheim society is the reality sui generis. It is an independent entity. Only social

facts are real. Social facts are objective and are capable of being perceived from outside. Social

facts are understood only by sociological laws. There can be no psychological explanation of

these facts. Sociology cannot be explained by the principle of utility or individual’s motivation.

Its explanation can only be social. Durkheim defines sociology as a science of social facts.

According to him sociology is not merely a theoretic discipline rather it is intimately connected

with the practical facts of life. The true nature of social facts lies in the collective or associational

characteristic inherent in society. Durkheim set out to establish the specific subject matter and

method for the science of sociology in his “The Rules of sociological methods.”

There are five rules:

1. Rules for observing social facts:

(a) Social facts should always be treated as if they are things.

(b) The voluntary nature of a social fact should never be assumed beforehand.

(c) All pre-conceptions should be eradicated.

(d) Observation of social facts should go beyond that of their individual manifestations.

(e) Observation should seek always those external distinguishing characteristics about which

there can be no doubt. Which can be objectively perceived by others?

(f) The observation and the study of social facts should be definitive as far as possible.

2. Rules for distinguishing between “Normal” and “Pathological” Social facts.

3. Rules for classifying societies: The construction of “Types” or “Species”.

4. Rules for the explanation of Social Facts.

5. Rules for Testing Sociological Explanations: For establishing sociological proofs.

Durkheim defined social facts as things external to and coercive of the actor. These are created

from collective forces and do not emanate from the individual. Social facts are things and to be

studied empirically not philosophically. Durkheim defines social facts as “Ways of acting,

thinking and feeling, external to the individual and endowed with a power of coercion by reason

of which they control them.”

Hierarchy of the Sciences According to Auguste Comte

Comte’s second-best known theory, that of the hierarchy of the sciences or classification of

sciences is intimately connected with the law of three stages. Just as mankind progresses only

through determinant stages, each successive stage building on the accomplishments of its

predecessors; so scientific knowledge passes through similar stages of development. But

different sciences progress at different rates. “Any kind of knowledge reaches the positive stage

early in proportion to its generality, simplicity and independence of other departments.”

Since time immemorial thinkers have tried to classify knowledge on one or the other basis. Early

Greek thinkers had made a tripartite classification of knowledge. These were Physics, Ethics and

Politics. Bacon made the classification on the basis of the faculties of man namely memory,

imagination and reason. The Science which was based upon memory is called History,

imagination is poetry and reason is Physics, Chemistry etc.

Comte classified knowledge on the basis of observation of scientific or positive level of human

thinking. The main aim of the classification of science by Comte is to prepare the background

and basis for the study of society, Sociology, a science invented by him. On this also he

determined the methodology of sociology. Comte thought that each Science came into being not

arbitrarily. It has come to seek the “Laws” of a particular kind or level of facts which man had

encountered in his experience of the world. Each Science is concerned with some definite event

or subject matter and these constitute the subject of its study.

Comte spoke of sociology is the “crowning edifice” of the hierarchy of sciences. He did not

mean that it is in any sense superior to any other science; but only that it serves to bring all other

sciences into relationship with each other, in the overall intellectual history of man. Comte says,
Astronomy, the most general and simple of all-natural sciences develops first. It is followed by

physics, chemistry, biology and finally sociology. Each science in this series depends for its

emergence on the prior developments of its predecessors in a hierarchy marked by the law of

increasing complexity and decreasing generality.

According to Comte behind and before all these sciences however lies the great science of

mathematics—the most powerful instrument the mind can employ in the investigation of natural

law. The Science of mathematics must be divided into abstract mathematics or the calculus, and

concrete mathematics embracing general geometry and rational mathematics. So we have thus

really six great sciences.

The classification of sciences follows the order of development of the sciences. It indicates their

social relation and relative perfection. In order to reach effective knowledge, the sciences must

be studied in the order named. Sociology cannot be understood without knowledge of the

anterior sciences.

Comte arranged the sciences so that each category may be grounded on the principal laws of the

preceding category and serve as a basis for the next ensuing category. The order hence, is one of

increasing complexity and decreasing generality. The simplest phenomena must be the most
general – general in the sense of being everywhere present. In the hierarchy, Comte places

mathematics on the lowest rung and the topmost rung is occupied by Sociology.

It was possible to arrange the Sciences systematically in a way which coincided with:

1. The order of their historical emergence and development. Sciences have developed in course

of history.

2. The order of their dependence upon each other. A science cannot develop without dependence

upon each other.

3. Their decreasing degree of generality and the increasing degree of complexity of their subject

matter.

4. The increasing degree of modifiability of the facts which they study.

The modifiable facts are one which can be modified. Sociology deals with social phenomenon

which undergoes constant modification.

In establishing the hierarchy of sciences, Comte also distinguished the methodological

characteristics of the various disciplines.

Mathematics:

Mathematics may be defined briefly as the indirect measurement of magnitudes and the

determination of magnitudes by each other. It is the business of concrete mathematics to discover

the equations of phenomena; it is the business of abstract mathematics to reduce results from the

equations. Thus concrete mathematics discovers by actual experiment the acceleration which
takes place per second in a falling body and abstract mathematics educes results from the

equations so discovered and obtains unknown quantities from known.

Astronomy:

Astronomy may be defined as the science by which we discover the laws of the geometrical and

mechanical phenomena presented by heavenly bodies. To discover these laws we can use only

our sense of sight and our reasoning power, the reasoning bears a great proportion to observation

here than in any other science.

Sight alone would never teach us the figure of the earth or the path of a planet, and only by the

measurement of angles and computations of times can we discover astronomical laws? The

observation of these invariable laws frees man from servitude to the theological and

metaphysical conceptions of the universe.

Physics:

Physics may be defined briefly as the study of the laws which regulate the general properties of

bodies regarded en masse, their molecules remaining unaltered and usually in a state of

aggregation. In the observations of physics all the senses are employed and mathematical

analysis and experiment assist observation. In the phenomena of astronomy human intervention

was impossible. In the phenomena of physics man begins to modify natural phenomena. Physics

includes the sub-divisions: statics, dynamics, thermo-logy, optics and electro logy. Physics is still

handicapped by metaphysical conceptions of the primary courses of phenomena.

Chemistry:

Chemistry may be briefly defined as the study of the laws of the phenomena of composition and

decomposition which result from the molecular and specific mutual action of different

substances, natural or artificial. In the observations of chemistry the senses are still more

employed, and experiment is still more utility. Even in chemistry metaphysical conceptions

linger.

Biology:

The physiology of plants and animals is studied under Biology. Physiology may be defined as

the study of the laws of organic dynamics in relation to structure and environment. Placed in a

given environment, a definite organism must always act in a definite way, and physiology

investigates the reciprocal relations, between organism, environment and function.

In physiology observation and experiment are of the greatest value, and apparatus of all kinds is

used to assist both observation and experiment. Physiology is most closely connected with

chemistry, since all the phenomena of life are associated with compositions and decompositions

of a chemical character.

Sociology:

In the series of classification of Sciences, each science depends for its emergence on the prior

developments of its predecessors in a hierarchy marked by the law of increasing complexity and

decreasing generality. The Social Sciences, the most complex and the most dependent for their

emergence on the development of all the others, are the “highest” in the hierarchy. “Social

Science offers the attributes of a completion of the positive method. All others…. are preparatory

to it.”
Although sociology has special methodological characteristics that distinguish it from its

predecessors in the hierarchy; it is also dependent upon them. It is especially dependent on

biology, the science that stands nearest to it in the hierarchy. What distinguishes biology from all

other natural sciences is its holistic character.

Unlike physics and chemistry, which proceed by isolating elements, biology proceeds from the

study of organic wholes. And it is this emphasis on organic or organism unity that sociology has

in common with biology. “There can be no scientific study of society either in its conditions or

its movements, if it is separated into portions and its divisions are studied apart.” The only proper

approach in Sociology consists in “viewing each element in the light of the whole system.”

Comte invented the specific hybrid term sociology which rests in turn upon biological, chemical,

physical and astronomical knowledge and uses Mathematics as its tool.

The positive method which has triumphed in all abstract sciences must essentially prevail in

history and politics and culminate in the founding of a positive science of society, namely

sociology, which is the root of all sciences. Sciences are no longer analytic but necessarily

synthetic. In the inorganic sciences, the elements are much better known to us than the whole

which they constitute, so that we can proceed from simple to compound.

Man and society as a whole is being better known to us, than the parts which constitute them.

Just as biology cannot explain an organ or a function apart from the organism as a whole,

sociology cannot explain social phenomena without reference to the total social context.

Comte developed social physics or what in 1839 he called sociology. The use of the term Social

physics made it clear that Comte sought to model sociology after the hard sciences. This new
science which in his view would ultimately become the dominant science was to be concerned

with both social statics (existing social structure) and Social Dynamics (Social change).

Although both involved the search for laws of social life.

According to Comte, the social organic science is sociology. It is relatively new science. Being

young it has not yet attended the status of a full-fledged science. Sociology is still a growing and

developing science. However; it is quite clear that sociology is gradually moving towards the

goal of a definite science.

Comte spoke of sociology is the ‘crowning edifice’ of the hierarchy of sciences. He did not mean

that it is in any sense superior to any other science; but only that is serves to bring all other

sciences into relationship with each other, in the overall intellectual history of man.