Modernization refers to rapid social, economic, political and cultural changes that were

taking place in 18th century Europe.

The Commercial and Scientific Revolution between the 14th and 18th centuries, along with
the cultural renaissance saw a revival in medicine, art, literature, astronomy, navigation,
chemistry, philosophy and so on.

Ideological modernity - The Enlightenment Period introduced a new way of thinking and
looking at reality, like:
1. Faith in human progress
2. Ability of science to offer solutions and improve human conditions
3. Rational thought and empiricism
4. A spirit of questioning
5. A belief that nature follows universal laws and can be studied scientifically

The ideas from these movements, percolated to the masses to give shape to the Industrial
Revolution and the French Revolution.

Political modernity - French Revolution brought with it:

1. Overthrow of ‘divinely ordained’ monarchy and estate system
2. Ideas of liberty, equality, fraternity
3. universal rule of law
4. Political instability and reign of terror

Economic modernity - Industrial Revolution led to:

1. Rapid urbanisation, changes in kinship structures and status of women
2. Mass production, mechanisation and world trade
3. Shift from agrarian to industrial economy
4. Change from feudalism to capitalistic society
5. Emergence of the middle class
6. Poverty, disease and exploitation
7. Religion being displaced by science as the omnipotent force

The central concepts of society, namely, religion, community, power, wealth, etc. were all
taking on new bearings and new implications. The contrast between present and past
seemed stark. In such a backdrop, sociology, with its belief in the power of science, emerged
as a discipline which aimed to provide a solution to this social crisis.

Peter Worsley indicates that modernity and sociology are engaged in dynamic and
dialectical relationships. Firstly sociology is a product of modernity and secondly sociology
also questions modernity.

John Harris iit can be said that Sociology emerged as a direct response to the social
problems posed by modernity.
COMMERCIAL REVOLUTION
The “Commercial Revolution” refers to a series of events which signalled a shift from the
largely subsistence and stagnant economy of mediaeval. Europe to a more dynamic and
worldwide system.
1. EXPANSION OF BANKING:Credit facilities were expanded,“cheque” was invented,
Paper money came to replace gold and silver coins
2. GROWTH OF COMPANIES: regulated companies, joint-stock companies and
chartered companies
3. RISE OF NEW CLASS- the middle class had become an influential group. It included
merchants, bankers, ship-owners and investors. However, their power, at this stage,
was mainly economic.
4. EUROPEANISATION OF WORLD- transplanting europe culture and manners to
others society
5. THEORY OF MERCANTILISM - which justifies preferential trade policies

Scientific revolution and Renaissance

Renaissance was a cultural movement which put man and humanism as the centre of all
activities and marked an era of description and criticism in the field of science.

1. Humanism: its emphasis on humanism, which focuses on human potential and

achievements. This shift in thinking encouraged the study of human society and
behavior, laying the groundwork for sociological inquiry.
2. Scientific Revolution: The Renaissance fostered a spirit of inquiry and led to the
Scientific Revolution. Which emphasised observation, experimentation, and
rational analysis. These methods were later adopted by sociologists to study and
understand social phenomena.
3. Political Thought: Machiavelli and later Enlightenment thinkerssuch as Hobbes,
Locke, explored ideas about social contracts, and nature of human society.This led to
foundation for later sociological theories about power, authority, and social order.
4. Exploration and Global Awareness: The Age of Exploration, during the
Renaissance, expanded European awareness of different cultures and societies.
fueling comparative studies and the development of anthropology and sociology.
5. Printing Press: invention during the Renaissance facilitated the spread of new ideas
and knowledge. It allowed for the dissemination of sociological works and the
establishment of academic communities.

The Scientific Revolution, took place from the 16th-18th century,marked a shift in thinking
and methodology, emphasising empirical observation, experimentation, and the use of
reason to understand the natural world

1. Empirical Methods and Observation - work of Galileo demonstrated the power of

empirical observation. This was later adopted by sociologists who used observation
and data collection to study social phenomena.
2. Scientific Method and Rational Inquiry- Newton’s formulation of the laws of motion
showed application of the scientific method—hypothesis, experimentation, and
 rational analysis.it emphasising the use of scientific methods to understand social
laws and dynamics.
3. Questioning Established Authorities and Belief- Kepler and Galileo questioned
long-held beliefs endorsed by the Church.it influenced early sociologists to critically
examine and challenge traditional social structures, norms, and institutions,
4. Interdisciplinary Approaches- The Scientific Revolution saw the integration of
different fields of study, such as mathematics, astronomy, physics.Sociology also
emerged as an interdisciplinary field that borrowed concepts and methods from other
sciences to analyze social phenomena.
5. Secularization and Humanism- This shift encouraged the study of human society
as a distinct realm of inquiry.
6. Circulation of blood was discovered by William Harvey. human organisms came to
be viewed in terms of interrelated parts and interconnected systems. This impacted
Emile Durkheim’s work which focuses on the functions of various parts of society and
their contributions to social stability
7. Charles Darwin published the Origin of Species in 1859 It was applied to the social
world by ‘evolutionary’ thinkers, notably Herbert Spencer. Not just organisms, but
societies were seen as constantly ‘evolving’ or developing from a lower to a higher
stage.

Enlightenment period

The Enlightenment period, also known as the Age of Reason, was an intellectual and
cultural movement in the 17th and 18th centuries that emphasised scientific enquiry,
humanism, individualism etc.

1. Rationalism: enlight* thinkers believe in the power of human reason to understand

and improve the world. This emphasis on critical thinking laid the groundwork for the
scientific study of society
2. Empiricism and observation: Collection of data through direct observation and
evidence - This led to the groundwork of Positivism as a method of sociological
research as used by thinkers like Durkheim
3. Social Contract Theory: Works of Locke, Hobbes, and Rousseau developed social
contract theories which helped establish relationships between individuals, state,
society. This enriched the Social inquiry.
4. Universalism and Equality: Enlightenment gave values like universalism, equality,
rights which led to sociological studies of stratification, hierarchy, inequality.
5. Social progress: They believed in the possibility of social progress and the
perfectibility of human society. Auguste Comte,influenced by this developed his
theory of social evolution,
6. The emergence of modernity: it marked the beginning of modernity,which led to the
foundation of the Industrial Revolution and French Revolution and thus arose a need
to understand these complex changes and development of sociology

Irving Zeitlin - ‘early sociology developed as a reaction to enlightenment’ it was a mix

of dialectics between enlightenment and counter-enlightenment represented by Louis de
Bonald and Joseph de Maistre.Enlightenment thinkers tended to emphasize the
individual, the conservative led to an emphasis on society. It was seen as having an
existence of its own with its own laws of development.

These ideas together created an upheaval and gave a new task to Social Scientists to
explain and give tools to understand the society which led to the emergence of a new Body
of knowledge called Sociology.

INTELLECTUAL FORCES

During the 18-19th century Europe intellectual forces disrupted the religious, agrarian, and
monarchical social order and gave birth to the modern era of science, industry and
democracy.

Intellectual forces which were antecedent to the emergence of modernity and ultimately
Sociology:
1. Renaissance -the central idea was focus on human rather than divine ; this gave
way to ideas of humanism and secularism
2. Scientific Revolution - empiricism, logic, rationality gave way to scientific evidence
based study of society by collecting data and observation. Thinkers such as Auguste
Comte applied these principles in the study of Society.
3. Enlightenment - Ideas given by Rousseau and Montesquieu about individual rights,
rationality led to modern values like free market economy, democracy, and nation
state.
4. French Revolution- Ideas of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity led to church-state
discord and social and political transformations.
5. Industrial Revolution- Mass production, urbanisation, bureaucracy resulted in
degradation of work, alienation, concentration of wealth, poverty. Thinkers like Karl
Marx undertook the study of issues of capitalism.
6. The Philosophy of history- assumes society must have progressed through a
series of steps from simple to complex which was used by Herbert spencer, Karl
Marx in their study.
7. Biological Theories of Evolution- considered society as an organism and
formulated social evolution as shown by Herbert Spencer, Durkheim.
8. Surveys of Social Condition- methods of natural sciences were extended to study
human affairs. This emphasised that issues like poverty, unemployment were social
problems rather than natural.
9. Ideas of counter enlightenment- Society most important and should be the unit of
analysis inspired conservatives and Structural functionalists.

The intellectual forces led to modernity. Eventually the issues with modernity like anarchy,
social disorder high divorce rate, loss of faith and religion, were exposed by
counter-enlightenment. To study modernity and these issues Sociology emerged.

Industrial Revolution

The Industrial Revolution led to a series of inventions in tools and techniques that gave rise
to the factory system of production that led to a change in economy from feudal to capitalist
system of production.
 1. Urbanisation- industrial revolution led to massive migration from rural areas to
rapidly growing cities. Sociologists studied the social problems associated with
urbanisation, such as overcrowding, inadequate housing, and the breakdown of
traditional social structures
2. Changes in Social Structure- it created new social classes,like bourgeoisie and the
proletariat Marx’s analysis of class struggle and economic systems was directly
influenced by these changes
3. Labor Conditions and Worker Exploitation- harsh working conditions, long hours,
and low wages. Early sociologists, such as Harriet Martineau, documented and
critiqued the conditions faced by workers.
4. Technological and Economic Changes- advancements, such as the steam engine
and mechanised production, transformed industries and economic practices. Max
Weber’s work on rationalisation and bureaucracy examined how industrialization and
technological progress influenced organisational structures and economic behavior
5. Political and Social Reforms- The social problems resulting from industrialization
led to political and social reforms aimed at improving labour conditions, public health,
and social welfare.Sociologists They analyzed the effectiveness of policies and their
impact on social well-being and inequality.
6. Social Dislocation and Disintegration- rapid caused social dislocation, including
the breakdown of traditional community bonds and family structures.Émile Durkheim
work on the division of labour and social solidarity explored how societies could
maintain stability amidst rapid social change.

French revolution

The French Revolution marked a turning point in the history of human struggle.. It put an end
to the age of feudalism and ushered in a new order of society

1. Transformation of Social Structures: overthrow of the monarchy, disruption of

feudal system and the power of the aristocracy. These contributed to the emergence
of sociology to study of social structures and transformation
2. Emphasis on Reason and Enlightenment Ideas- Rousseau, Voltaire, and
Montesquieu,emphasised reason, individual rights, and scientific thinking. These
ideas laid the groundwork for a scientific approach to studying society,
3. Interest in Social Order and Change- chaos and upheaval prompted thinkers to
explore the causes of social instability and the means to achieve social order.
Auguste Comte, law of three stages were directly inspired by the desire to
understand the societal changes triggered by the Revolution
4. Political and Social Ideals: ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity. inspired
sociologists to study concepts such as social justice, individual rights, and
democracy. For ex Alexis de Tocqueville work "Democracy in America."

Development in america

Sociology emerged in Europe in the 19th century, and its development continued robustly in
America, where it also embraced a reformist agenda. In the United States, sociologists
focused on addressing the unique social issues and challenges of American society,
including urbanisation, industrialization, immigration, and racial inequality. Here’s how
sociology flourished with a reformist agenda in America:

Emergence and Development of Sociology in America

1. Establishment - University of Chicago first department of sociology which became

a leading centre later Columbia University became another key institution
2. Urban Sociology - Robert E. Park and Ernest W. Burgess focus on issues like
crime, poverty, Jane Addams founded Hull House in Chicago to address urban
poverty pioneering applied sociology.
3. Race and Ethnic Relations- W.E.B. Du Bois highlighted the racism and social
barriers faced by African Americans, advocating for civil rights. He introduced the
concept of double consciousness, as the internal conflict experienced by
subordinated or marginalised groups in an oppressive society.
4. Social Stratification and Inequality- C. Wright Mills analyzed the power structures
and inequalities in His work "The Power Elite" and advocated for greater democratic
accountability.
5. Women’s Rights and Gender Equality - Harriet Martineau advocated for gender
equality and social reform, her work laid the foundation for later feminist sociologists
in America.

Characteristics of Early Sociology:

T.B. Bottomore:
1. Encyclopedic
2. Influence of philosophy of history and biological theories of evolution
3. Conceived to be a positive science
4. Had ideological as well as scientific character
5. Dealt with subjects inspired by conditions of labour, transformation of property,
technology and factory, industrial
1.B. Scope of the subject and comparison with other social sciences

Sociology is a social science that studies human societies, their interactions, and the
processes that preserve and change them by examining the dynamics of different parts of
societies

The scope of sociology is extremely wide. It can focus on interactions between individuals
and at the same time, on larger issues like unemployment, caste conflicts,etc. Hence, the
discipline is defined by, not just what it studies, but also how it studies it. Sociology studies
role (micro), structure (meso) and society (macro).

V.F. Calberton holds, “ sociology is so elastic a science, it is difficult to determine just where
its boundaries begin and end, thus The scope of sociological study is extremely wide.

Formal or specialist schools

1. Formal school argued in favour of giving sociology a definite subject matter to make it
a distinct discipline.
 2. George Simmel - Sociology is a pure and an independent science and it should
study only the ‘forms’ of social relationships but not their contents .It should have a
subjective understanding of objective reality.
3. Sociology should disentangle the forms of social relationships and study them in
abstraction.
4. Vierkandt maintained that sociology should be concerned with ultimate forms of
mental or psychic relationship which knit the people together in a society.
5. Max Weber- According to him the aim of sociology is to interpret or understand social
behaviour. But human interactions that are not social are excluded.
Critique:
1. According to Ginsberg, The conception of pure sociology is not practical as no
social science can be studied in isolation from other social sciences.
2. narrowed the scope of sociology by restricting the field of sociology to a mere study
of abstract forms.

Synthetic school
1. The synthetic school sees sociology as a synthesis of the social sciences Durkheim,
Hobhouse and Sorokin, subscribing to this point of view.
2. According to this opinion, sociology is the science of sciences and the scope of
sociology is encyclopaedic and synoptic.
3. Durkheim - sociology has three principal divisions:
● Social morphology concerned with analysis of size and quality of population
which affects the quality of social relationships and social groups,
● Social physiology genesis and nature of various social institutions
● General sociology aims to formulate general social laws
4. Hobhouse - the whole social life of man is the sphere of sociology. Its relationship
with other social sciences is of mutual exchange and stimulation.
5. SOROKIN - general sociology (same institutions found all over the world) and
specific sociology (caste in India, race in USA).

Later MARXIST SCHOOL Added to the scope by bringing in a conflict

perspective,FEMINIST SCHOOL introduced radical alternatives and offered distinctive
gender-based explanations.POST STRUCTURALISM like Jacques Derrida and Michel
Foucault. further enhanced the scope of Sociology and new issues like health, ageing,
demographic issues,

However, the scope of sociology cannot be boxed up in rigid boundaries and there is often
overlap and interdisciplinary work between these social sciences. As Sprott has rightly
quoted, ‘Delimiting scope of sociology is like confining a slippery material into pigeon holes.

1. Comparison to other social sciences

Sociology is a science of society. As a social science it attempts to study social life as a

whole. But for the understanding of social life as a whole, sociology requires the help of
other social sciences which study different other aspects of society.

Sociology and economics

1. Economics is the study of production and distribution of goods and services. The
sociological approach looks at economic behaviour in a broader context of social
norms, values
2. Economics is concrete science while socio is abstract ,Economy is more
systematised and more scientific. give laws which can predict the economic
phenomenon with fair accuracy,While sociological laws are less universal in nature,
3. Sociology Utilises both qualitative and quantitative methods while Economics
Focuses heavily on quantitative methods,
4. Durkheim established division of labour as a social fact different from Adam
Smith's explanation of division of labour he tried to give social explanations priority
over economic explanation
5. problem like poverty and unemployment need sociological understanding while topic
like utsa patnaik economics of dowry and economics of child labour need help
of economist
6. Pierre Bourdieu “A true economic science would look at all the costs of the
economy not only at the costs that corporations are concerned with, but also at
crimes, suicides, and so on
7. attempts have been made to link the two disciplines Marxists economic behaviour of
man is viewed as a key to understanding social behaviour of man.
8. Barbara Cotton The Social Foundations of Wage Policy ,Goldthorpe and Veblen
have attempted synthesis of social and economic factors
9. Other emerging concept such as gender budgeting and feminist economics are also
coming making it interdisciplinarity
10. Hence, both sociological and economics studies collaboration is increasing and will
be helpful as .Economics without sociology is a mechanistic pursuit, with sociological
insight, it becomes a humanistic endeavour.

Psychology and Sociology

1. Psychology is often defined as the science of behavior. It involves itself primarily with
the individual while Sociology attempts to understand behavior as it is organized in
society and the way personality is shaped by different aspects of society.
2. Sociology examines larger social systems and institutions, and their influence on
behavior,While psychology is concerned with understanding individual mental
functions, emotional responses,
3. Sociology Utilises both qualitative and quantitative methods while psychology Uses
controlled experimental methods, longitudinal studies, case studies, and
psychometric assessments to study mental processes and behavior.
4. According to Bottomore, in almost every field of enquiry it can be shown that
psychology and sociology continue for the most part and are two separate universes
of study.
5. js Mill established primacy of psychology and believed that all laws are derived
from the laws of mind. Similarly Sigmund Freud views sociology as merely an
extension of social psychology.
6. Durkheim on the other hand, made a radical distinction in his study of suicide he
ignored psychologicall disposition while taking into social phenomenon.
7. But there is growing interdisciplinarity, Ginsberg argues , “many sociological
generalisations can be more firmly established by being related to general
 psychological laws. Max Weber -sociological explanations can be enriched if an
attempt is made to understand social behavior in terms of underlying meanings
8. work of thinkers like George Herbert Mead and Erving Goffman bridges these
fields, investigating how individual self-concept and behavior are shaped by societal
interactions
9. Gerth and Mill mention that study of social psychology is an interplay between
individual character and social structure and the concept of role as a bridge between
the two sciences.
10. Juvenile delinquency, drug abuse, domestic violence , suicide are areas study by
both.

Sociology and Political science

1. Sociology was born in the political upheaval of French Revolution and it would not be
wrong to call political science as ‘sociology from top’
2. Political science was focused primarily on two elements: political theory and
government administration.Sociology is devoted to the study of all aspects of society
and interrelationships between institutions including government,
3. The Arab spring, Tiananmen Square incidents were all manifestations of society
taking political systems head on. Hence, such topics became areas of both political
science and sociology.
4. Though not studied exclusively under the scope of sociology, political systems
influence society every minute. Hence, a discipline called political sociologies was
born as a meeting ground for two.
5. Weber developed sociological theories of power and authority in his study on
bureaucracy. Pareto, Mosca, Michels, and later CW Mills utilised sociology and
political science for the ‘elite theory’.
6. And at the world stage Wallerstein’s ‘Dependency theory’ also derived help from
both the streams.
7. behavioural approach to political phenomena by the University of Chicago,Rajni
kothari politicisation of caste further bring both disciplines together
8. Rise of welfare state led sociological slant to political activity as sociology provides
data and basis for these laws and policies
9. Further Political science provides laws which affect the welfare of masses and affect
social institutions such as China's one child policy and India population policy.

As the modern state is increasingly getting involved in providing welfare amenities,

sociological slant to political activity and political thinking is gaining more and more
acceptance. Further there is Need of interdisciplinary to study rising communal conflict,
regional movement which has both sociological and political basis
Philosophy and sociology

1. Modern philosophy and sociology came into existence during one time period to
explain the social crisis of Europe in the 19th century.
2. Philosophy examines fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, values
and deals with abstract concepts while sociology studies social behavior, institutions,
and looks at how norms, values, influence individual and group behavior.
3. Philosophy addresses normative questions about what ought to be. While sociology
addresses empirical questions about how societies function and how social factors
influence behavior.
4. Philosophy uses deductive reasoning and normative analysis to explore theoretical
questions.sociology employs both qualitative methods(ethnography,) and quantitative
methods(surveys) to study social phenomena.
5. But sociology also began its journey with philosophical ambitions of developing grand
theories and seeking ultimate ends.
6. Sociology develops theories which are instrumental for collective mobilisation and
social transformation, and thus become an ideology, a philosophy. Example:,
Feminism There is a close relationship between sociology and moral & social
philosophy. The subject-matter of sociology is human social behavior as guided by
values. Moral and social philosophy studies values and sociologists study values as
facts.
7. Vierkandt , sociology is productive only when it has a philosophical basis.early
Marxism developed to great extent due to the fact the Marxism was not only a
sociological theory but also philosophical base which was helpful for social research
8. Durkheim thought that Socio can contribute to renewal of philosophical
questions, making it closer to Epistemology. ie a knowledge giving and
furthering experience
9. Further Social philosophy is the meeting point and is concerned with studying
concepts of like individualis, alienation they both consist of values and facts.

Anthropology and sociology

1. Sociology is deemed to be the study of modern, complex societies while social

anthropology was deemed to be the study of simple societies.
2. Sociology study from top-down from society to individual while anthro goes for
bottom up approach.
3. Anthro originated from western scholars' interest in primitive communities in non
western countries while sociology emerged to answer questions of modernity.
4. But Today the distinction between a simple society and a complex one is not very
clear. India itself is a mix of tradition and modernity , Hence the spheres of
anthropology and sociology are coming closer.A.L.Kroeber consider anthropology
and sociology as twin sisters
5. Both sociology and anthropology study the same subject matter (man),time and
cultural elements are the only aspect that separate them. Thus it's no surprise that a
student of anthro ( AR radcliffe brown ) was made head of sociology department by
delhi university.
 6. Anthropologists use structural-functionalist approach, field work, participant
observation as techniques of data collection, and these are now adopted by
sociologists too. Sociology has borrowed concepts like cultural lag from cultural
anthropology and the works of EB Tylor, while Marx idea of primitive communism
has inspired anthropologist
7. Malinowski studied religion using anthropological methods. Durkheim did an
ethnography study of Arunta tribes. MS Srinivas, Andre Beteille and SC Dube used
field studies to study Indian villages.William Whyte used participant observers for
study of modern industrial society.

The rise of new nation states show the features of both modern industrial societies as well
as traditional small-scale societies.studies of these dualistic societies require both
sociological and socio-anthropological approaches. Sociology can study tribes displaced by
industrialization, while anthropology can study slum dwellers. Thus, a closer cooperation
between the two is the need of the hour.

History and sociology

1. Historians almost as a rule study the past, sociologists are more interested in the
contemporary or recent past.
2. Historians are content to delineate the actual events, to establish how things actually
happened, while in sociology the focus was to seek to establish causal relationships
3. History studies concrete details while the sociologists are more likely to abstract from
concrete reality, categorise and generalize.
4. According to Radcliff Brown “sociology is nomothetic, while history is idiographic”.
Sociologists produce generalizations while historians describe unique events. This
distinction holds true for traditional narrative history, but is only partly true for
modern historiography.
5. history and sociology have close relationships -G E Howard ‘history is past
sociology,sociology is present history.’
6. Modern historians' works are abound in generalizations while sometimes sociologists
have concerned themselves with the study of unique events.ex Weber’s thesis “The
Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”. “The Polish Peasant” by Thomas and
Zelencki consist of mere description of a peasant family, and therefore, is idiographic
7. works like Marx historical materialism which is pivoted around historical epochs.
Weber’s ‘Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism’ and Pitrim Sorokin’s ‘Social
and Cultural Dynamics’, the line for demarcation between history and sociology is
becoming increasingly blurred.
1.C. Sociology and Common sense

common sense as a routine knowledge that people have of their everyday world and
activities. based on observations and experiences, or on ignorance,,Sociology understand
social phenomenon using empiricism, objectivity and verificationism, and build cause effect
relationships

Divergence between sociology and common sense

1. Common sense is unreflective and does not question its own origins, while as berger
puts it ‘ the very wisdom of sociology is that things are not what they seem’.
2. Common sense is based on ‘individualistic’ explanations and gives no importance to
the wider social forces that act on an individual. Example: Naturalistic explanation of
poverty-people are poor because they are afraid of work,while sociological
explanation- poverty is cause by structural inequality
3. Common sense takes cues from what appears at the surface,sociology on the other
hand looks for inter-connections and root causes. Ex Durkhiem - suicide study
4. Sociology uses reason and logic,common sense uses conjecture and stereotypical
beliefs..while sociology challenges these stereotypes. For example- cs view about
women ritual role was challenged by Margaret mead in his ‘sex and temperament in
three primitive societies
5. Common sense is based on assumptions while sociology is based on evidence.
6. Sociological knowledge is objective and common sense is intuitive and highly value
laden and is localised which changes with respect to society .(Andre Beteille)
7. Sociological knowledge tends to change the society with its new theories and subject
matter whereas common sense tends towards status quoism.

Convergence between sociology and common sense

1. Concepts in sociology are framed by taking into consideration the commonsensical

knowledge it helps in hypothesis building
2. Common sense is required in the social research when people do not cooperate as
proposed by M N Srinivas
3. Common sense provides raw data for sociological investigations as said by Hegel-
all philosophy gradually develops from ordinary day to day consciousness and daily
 life experiences ex Weber observed that Protestant societies seemed to develop
capitalist economies more rapidly than others, leading him to investigate the role of
religious beliefs in economic behavior
4. Common sense also helps sociology by challenging its conclusions thereby enriching
the discipline.
5. Common sense establishes connection of the researcher with research and society
-Goffman observed that people engage in impression management in everyday life,
leading him to investigate how individuals present themselves and navigate social
interactions
6. According to Anthony Giddens, sometimes sociological knowledge also becomes a
part of common sense knowledge. For example– sociological research into marital
breakdown has led people to believe that marriage is a risky proposition.
7. Ronald Fletcher calls common sense knowledge as science in embryos.as Every
scientific query starts from common sense.
8. Enhances the knowledge and curiosity to dig deeper into the surface knowledge held
by the common sense. For example - Durkheim study shows multivariate analysis of
suicide and shows more factors behind suicide rather than individualistic behaviour.

Non positivist schools relied less on objectivity and hence took sociology close to common
sense.
Positivists like Durkheim out rightly rejected the role of common sense in sociological
explanation; he called it deceptive,unrealistic and speculative. According to him ‘common
sense perceptions are prejudices which mar the scientific study of the social world.

While post-modernists claim that sociology is no superior to common sense as there is no

such thing as complete gospel and sociological principles are nothing more than common
sense.

In Gramsci's view, the bourgeoisie develops a hegemonic culture and propagates its own
values and norms so that they become the "common sense" values of all, and thus maintain
the status quo.

So the relationship between the two is dynamic and even mutually enforcing at times.
However,Sociology has a body of concepts, methods and data, no matter how loosely
coordinated. This cannot be substituted b

2. Sociology as science

2.A. Science,scientific method and critique

What is science?

Science is a systemically acquired, organized body of certified and changing knowledge

which is based upon observable facts and methods used to acquire this knowledge.
Science is characterised by:
 1. Empiricism observable, verifiable, quantifiable facts
2. Objectivity and value neutrality
3. Reliability, validity, predictability and generalizations
4. Self-corrective open to reflection and takes spatial and temporal variations into
consideration
5. Theoretical orientation and cumulativeness

Tryst of sociology with science started with the origin of discipline itself .Comte called new
discipline social physics,similarly Herbert Spencer ‘organismic analogy’ Durkheim ‘social
facts’ and Weber ‘ideal types’ were attempts to develop sociology on the basis of natural
sciences.

What is the scientific method ?

Theodorson and Theodorson define scientific method as building of a body of knowledge

through observation, experimentation, generalization and verification.

The critical characteristic of the scientific method lies in the procedure involved in proposing
hypotheses, and designing experimental studies and classification, measurement, analysis
and interpretation of phenomenon . to arrive at universally accepted facts.

steps of scientific research as listed by Horton and Hunt are:

1. Identification of problem of research, driven by scientific consideration
2. Literature review
3. Construction of hypothesis - a tentative generalization, the validity of which is not yet
tested.
4. Plan the research design
5. Collection of data by using scientific tools and techniques
6. Check reliability, validity and authenticity of data
7. Generation of theory - draw conclusion
8. Replicate the study

Is sociology a science ?

Sociology is considered science as it has inter-subjective reliability. Comte called

sociology the last of the sciences to be discovered.while Durkheim considered social fact as
subject matter of sociology which should be studied using principles of natural science by
using positive science methods.

1) Sociology adopts a scientific method: ED's study of suicide use Statistical data and
through Multivariate analysis he established Correlation

2) Sociology makes accurate observation and measurements: By using bogardus scale

, socio-metric scale, scales of measurement sociology
(3) Objectivity is possible in Sociology:- According to weber ‘objectivity is possible
through methods like-verstehen and ideal types.

(4) Sociology describes cause-effect relationship: weber mention sociology aim to

interpretivist understanding of social action to build causal explanation of its cause and effect
ex - PESC

(5) Sociology makes generalizations: through statistics correlation can be developed to

establish genralization for ex durkhiem suicide rise during economic boom and bust

Critique:

1. Scientific method is based on induction and does not promote refutability. Before
research is initiated, the result is already known, Karl Popper suggests falsification
as a counter to this.
2. Adorno states that science is suffocating and kills creativity.
3. Paul Feyerabend calls scientific method as “ epistemological anarchism'' He sees
scientific method as one method of looking at truth and stated that there are many
more manners of looking at the truth.
4. Phenomenologists like Peter Berger, Thomas Luckmann and Alfred Schutz
-subject matter of natural sciences and sociology differ as human have
consciousness while material dont
5. Carl Jung states that subjective things like happiness, beauty, pleasure, etc. cannot
be measured ,so methodology should be discipline specific.
6. Experimentation has both practical and ethical limitations in sociology.
7. Thomas Kuhn states that even with non-scientific methods, many disciplines, like
history and philosophy have grown and matured.

However, Karl Popper argued that - science is not a body of knowledge ,but a method of
approaching and sociology also has key features of science such as perspective,method of
study,subject matter,etc.

Robert Bierstedt in his book The Social Order mentioned characteristics of the nature of
sociology Sociology is an abstract and not a concrete one.

Robert merton says that sociology should give emphasis on spirit of science than scientific
method
● communalism-Scientific community follows a spirit of unity and integration by sharing
of knowledge
● Universalism- outcomes of scientific research are not the private property of the
researcher.
● Disinterestedness in politics, wealth etc.and researchers are committed to science
● Scepticism- they question every

2.C. Positivism and its critique

Positivism is an approach of studying sociology which aims at applying principles similar to
those in natural sciences.

Auguste Comte was the founder of this approach iHe maintained that the application of the
methods and assumptions of the natural sciences will lead to ‘positive science of society’
and evolution of invariable universal law of society.

● Saint Simon: wrote Positive Philosophy to enunciate the principles of new

discipline in society.
● Comte: 'The Course in Positive Philosophy'. Every society is driven by continuity
(law of statics) and change (law of dynamics).
● He also gave a hierarchy of science based on applicability of scientific methods.
● Said Socio is the last and the most sophisticated of all sciences as it deals with all
aspects of humanity.
● He gave 4 methods - Observation, Experimentation, Historical and Comparative.
● Marx: Methodological positivist. In his theory on stages of human history, he
collected data on each stage to draw conclusions. He can be interpretted as a part
positivist though not consciously one.
● Durkheim: Pure Positivist. Subject matter of Socio is social facts - need to be
studied systematically. For ex, studied Suicide through data to prove counter-intuitive
conclusions.

Main features of Positivism

1. emphasis on behaviour that can be directly observed
2. Focus on understanding external realities and reject internal aspects like meanings
and motives.
3. primacy to discovery of cause and effect.
4. Use of scientific methods
5. Focus on empiricism and rejected commonsensical speculations.
6. formulation of universal theories and laws
7. predictability of social events

Positivist method:
1. Empiricism and observation
2. Inductivism
3. Reductional analysis
4. Cause and effect relationship

Positivism helps in sociological theory building and generalization. Through observation,

a reliable body of data could be collected, the methods used could be standardized, and
objectivity and value neutrality could be achieved.

Critiques
1. Weber it is Important to interpret subjective states of mind. Verstehen and Ideal
Types should be used to supplement positivism.
2. Phenomenologists like Peter Berger and Alfred Schutz - Social life is made,
dismantled and remade by people who are a part of it. Nothing is fixed and statistics
are simply the product of opinions of those who produce them.
 3. Ethnomethodologists like Harold Garfinkel say that reality should be studied from
from people’s perspective not from researcher perspectives using documentary
method
4. Karl Popper - positivism kills the critical spirit of science as it presumes hypotheses
to be true and accordingly analyses data.
5. Post modernists like Derrida and Foucault claim that reality can be studied in
many ways and hence reject the metanarratives and grand theories that Positivism
aims to build.
6. Interactionists like Mead and Blumer see actions and interactions as the driving
force behind social actions.
7. Horkheimer criticised Positivism as a conservative philosophy that focuses on the
status quo. It engages in objective anarchism.
8. Habermas, positivism loses sight of actors reducing them to passive entities
determined by natural forces.
However one big achievement of positivists was that they freed social sciences from
clutches of religion and speculative philosophies and laid a solid foundation of a systematic
investigation in society.

Post-positivism assumes that scientists are never objective and are biased due to their
cultural beliefs,and are considered as critical realists, they do not rely on a single method
of scientific inquiry and use triangulation.

2.D. Fact , Value and Objectivity

Fact
1. Facts are defined as empirically verifiable observations. They are thought to be
definite, certain, without question, and their meaning to be self-evident.
2. It has its own independent existence.
3. Positivists conceptualised the new discipline of sociology as lying on the bedrock of
facts and empirical knowledge.
 4. According to durkheim social facts are the subject matter of sociology,to make
sociology a science attention should be paid only on factual analysis of and not on
subjective interpretations and individual perceptions.

Values
1. Values are considered to be subjective, emotional feelings that come from race,
caste or culture and the socialisation process is their source. It does not consider
“what is” but “what ought to be”
2. Comte and Durkhiem believed scientific study of social facts in a value neutral way
is possible
3. Max Weber explains that sociologists while carrying out social research must confine
to value relevance. Thus the values can operate at three levels:
● At the level of philological interpretation.
● At the level of ethical interpretation in assigning value to an object of enquiry.
● At the level of rational interpretation in which the sociologists seek the
meaningful relationship
4. According to him, the end purpose and selection of research may be affected by the
values, but once it is decided, the process of research itself should not be
contaminated by the values
5. He should exclude ideological or non -scientific assumptions and Value judgement
should be restricted to areas of technical competence further he should make his
own values open and clear .
6. Merton believes that the very choice of topic is influenced by personal preferences
and ideological biases,Marx lived among the oppressed, thus he wrote Das Kapital
and Weber was son of a bureaucrat and his mother a Calvinist
7. Michael Polanyi speaks about the value laden nature of peer evaluation and how
censorship is imposed if conclusion appears absurd in the light of current scientific
knowledge
8. According to Gunnar Myrdal total value neutrality is impossible. We need viewpoints
in order to carry out social research as it form the basis of a hypothesis
9. Howard Becker even argued that depriving social sciences of values will akin to
taking every soul away from the disciplines.
Mannheim states, value free research is a desirable goal towards which social scientists
can strive without any necessary expectations of actually attaining it.

Facts and Value

1. Positivists see Fact and Value as absolutely separable entities and value should be
completely excluded from sociological inquiry as it distorts reality and produces a
biased result. If a conclusion is based on fact, it is completely true, else it is
completely false.
2. Alvin gouldner wrote that fact and value cannot be separated, there can be
fact-value distinction but not fact-value dichotomy; he also says value neutrality is an
elusive goal in sociology’ as investigators have to deal with multi-layered truths.
3. Habermas since humans study humans, separation of facts value is not possible.
4. Critical theorists argue that values in society are also dominant values
hence,sociologists cannot concern themselves with facts alone and sociology itself
has committed to specific value orientations.
 5. Howard Becker in his ‘whose side we are on’ even argued that depriving social
sciences of values will akin to taking very soul away from the disciplines.
6. According to Mills and Wordsworth Some standpoint or value judgement is
necessary for solving social problems
7. As a middle path it is generally agreed that rather than aiming for complete value
freedom,sociologists should avoid a strong interest in the outcome of research,so
that necessary influence of values may be avoided.
8. By this logic it is possible to retain objectivity and rationality in sociological research
without completely doing away with values.

Objectivity
1. Robert Bierstedt objectivity means that conclusions arrived at as a result of inquiry
are independent of the race,colour,creed,nationality and personal disposition of the
investigator.
2. The need of objectivity in sociological research has been emphasised by all
important sociologists. Durkheim in the Rules of the Sociological Method stated
that social facts must be treated as things and all preconceived notions about social
facts must be abandoned. Even Max Weber emphasised the need of objectivity
when he said that sociology must be value free. According to Radcliff Brown the
social scientist must abandon or transcend his ethnocentric and egocentric biases
while carrying out research.
3. Gunnar Myrdal states that total objectivity is an illusion as subjectivity creeps in at
various stages in the course of sociological research.
4. Merton believes that the very choice of topic is influenced by personal preferences
and ideological biases of the researcher.
5. Prof. SCHWAB - analyzed 4000 scientific papers found that the choice made by
scientists in pursuing their research was based on their personal preferences
6. Ex -study of Tepostalan village in Mexico. Robert Redfield studied it with a
functionalist perspective and concluded there exists total harmony while Oscar
Lewis studied from Marxist perspective and found that the society was conflict
ridden.
7. Subjectivity can also creep in at the time of formulation of hypotheses as
hypotheses are deduced from the existing body of theory.
8. Further ,No technique of data collection is perfect. Each technique may lead to
subjectivity in one way or the other. In case of participant observation the observer
may acquire nativisation ,While in non-participant observation the sociologist belongs
to a different group thus he is likely to impose his values and prejudices. Pauline V
Young says that interviewing as a technique of data collection is often subjective as it
depends on the rapport between the researcher and the subjects.
9. it can also affect the field limitations as reported by Andre Beteille study of Sripuram
village in Tanjore where the Brahmins did not allow him to visit the untouchable
locality and ask their point of view

Anthony Giddens says that structure, which is largely seen as objective, and social action,
which is seen as value-laden, are two sides of the same coin and cannot co-exist
independently.
Myrdal argues that sociology at best could aspire for the goal of value-neutrality on the
part of the researcher. This could be attained by either of the following ways
1. Comte suggested positivism and restricting the study to the macro
2. Durkheim preferred inductive methodology and statistical techniques as stated in
Rules of Sociological Method
3. Weber claims Verstehen and Ideal Types can be used to ensure objectivity
4. Training the researcher
5. Multi-disciplinary peer review
6. Testing to improve reliability and validity
7. Refraining from advocating preference for any view point
8. Methodological pluralism
9. Stating one biasness and field limitation in monograph
10. double-blind research, enlarging sample and expanding research in both
temporal and spatial dimensions.

2.B. Major theoretical strands of research methodology

Functionalism
1. Functional analysis is rooted in the origins of sociology in writing of Auguste
Comte and Herbert Spencer they viewed society as a whole unit, made up
of interrelated parts which function harmoniously to maintain stability and
coherence
2. Functionalism encapsulates the notion of "social structure, where behavior
of the society is structured and Relationships between the members are
organized in terms of the rules and thus are patterned and recurrent.
3. These relationships are guided by generalized values which provide for
integration.
4. There is also the idea of "functional prerequisites." that are essential
conditions deemed necessary for the survival and well-being of a society. Ex
Durkheim's exploration of social integration and solidarity in "The Division of
Labor in Society.
5. it was applied in different contexts by different thinkers. Malinowski used it to
study religion, Murdock used it to evaluate universality of family, Davis and
Moore used it to study stratification in society,
6. a variant of functionalism which was called Structural Functionalism, led by
Parsons and Merton emerged later
7. Robert Merton introduced neo-functionalism expanding the functionalist
framework through concept of "manifest and latent functions"

1. look at the beneficial aspects of social relations- conservative and status quoist
2. Functionalists are also accused of offering teleological explanations
 3. The conflict theorists say that all societies are characterised by some degree of
constraint, disagreement, uncertainty, control dysfunctional and coercions that can’t
be ignored
4. C. Wright Mills functionalism tends to overlook power dynamics and structural
inequalities in society. He urges sociologists to consider the broader historical and
social context beyond the functional prerequisites

Conflict perspectives
1. The conflict perspective views society as composed of diverse groups having
differential access to wealth, power, and prestige and with conflicting values
and interests.
2. They emphasises the role of coercion and power in society and the ability of
some to influence and control others
3. Social order is maintained not by consensus but by domination, with power in
the hands of those with the greatest political, economic, and social resources.
4. Conflict theory gives great attention to class, race, gender, in society because
these are seen as the grounds of the most pertinent and enduring struggles in
society.
5. from the conflict perspective, power struggles between conflicting groups are
the source of social change.
6. Marx was the first major social thinker who gave this perspective through his
dialectical materialistic conception of history. He saw societies as divided into
two classes like a dominant upper class in form of the haves and a
subjugated class in form of the have nots.
7. Frankfurt School of Germany was another major carrier it introduced an
element of culture into structural analysis. Theodor Adorno, Max
Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse and more recently Jurgen Habermas
belonged to this school, which is also known as Critical School or neo-Marxist
school.
8. German scholar Ralf Dahrendorf combined Marxist ideas with Weberian
perspective and he related conflict in society to differences in interests of
individuals and groups and also added dimension of power and authority.
9. Ivan Illich, Althuser applied Marxist ideas in the field of education and
culture. Gramsci used Marxist thoughts to give the concept of hegemony in
the field of polity. Pierre Bourdieu developed his model of four fold capitals
in modern societies. Wallerstein used this perspective to study the effect of
globalisation and unequal trade
10. C. Wright Mills and the “Power Elite” promoted the conflict perspective for
analysing the distribution of power and authority in the United States. In The
Power Elite (1956),
Critique
1. They are criticised for being reductionist in nature.
2. Karl Popper says that they are economic reductionism for ignoring ideas.
3. Focussed on the macro aspect ignoring the micro reality.

2.E. Non-positivist methodologies

Positivists put forth an over-socialised conception of man, Non-Positivists, on the other
hand, considered man as an independent thinking being who can also influence society and
tried to gauge what goes inside the mind of a man.

Even before the establishment of Sociology as a formal discipline, such ideas were
prevalent,Dilthey and Rickert highlighted that social world is based upon uniqueness of
human society in terms of meaning, symbols and motives

while George Hegel argued. “Social phenomena are results of the ideas which are
generated in the minds of individuals and these ideas are responsible for history”.

This tradition was carried on and led to emergence of variety thought collectively known as
Non-Positivist methodology

Weber was one of the pioneers of the Non-Positivist approach and laid the foundation of
Interpretivist methodology and Mead pioneered Symbolic Interactionism. Various
Non-Positivist methods which emerged later include Phenomenology by Alfred Schutz and
Ethnomethodology by Harold Garfinkel

Various elements that run common to these methodologies are-

1. Non-Positivists study the internal processes represented through motives,

aspirations and the individual's interpretation of social reality
2. Non-Positivists emphasised upon using qualitative methods and not the Scientific
Methods similar to the ones used in natural sciences.
3. Non-Positivists suggested the understanding and describing of social reality and not
prediction of events. They refrained from formulation of generalized universal
theories.
4. Non-Positivists also highlighted impossibility of total objectivity and hence, were
accommodative of subjectivity in research.
5. The non-positivist believes that reality is multi-layered and complex and a single
phenomenon is having multiple interpretations.

Interpretive methods

It is an umbrella term for various streams like Phenomenology, Ethnomethodology, Symbolic

Interactionism and so on. This approach was used for the first time by Max Weber in his
book Methodology of the Social Sciences.According to this approach, the task of
Sociology is to interpret the meanings attached by individuals to their actions and thereby
arrive at its cause and effect.

1. an individual has a voluntary will and his thoughts cannot be understood simply in
terms of external influence.thus it attempts to understand societies through the
internal perspectives of participants
2. Interpretive sociology sees reality as being constructed by people, unlike positivist
sociology which sees an objective reality “out there”.
3. Methods used by Weber included Verstehen, Ideal Type and comparative methods.
It uses quantitative methodologies such, participatory research within the daily lives of the
participant. Interpretive sociologists use methods such as focus groups, in-depth interviews,
and ethnographic observation.

The approach of Weber later influenced the emergence of purely Non-Positivist approaches
like Phenomenology and Ethnomethodology. Georg Simmel, a German sociologist, was
another early doyen of this approach. In America, Chicago School, led by Louis Firth,
Robert Park, Mead, etc. took his tradition forward.

Phenomenology
1. distinctively European branch of Sociology which emerged as an alternative to
Positivism
2. According to Gabriella Farina, “Phenomenology is neither a doctrine, nor a
philosophy but merely a style of thought by which the investigator can have different
experiences and result each time”.
3. It argued that subject matter of natural sciences and social sciences are
different-man has consciousness, material things don’t Hence, methods of sciences
cannot be applied in socio
4. Meanings don't have their own independent existence. Instead, they are constructed
and reconstructed by the actors in the course of their social interaction and there is
no objective reality which lies beyond the meaning of the individual.
5. Its emphasis is on the internal workings of the human mind and the way humans
classify and make sense of the world around them.
6. Efforts to develop it can be traced to the publication of Alfred Schutz's The
Phenomenology of the Social World in 1932
7. Schutz focused upon the dialectical relationship between the way people construct
social reality and the stubborn external social they inherit from those who preceded
them. He was particularly interested in typifications, ie, the way the phenomenon is
classified.
8. The stream was later systematised by Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann in
.The social construction of reality,1967. According to them,In order to decipher the
phenomena, the sociologists must immerse themselves into the areas of life they
seek to investigate, rather than attempting to fit the data into predefined categories.

Critiques
Phenomenology faded out due to its pure subjective nature and inability to deliver concrete
concepts .Some contemporary sociologists criticise it for being nothing more than mere
common sense and very narrow and speculative in nature.

Symbolic interactionism

Herbert Blumer, who was a student of Mead, coined the term Symbolic Interactionism it
was distinctively American and rejected both social and biological determinism and argued
that man himself creates social reality by meanings created through interaction.

Symbolic Interactionists have been influenced by Weber's ideas on Verstehen and was
developed, in large part, out of Simmel's interest in action and interaction and Mead's
interest in consciousness.
Basic tenets -

1. Human Behavior is Based on Meaning:-People act toward things based on the

meanings those things have for them.
2. Meaning Arises Through Interaction- they are not inherent in objects or actions but
are created and modified through social interactions.
3. Use of Symbols: particularly language, are crucial for communication and the
creation of meaning.
4. The Social Construction of Reality: Reality is not fixed but is constructed through
social processes. People collectively create and sustain reality through their
interactions.
5. Focus on Micro-Level Interactions:rather than large-scale social structures, It is
concerned with understanding how individuals create and navigate their social worlds
through these interactions.

Social life is seen as a dynamic and ongoing process where meanings and interactions are
constantly evolving. People continuously negotiate and renegotiate meanings as they
interact with others.

Mead laid the foundation of symbolic interactionism and gave the concept of self in mind
and society -
Which is social product that emerges from interactions with others

Popularly, the perspective was used by Arlie Hochschild, in her The Managed Heart, 1983,
which is based on her study of Delta Airlines. She studied how the air hostesses manage
their emotions to serve the passengers better. She terms this as emotional labour. While
Irving Goffman made landmark contributions in his studies of mental asylums showcasing
symbolic interactionism.

Criticism
1. According to Skidmore, Interactionists largely fail to explain why people consistently
choose to act in given ways, they conveniently ignore the constraints on
individuals..Eg: In North Korea, social behavior is strictly regulated by the state
2. Marxists argue that meanings that are generated are not a result of interaction, but
external force due to presence of class relationships.
3. Interactionists are accused of examining human interaction in a vacuum. They focus
only on small face-to-face interaction and ignore the larger historical or social
settings.

Despite criticism symbolic interactionism has a distinct place in sociology and influences
study of topics like study of emotions, deviance/criminology Hence, it helps understand the
meanings behind social actions and try to answer the ‘why’ bit of things

Ethnomethodology
 1. Ethnomethodology was proposed by American sociologist Harold Garfinke and it
was the fusion of Parsonsian and Schutzian ideas which gave Ethnomethodology
its distinctive orientation.
2. Ethnomethodology is concerned with examining the methods and procedures
employed by members of society to construct, account for and give meaning to their
social world. Zimmerman and Wieder state that the ethnomethodologist is
‘concerned with how members of society go about the task of seeing, describing and
explaining order in the world in which they live’
3. Ethnomethodologists argue that the social world is nothing more than the constructs,
interpretations and accounts of its members. Accounts are the ways in which actors
explain specific situations.
4. Ethnomethodologists devote a lot of attention to analyze people's accounts and
methods used for creating a sense of order.
5. There are two central ideas to Ethnomethodology-
1. Indexicality- Meanings are context-dependent and can vary based on the
situation.
2. Reflexivity- Actions shape and are shaped by the social context in which they
occur.

They uses Conversational Analysis which focuses on the microstructures of talk, such as
turn-taking and repair mechanisms, to understand how social interactions are organized and
meaning is co-constructed. Also, the Documentary Method which involves interpreting
social actions and events as if they are "documents" that reveal underlying patterns and
structures.

Ethnomethodologists are highly critical of other branches of sociology. AS They have treated
the social world as if it had an objective reality which is independent of members’ accounts
and interpretations.

Ethnomethodologists argue that the social world consists of nothing more than the
constructs, interpretations and accounts of its members. The job of the sociologist is
therefore to explain the methods and accounting procedures which members employ to
construct their social world.

Critiques
1. They are criticised for taking a detached view of the members of society. According
to Giddens,they seem to have no goals.
2. Alvin Gouldner says that they ignore the fact that interactions and reality are
shaped by the differential power relations that exist in society.
3. According to Goldthorpe-It seems that what members don't recognise, doesn't exist
for them and they remain insulated with that. This is, however, not true.

The Non-Positivist methodologies also could not resolve the dilemma of objectivity and
subjectivity. Non-Positivists could also not develop a single methodological principle
leading to wide variations in research; they also depended heavily on the ability of the
interrogator and as a result, different explanations were given for the same phenomenon.
They further overlooked the fact that man is born in a pre-existing society influencing his
action
Postmodernism

Postmodernism is a theoretical perspective that emerged in the late 20th century as a

reaction against modernist ideas and grand narratives. It emphasizes diversity,
fragmentation, and the subjective nature of reality.

1. Rejection of Grand Narratives- challenges overarching theories and grand

narratives. It argues that such narratives are too simplistic and ignore the complexity
and diversity of social life.
2. Emphasis on Fragmentation and Plurality-Postmodernism highlights the existence
of multiple truths rather than a single, objective truth.
3. Deconstruction of Social Constructs:it seek to deconstruct social constructs and
question taken-for-granted assumptions about reality.
4. Focus on Language and Discourse- it examines how language, symbols, and
discourse shape our understanding of the world and influence power relations.
5. Relativity and Subjectivity- it argues that what we perceive as reality is mediated
by our cultural and social context, and thus, there is no single, objective reality.
6. Critique of Modernity- it critiques the principles of modernity, such as rationality,
progress, and the belief in a linear history

Key Figures and Their Contributions

● Jean-François Lyotard in "The Postmodern Condition" challenged grand

narratives and emphasised the plurality of knowledge and the role of language in
shaping our understanding
● Michel Foucault: Foucault's work focused on the relationship between power,
knowledge, and discourse. In works like "Discipline and Punish" he examined how
power operates through societal institutions and discourses.
● Jean Baudrillard: Baudrillard introduced concepts such as simulacra and
hyperreality in "Simulacra and Simulation" , exploring how media and technology
create a reality that is more real than the real.
● Zygmunt Bauman: In works like "Liquid Modernity" (2000), Bauman discussed the
fluid and transient nature of contemporary society, characterised by uncertainty and
constant change.

Habermas, a staunch critic of postmodern theory, argued that now is not the time to give up
on the 'project' of modernity. He sees modernity as 'an incomplete project' and calls
postmodernism pessimistic and defeatist.

Ulrich Beck, also rejects postmodernism. According to Beck rather than living in a world
'beyond the modern', we are moving into a phase of 'the second modernity'
 4.Sociological thinkers

1.Historical materialism

Hegel in his book ‘phenomenology of mind’ propounded that ultimate reality is spirit (giest)
and spirit is manifested in the conscious human mind. This spirit is projected on matter and
interaction between spirit and matter gives rise to the material world. Thus society is an
outward projection of spirit.

Hegel gives an account of HISTORY-AS-A-WHOLE as a single, unified, and rational progres

whose primary manifestation of development is the Absolute Spirit .According to him spirit
evolves in dialectical fashion. At a certain level of spirit there are certain ideas (thesis)And
opposite ideas ( antithesis), with time they reconcile forming synthesis which becomes a new
spirit and thus goes on the process of dialectics.

Marx adopted and adapted his idea of dialectics, idea of history-as-a-whole, and
progressive development but rejected hegel dualism of mind and matter and says that
“MATTER Is ultimate reality and is independent of ideas against hegel notion that ideas
exist independently.

Also Marx criticised Hegel for overlooking the active side of men in influencing and changing
the environment they live in. He wrote that men are in an active relationship with their
environment shaping it to fulfil their needs. He called it an act of production and thus man
through this is the creator of his own world.

Thus Marx tried to reach the truth via “materialism”. This is why Marx’s theory is known as
“HISTORICAL MATERIALISM” while Hegel’s system is called “dialectical idealism”.

1. - Historical Materialism A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, 1859”

Historical Materialism is the guiding thread of Marx's works and was influenced by the idea
of “dialectical idealism” of Hegel and the “concept of materialism” by Ludwig
Feuerbach.
“It is the study of human history and progress rounded on materialistic grounds going through a
process of dialectics of human progress
● Historical because - analysis of society in terms of evolution from one state to another.
● Materialist because -> 1) based on material factors and not metaphysical factors, 2)
change in terms of material conditions and not ideas

Further, his theory of historical materialism has two aspects-

● Economic aspect of society forms the infrastructure and consist of forces and
relations of production; it forms the foundation of society on which the superstructure
of legal, political, and intellectual systems is built. Any changes in material conditions
or infrastructure also imply corresponding changes in social relations or
“SUPERSTRUCTURE”
● Through this He understands the evolution in terms of a dialectic process, where
“New development of productive relations came in conflict”with existing relations of
 productions”. When people become conscious of the state of conflict, they wish to
bring an end to it. “the period of social revolution” begins.
● Thus,for marx it is development of new productive forces which outline course of
human history

Relevance in understanding contemporary society

● To study the caste system as it was historically linked with occupational roles and
can be understood as a superstructure that emerged from the feudal agrarian base,
● LPG reform> Secularisation of marriage, caste etc , consumerism,rise of Nmc etc are
result of these economic changes. Thus, material change brings change in
contemporary society as well.
● Due to Neo- liberalism and globalisation, inequality increased in the society. These
changes in the economic sphere cause conflict in society. Which is reflected in the
rise of Right wing populism and de- globalisation tendencies such as BREXIT &
Make America Great Again. Thus changes in material conditions influence the
political and social sphere as well.
● Historical materialism’s focus on class relations and conflicts, thus economic
inequality andNaxalite movement emerging from land disputes can be analysed
through this perspective.
● EMERGENCE of new productive forces such RISE OF SERVICE SECTOR, AI ,
TECH COMPANIES are affecting superstructure as gig workers,urbanisation(IT
cities)
● help understand the dynamics of globalisation and neo-imperialism, the dominance
of multinational corporations, and the economic exploitation of developing countries
can be analysed.

While historical materialism offers valuable insights into the functioning of societies, it should
not be applied dogmatically. It needs to be combined with other sociological theories to fully
understand the complexities of contemporary societies. For instance, Weber’s emphasis on
ideas and values, and Durkheim’s focus on social solidarity and collective conscience,
provide a more comprehensive understanding when used in conjunction with historical
materialism.

Criticism
1. He thinks dialectical materialism is a master key to several locks. Weber appreciated
the works of Marx that change in infrastructure (economic structure) brought change
into superstructure (human relations/consciousness). But there is a possibility that
even change in superstructures (religion) would bring change in infrastructure
(capitalism).
2. G. Myrdal Due to policies and state intervention there are changes in infrastructure.
3. Karl Popper“economic reductionism” for ignoring ideas and for over-emphasising on
material factors
4. over-emphasised on conflict,George simmel even conflict also has its own functions.
 5. focused on macro evolution and ignored the micro reality of social life non-positivist
tradition.

Modes of production

In order to survive, man must produce -Marx. It is the first historical act .as- Man is a
perpetually dissatisfied animal. Once a need is satisfied, new ones are created. Thus,
production continues and history proceeds.
In order to produce, man must enter into relations with others. Apart from relations, some
forces of production are also required which include tools, techniques, skills, etc.

Relations of Production or social relations of production -

1. Relations between man and man
● individuals form associations in order to undertake production which lead to
stratification.The employer’s relation to worker is of domination and the worker’s
relation with coworkers is of cooperation. The Relations is of antagonistic
cooperation.
2. Relations between man and things -
● nature of ownership and non-ownership of things required in the production. The
haves control the production process whereas the have not are non-owners in the
production process

Forces of Production,
● include Means of Production and labour power, its development reflects constant
struggle of human beings to master nature through their labour.it include – tools,
techniques, equipment and skills etc. Major changes in society occur when new
forces of production are evolved

Both change continuously and the two constitute economic infrastructure; their constant
interplay results in a particular type of social formation, which is called mode of production

Marx conceptualised six stages,Every

new mode of production displaces the
earlier one because of inherent
weaknesses of the system,
contradictions and class struggle. Out
of the six modes, four are historical and
two are futuristic, historical stages
include -

1. Primitive Communism -
Forces of production were at an extremely low level of development and de facto
equality,Relations of production based upon cooperation, rather than domination as
ownership of forces of production was communal. Emergence of private property leads
to next stage - which Marx called Negation of Primitive Communism
2. Ancient Slave Mode of Production - some men had control over skills and tools
and others were subordinate to them. slaves didn't have control on their labour as
 well. Population increased, slaves pressured to produce more, exploitation increased
and the slaves revolted.
3. Feudalistic Mode of Production - divided into land owning feudal lords and
landless serfs. Land was central to economic activity,Serfs were free, but were forced
to cultivate on the land of lords and pay tax and service, which kept on rising, leading
to revolt of serfs when mature conditions arrived.
4. Capitalist Mode of Production - capital is central to production and society is
primarily divided into the have nots called the proletariat and the haves called the
bourgeoisie.Emerges from the ruins of guild system of feudal society Commodification
of labour and social character of production with private form of appropriation. It
leads to conflict and exploited workers will revolt heralding a new mode of production
- socialist mode of production, eventually leading to communism.

Marx terms feudalistic and capitalist modes of production as negation of negation as these
modes of production negate a mode of production which has itself negated another mode of
production.he envisages that capitalism is inherently unstable and soon it will be replaced
by other modes of production
1. Socialist Mode of Production - It is a transitory mode of production, proletariat will
topple bourgeoisie and control forces of production. Marx -dictatorship of proletariat
as However, Marx believed that control by workers shall also come to an end to
realise the true potential of all human beings.
2. Advanced Communism - It is the final mode forces of production will be
communally owned,everyone will carry their own creative pursuit and no class in
society,no state.this will be the last mode of production as the contradiction will be
resolved in this mode and Dialectical principle will cease to operate in this mode of
production and this stage will be a closing chapter of dialectical materialism.

ASIATIC MODE OF PRODUCTION

explain the stagnation of oriental societies. departure from dialectical materialistic

conception. It was characterised by simple production methods, despotic rule, self-sufficient
villages, absence of private property, economy based on handicraft and agriculture and
absence of autonomous cities. As there was no private property, there was no class struggle
based upon antagonism between landlords and peasants thus there was little hope of
revolution. criticised for being an overall misfit in the wider dialectical schema.

General criticism
1. futuristic communist utopia never arrived even in the communist countries.
2. Asiatic Mode of Production, which runs counter to his generalised mode of
production thesis.
3. criticised for narrow empiricism and being reductionist in approach.
4. He ignored the feminist dimension of production as patriarchy is also seen as an
important factor
5. obsession with social justice. He predicts that the dialectic process will cease. But
someinequalities are likely to remain due to natural and man made differences in
society.
6. In any particular society at a particular point in time there may exist more than one
mode of production.
Neo Marxists (aka Critical Theorists) criticise Marx that there is no qualitative difference b/n
Cap and soc.
1. LOUIS ALTHUSSER: Book 'For Marx'
In the name of social welfare, one party system in socialism and multiparty system in a
democracy try to capture power. In both societies, State controls individuals through 2
forces: Both are exploitative and need to be reflexive to differentiate.
● Ideological State Apparatus: school, family, media etc. Political socialisation
● Repressive State Apparatus: for deviants
2. GRAMSCI: Source of domination is hegemonistic both in socialist and democratic
societies and need to be counter-hegemonistic to replace it. Control is total, it is not just
State but all its apparatus, jurists, thinkers, intellectuals, military etc. => complete and
integrative domination.
3. P BOURDIEU: Class is a group of people controlling capital. Gave a new definition to
capital:
1. Cultural: knowledge, education
2. Economic: wealth
3. Social: network of contacts and social associations
4. Symbolic: position or social status
All three result in social reproduction of capital, which is common in
socialism and capitalism.

Q: Relevance of Marxian Theory on Historical Materialsm:

1. Slave system was peculiar to Europe. Not every society needs to pass through all
stages. As observed in Russia, society went from feudal to socialism, Japan: feudal ->
capitalism, India: continuation of multiple modes of production.
2. Feudalism exits in multiple forms. Indian feudalism is a colonial construct; European
feudalism is a historical product. Similarly feudalism ended differently, in Europe it led to
capitalism (economic consequence), in India it led to decolonisation (political
consequence)
3. Contemporary India: eco base is feudal and super structure based on capitalism.
Complicated
combination. Singular MoP is absent.
Q: Socialism as an ideology is dead and capitalism is reinventing itself.
● Contradictory results in communist USSR where goods were produced based on
marketable potential such as arms and ammunition instead of focusing on use value.
More than collective welfare, cold war became the focus of the State.
● China while claiming to be communist, went for a capitalist economy, creating an export
centric economy
 ● OPEC: most of them are totalitarian states, still have adopted capitalism economy for
rapid growth
● Indian consti proclaims to be 'socialist' but State's initiatives like contract farming, land
acquisition, service sector boost etc, all indicate spirit of capitalism
● Fusion of capitalism and socialism resulting in a welfare State is the new order of the day.
*Marx on DoL: it is a class construct. It is a manifestation of production relationship.
Marx says with increasing specialisations, division of labour converts to division of labourers.
DoL divides labourers on the basis of specialisation, ethnicity and other factors – creating a False
Class Consciousness. It is with the conversion of this False Class Consciousness to True Class
Consciousness that the process of Social Transformation would begin.

Alienation
Marx conceived of alienation as a phenomenon related to societies in which the producer is
divorced from the means of production and in which “dead labour” (capital) dominates “living
labour” (the worker). It is a feeling of estrangement and disenchantment from a group, a
situation, society and even with oneself.
It occupies the central role in marxian understanding of exploitation -Economic and
Political Manuscripts”
● saw it as the perverted relationship bw labour and human nature in capitalist mode of
production.
● Labour in capitalism is reduced to a means to an end, i.e. producing and earning money
for the capitalist
● An individual is essentially creative and his true consciousness is defined by his being,
but in a CMoP, man is defined by his social being). So alienation of labour becomes key
to alienation of man.
● Alienation happens in 2 ways:
1. In a given MoP, it increases with time: as control over forces of production
increases and material forces become stronger. feudalism, taxes and hardship
on serfs increase with time
2. Its degree increases as MoP advances,least in primitive communism and peaks
in capitalism

Borrowed from Hegel's alienation of spirit,Marx consider 4 dimensions of alienation in

capitalism which lead to inversion of subject-object relation.
1. From the process of production - Capitalistsdecide what commodities are made,
how they are made, and in what working conditions they are made. work is often
repetitive and dangerous. workers man the machines which are given more
importance. Workers lose control and feel alienated .
2. Alienation from the product - In capitalism, product doesn't belong to producer, but
to capitalist. Workers no control over quantity, quality or nature of the product. The
same product has to be purchased from the market, leading to a sense of alienation
from the product.
 3. Alienation from the fellow workers - Work is compartmentalised and a worker gets
no time to interact with others, The communal element of the work is lost and leads
to feelings of alienation from the fellow workers as well.
4. Alienation from one's potential - workers feel so helpless that they even doubt
their own existence. Work is not a choice, but a compulsion. Work is external to the
worker; it is not a part of his nature. He loses control over his own thoughts also, as
none of his thoughts can be transformed into reality. He gets alienated from his
thoughts also. This is the peak of alienation.
Solution to alienation -production process to be overhauled and relations of production were
modified in communism where forces of production will be communally owned.where being
of man is truly realised and he goes for all the creative pursuits .

Alienation Anomie
● Collective class experience ● Mass experience
● Product of economic condition, present in ● Social experience
capitalism ● Product of rapid social change
● Created by mode of production ● Temporal, transitional phenomenon
● Present in structured economic phase called ● Disappears by itself, can be stopped
Capitalism through reforms
● Need revolution to end this ● Temporal happiness due to
● Brings despair to workers ruleless-ness
● Required for social progress as it leads to true ● Leads to social progress
class consciousness

Marx’ idea of alienation is criticised on following grounds –

1. SEEMAN: Refutes Marx who says that alienation is experienced by all workers. Says
that it's a psychological experience, which can't be generalised.
2. Karl Popper says that alienation can be a breeding ground for creative ideas also.
Merton also states that people may rebel and innovate if they feel alienated.
3. Durkheim had highlighted that anomie and alienation can be corrected by existing
structures also.
4. Goldthorpe and Lockwood highlight that work is just a means to an end which is
better standards of living. Workers are more concerned about what happens outside
the factory .
5. Max Weber say over bureaucratization of society leads to alienation as man is
guided by fixed rules and his creativity is suffocated
6. C.W. Mills states that the growth of the tertiary (service) sector in modern industrial
societies has contributed to self alienation more among the white collar (non-manual)
workers.
7. Robert Blaumer has further developed four of these conditions and has related
them with different types of technology. To him, a less technical job has less
alienation. He saw less alienation in handicrafts & cottage industries & more in
mechanised industries.
 8. Herbert Marcuse - He believed that non-creativity leads to alienation but he
criticised Marx for merely favouring the proletariats. He believed that alienation will
occur among the capitalist also because of the non-creativity of their work.

Commodity fetishism
● central to highlighting the social structure of a modern capitalist society and its true
nature where relations between things assume more importance than the man who
produces them.
● A commodity is a product of labour. Earlier, they were produced satisfaction of needs
and personal use only and hence, they had use value
● but in modern capitalist Industries, workers are not entitled to the fruit of his work,
commodities now have exchange value. commodities come in the market and are
exchanged for money
● It seems to exist in a realm, separate from any human use and have independent
existences with almost mystical external reality, they appear like fetishes to those
who produce them.
● By fetish, Marx meant a thing that we ourselves make and then worship as if it were
a god or spirit.
● Even our own labour, according to Marx, makes us truly human, becomes a
commodity that is bought and sold.Thus, man feels powerless with little control over
what he produces and commodities become a source of alienation

Class struggle
Das Capital'
● Class - group of people sharing the same position in the process of production.
● In 'Revolutions and Counter Revolutions in Germany' he spoke of 8 classes and in
'Class Struggle in France' he spoke of 6 classes.
● Contends that as history proceeds all intermediary classes get absorbed into 2 broad
strata through a process called Polarisation. Involves 2 processes:
1. Bourgeoisisation
2. Proletariatisation
Marx also sees class in terms of its objective and
subjective expression in the form of class in itself
and class for itself .
1. Class in itself – a category seen by others,by
virtue people having a common relationship to the
means of production members are not aware of
being a part of a common stratum. It is only an
analytical construct to Marx in order to stratify
position.
2. Class for itself is– a class in which workers are aware of their common condition,
their mission, etc. and it develops only when class consciousness develops.start to
see through exploitation and can realise the unequal terms of production. defined on
the basis of subjective criterion.

precondition for the change of mode of production to socialism. Transformation from class in
itself to class for itself is governed by the ever increasing exploitation, communal working in
a factory and the rising gap between the haves and the have nots. Polarisation will further
hasten this process. Which will occur as a result of increasing mechanisation and
homogenisation of the workforce.

According to Marx, class in itself becomes a class for itself only in capitalist mode of
production, as in earlier modes of production, change of mode of production resulted only in
replacement of one set of contradictions by the other and no qualitative change in
relationships of production occurred.

Marx sees classes in society in terms of antagonistic cooperation. According to

Marx-'History of hitherto existing societies is history of class struggle.' He also states
that - Class struggle acts as a motor of history, - i.e., conflict between the two classes in
every mode of production is the force behind historical developments.

According to Marx, revolution will not come on its own, Mature conditions for revolution - true
consciousness, network of communication among workers, clear perception of common enemy,
appropriate organisation, leadership and ideology.

Workers' revolution will result in a state of transition to socialism and later to communalism
where production will be communally owned. Each one will get according to one's need and
not according to one's greed. there will be no class and hence, no class struggle. Hence,
class struggle ends as the dialectic materialistic process comes to an end.

Criticism
1. Frank Parkin in his ‘Class Inequality and Political Order,-class exists even in
socialist countries.
2. class struggle moderated in most of Europe which is epitome of capitalism. Workers
themselves have become affluent and now have a stake in the capitalist economy.
3. Weber apart from economic basis, other bases of stratification in society(1.)
propertied Upper class (2.) Property less white collar (3.) Petty Bourgeoisie (4.)
Manual workers.
4. Weber- no possibility of pauperization, polarisation and homogenization. because
property less white collars will expand as capitalism matures
5. Lenski -even breakdown of capitalism may not lead to socialism, as other modes of
production may emerge.
6. According to Dahrendorf, manual working class has become increasingly
heterogeneous little chance of it uniting for a revolution.
7. Postmodernists, Pakulski and Waters in their book, ‘The Death of Class’ claim
that not that social inequality is disappearing, but ‘class based division’ is losing it’s
significance.

Theory of surplus value

1. embedded in the labour theory of value and holds that labour spent by the labourer in
the production of the commodity is the sole criterion for determining its value.
2. The capitalist buys the labour power of the labourer and applies it to the raw material
to produce commodities which have an exchange value of the commodity
3. In his Das Kapital, Marx contended that capital has two parts-constant capital and
variable capital. Constant capital relates to means of production like raw material,
 machinery tools used for commodity production. The variable capital denotes the
wages paid to the worker.
4. Surplus value is the difference between the value produced by the worker and what
he actually gets in exchange for this value of his labour. In other words, surplus value
is unpaid labor

The Three Laws of Dialectical Materialism marx borrowed from engles

1. Law of unity and struggle of opposites.
2. Law of transformation fromquantity to quality.
3. Law of Negation of Negation.
Law of unity and struggle of opposites talks about the very nature or cause of social change.
The law of transformation from quantity to quality talks about the very manner of social
change.
The law of negation of negation talks about the very direction of social change.

Relevance of marxism -
1. Economic Inequality- Thomas Piketty's "Capital in the Twenty-First Century"
(2013) highlights the growing wealth gap, showing that capital accumulation leads to
increasing inequality.
2. Labor Rights and Exploitation:The gig economy (e.g., Uber, DoorDash)
exemplifies precarious work conditions, leading to movements advocating for labor
rights.
3. Globalization- Immanuel Wallerstein's World-Systems Theory discusses how
globalisation creates inequalities between core and peripheral countrie.Multinational
corporations exploiting labour in developing nations, leading to economic
dependency and local exploitation.
4. Environmental Concerns: John Bellamy Foster’s "Marx’s Ecology" explores the
ecological crises linked to capitalist exploitation of nature.
5. Social Movements: Nancy Fraser analyses social justice movements and their
roots in Marxist theory, Movements like Black Lives Matter and labour rights seek to
address systemic inequalities.

Against
1. David Harvey highlight the resilience of capitalism and argues that it has continually
adapted to crises, which undermines the inevitability of a communist revolution. Ex -
welfare state
2. Ralph Dahrendorf's- Decomposition of Labour and Decomposition of Capital
3. Scholars like Daniel Bell argue that modern economies have shifted from industrial
to post-industrial, reducing the prominence of class struggle. And rise of
service-oriented jobs and knowledge work diminishes the traditional labor vs. capital
dichotomy.
4. Sociologists like Erik Olin Wright suggest that the growth of the middle class
complicates traditional Marxist notions of class struggle.
2. Emile durkhiem - DOL, Social fact, suicide, religion

In his first major work titled Montesquieu and Rousseau, 1892, he laid down the general
conditions for the establishment of a science of society. According to him, a social science
should
1. Deal with specific subject matter and not total knowledge that is around.
2. Aim at identifying the general types rather than describing individual types.
3. Have a definite and observable field to explore and it should study objective reality.
4. Yield general principles or laws.
5. Use methods similar to natural science.

Durkheim further clarified the scope and methodology of Sociology in his book The Rules of
Sociological Method, 1895. According to him, the task of a sociologist is to study social
facts as we study things in a natural world. He defined social facts as- Social facts are
ways of acting, thinking and feeling which are external to the individual and are
endowed with the power of coercion by reason of which they control of him..

Social facts, thus can be understood by their four characteristics-

1. Externality- exist outside the individual and must be seen apart from the individual and
are sui-generis
2. Constraining- The constraint is in the nature of coercion and is visible in terms of its
consequences.
3. Generality- general in nature and must not be confused with the individual interpretations
or individual facts. These are in the form of generalised perception which is understood by all
in the same manner..
4. Independence- Social facts are independent of the will of the individual. Individuals cannot
change the social facts, but rather, the opposite is true

According to Durkheim, social facts emerge from the collective of individuals, they cannot be
reduced to the level of individuals – and this social reality is real, and it exists above the level
of the individual,
Types of Social Facts:
1. Material: empirically arrestable
2. Non Material: mains focus was on these, like culture, social insti, morality and
collective conscience.
He saw social facts along a continuum of materiality. The sociologist usually begins a study
by focusing on material social facts, which are empirically accessible, in order to understand
nonmaterial social facts, which are abstract in nature.

There are two ways which can explain social facts-

1. Determining the cause of social facts- the cause of social fact lies in another social
fact. example, cause of suicide does not lie in individual's will, but explored through
various other social facts
 2. Determining functions of social facts- social facts perform certain functional
prerequisites of society. Most important of which is maintenance of social
order.collective conscience

Rules for studying social facts

1. Rules of observation: Social facts should be studied as things. Every social fact has a
representation in the form of objective manifestation. Through these, they can be
observed as things.
2. Rules of classification:
○ Structural or Morphological Facts - give a particular society its
appearance.
○ Institutional SF - accepted. Such as religion, DoL, suicide etc.
○ Non Institutional SF - still not accepted, but have the potential to exert
constraint. Ex. mob behaviour etc. He called these socio-currents.
3. Rules of Distinction: nomal and pathological. Normal means present in general form
and fulfil some functions for society. Pathological means disfunctional. Ex. crime rate
beyond a point becomes pathological but considered normal till a point.
4. Rules of explanation:
○ Investor should observe complete objectivity
○ Use methods of natural sciences like concomitant variations, indirect
experimentation and statistical techniques.
○ Explanation must yield general theories.
1. HEIDLEMAN: Durkheim is more concerned with making of society rather than describing a
methodology for it.
2. Merton - need middle range theories not grand universalitic ones.
3. STEPHEN LUKES: ED glorified empiricism and moralism and neglected emotions and
individual subjectivity.
4. WEBER: social facts don't exist as things in their own right, waiting to be gathered like pebble
on beach. They lie inside an individual and their influence is on the basis of individual's own
interpretation.
5. Research by JEAN PIAGET indicates that individual creativity is an imp component of social
life. The social actors' mental processes can't always be explained through independent and
decisive social facts.
6. He couldn't explain why the same social facts influence different individuals differently.

Division of labour

In the background of upheaval in French society after FR, ED was concerned about maintenance
of solidarity and social order in the society. ED wanted a solution to the wide spread moral crisis
then prevelant in France.
He rejected view of Comte that Dol causes disorder, rejected earlier economists and
philosophers like Hedonists, Utilitarian and argues that DoL is not based on indiv interest,
pleasure or utility.While Marx was pessimistic about the division of labour, Durkheim was
cautiously optimistic.

It means the splitting up of an activity into a number of parts or smaller processes. These smaller
processes are undertaken by different persons or groups of persons, thereby speeding up the
performance of the activity. Division of labour implies specialisation, saving time and saving costs
and at the same time increasing productivity. It can be technical, social or sexual DoL. According
to Durkheim, division of labour is a social fact and is a product of autonomous development
of society and is sui generis
Cause:
● used an evolutionary perspective.
● Primitive society is segmentary in nature, collective conscience is very strong due to
likeness. very few specialisations, laws in such societies are repressive and
conformity to the social norms is a must and there is minimum deviation. Population
(ie material density) is very low, further interaction of population (ie moral density) is also
low.
● Cause of transition from mechanical to organic solidarity was the dynamic density (which
increased due to inc in material and moral density).As societies become more
voluminous and denser, more people come into contact with one another; they
compete for scarce resources and there is rivalry everywhere. As the struggle for
survival becomes acute, social differentiation develops as a peaceful solution to the
problem..

“Thus division of labour varies in direct ratio with the volume and density of societies and, if it
progresses in a continuous manner in the course of social development, it is because
societies become regularly denser and generally more voluminous.”

Functions: It performs dual needs

1. Integration of society: Society is now based upon heterogeneity of
relationships. In modern societies, collective conscience is weak and hence, the
binding force is also weak. In the absence of strong collective conscience, it
integrates modern societies.
2. Autonomy of the individual: modern society is based on mass production, high
specialisation. Individuals are relatively free and have better freedom to
innovate.Durkheimalso states that, Individuals, while becoming autonomous,
come to depend more heavily on society.
3. The increased division of labour makes for greater efficiency, with the result that
resources increase, making the competition over them more peaceful
Since social facts have pathological state too durkheim also gave 3 abnormal division of
labour

1. Anomie division of labour -

● state of normlessness, in which people in general don't follow norms attached to their
activities.
● happens during transition phases, shift of mechanical solidarity to organic solidarity,
When economic pace is too fast and moral regulation is unable to keep pace with
increasing differentiation, it leads to anomic pathological state of division of labour.
● Durkheim argued that the customary limits to what people want and expect from life
are disrupted in times of rapid change.
● specialised division of labour also produces anomie as it promotes self-interest and
individualism,
● Symptoms high rates of suicide, marital breakup and industrial conflict,
● Durkheim said that its solution can be found in the existing framework of the society.
Self-interest should be replaced by a code of ethics Occupational associations can
play an important role by acting as agents of moral regulation.
2. Inadequate organization - work is not well organised and coordinated. Workers are
often engaged in doing meaningless tasks. There is no unity of action. Thus solidarity
breaks down and disorder results
3. Forced DoL: Division of labour based on inequality of opportunity, according to
Durkheim, fails to produce long-lasting solidarity. DoL not in correspondence with distri
of talent and will. Indiv becomes frust and unhappy.
Suicide

ED attempts to explain a seemingly personal phenomenon in a sociological way. Exhibited use of

scientific methodology and that real laws are discoverable in Sociology as well.He wasn't
concerned with individuals committing suicide, instead was interested in explaining differences in
suicide rates among different groups

Durkheim in his Le Suicide, 1897 defines suicide as 'Suicide is any case of death, caused
by directly or indirectly positive or negative action of the victim himself, which he knows will
produce this result.

Rejected
1. GABRIEL TRADE: psychological theory to suicide. Said that it is a product of
psychological disorder and an attempt to imitate others.
2. SALVIN: Demographic Theory. Gave climate, race, heridity and migration as variables
that determine tendency of suicide.
3. ROBERT BEARD: Concept of Neuro Asthenia. Due to unlimited aspirations in MS,
failure or under achievement causes disillusionment leading to suicides. Modernity is the
cause.

For the purpose of theory building, he took data from police records from various regions of
Europe at different time periods by using statistical techniques he found concomitant relation
between suicide rate and different social variables attached to the people who committed
suicide.

Different social variables that were taken by Durkheim were-marital status, locality, urban,
developed or underdeveloped, religious orientation. He undertook the multivariate analysis
to establish the, relationship between rates of suicides and social factors. After a detailed
research, he concluded that-
1. Males have greater suicidal tendency as compared to females.
2. Rate of suicide is found more among the bachelor
3. Underdeveloped countries have less rate of suicide than developed countries.
4. On the basis of religion, Protestants commit more suicide than Catholics.

Based on above causal relationship, he concluded that suicide is a social phenomenon. Impact
of suicidogenic impulses leads to suicide. There are 2 types of bonds which integrate individual
into the society
1. Forces of integration:
● Altruistic suicide - result of over integration. Characteristic of traditional soc with
high mechanical solidarity. Ex. Sati, soldiers in war, Japanese Kamikaze during
WW2, who initiated suicide attacks.
● Egoistic suicide - low integration, indiv feel alienated and that they are not a part
of society. Suicide resulting from failure, success and depression. Stems from
 incurable weariness and sad depression, whereas altruistic suicide springs from
hope, as it depends on the belief in beautiful perspectives beyond life.
2. Forces of regulation: control of individual by society.
● Anomic suicide - when social regulation disapears, such as during economic
boom or bust. Individual desires either become limitless or confused. Further
classification -> chronic economic (abolition), acute economic (sporadic
decrease), similarly acute and chronic domestic.
● Fatalistic suicide - excessive control of society leading to suffocation and
powerlessness of indiv. Ex when slave kills himself. Rare in modern societies.

Suicide is a result of suicidogenic forces,

comprising of varying state of integration and
regulation. These forces are conceptualised in
the form of social currents in the society. If an
individual comes under these currents, he has
a tendency to commit suicide.

CRITICISM
1. JM ATKINSON 'Discovering Suicide' -
contends quality of statistics used by ED is
questionable. Ex religious censure of suicide is
more in Catolics, so many suicides might go
disguised. Similarly, different countries have different ways of investigating suicides.
2. Data has poor reliability as Doesn't include attempted and unreported suicides
3. DAVID FREEDMAN 'The Ecological Fallacy' accused him of committing ecological
fallacy as he tried to generalise an apparent personal phenomenon.
4. Gibbs and Martin, criticized Durkheim for being insufficiently positivist,as in some
instances , he made use of concepts, which could not be directly observed or measured,
ex anomie
5. J.B. Douglas (1967) official statistics are highly inaccurate and systematically
biased,Suicide are more accurately reported in towns than rural areas, medical
competence of those who categorize deaths for official purposes varies

Religion

theory was also partly in reaction to the existing explanations of religion, which Durkheim
deemed as non-sociological explanations, especially that of Tylor's animistic theory based
on supernatural and of Max Muller based on nature-myth.

Defn. - Unified system of beliefs and practices related to sacred things ie, things forbidden and
set apart, beliefs and practices that unify people to constitute a single moral community.
● Beliefs are system of ideas which explain the sacred like myths, ethical code etc.
 ● Practices are rituals or rites explaining individual's behaviour towards sacred. Positive
rites bring individual closer to scared, like worship. Negative rites help in maintaining the
distance ex fasting, sacrifice etc.
● Religion is universal because any group can form a moral community when united by
common beliefs and practises. Also sacred things are kept apart to be seperated from
utilitarian things.

According to him, society consists of two parts- the sacred and the profane. The sacred are
the things which are set apart and are forbidden ,referring to all the things which are
connected to the supernatural or the divine. A relationship of distance and fear is maintained
with respect to these things. Profane are the things apart from the sacred. It includes all the
things which people use in their lives.

Features of sacred:
1. It is a matter of faith, can't be subject to rational scrutiny
2. It makes demands on its followers.
3. It's not subject to evaluation by utilitarian role. Whether it gives results or not, it remains
sacred.
4. Strength giving
5. Sacred may not always be good and everything profane is not always bad. Ex. a
poisonous snake can be sacred.
6. Movement from sacred to profane (profanising) and profane to sacred (sacrelising) is
common.
7. Sacred is always superior to profane.
8. Sacred is universal.
9. Man's relation with profane is dynamic but respect to scared is persistant.
10. Profane is functional to individual; sacred is functional to society.
ED gave a causal explanation of religion using method of indirect experimentation.
Established the link for simple society and applied it to modern religions.ED made use of
secondary data collected by SPENCER and COLLINS in their book on Australian tribe named
'Religion in Arunta tribe'.

Primitive men were wanderers but when they came together for some purpose they felt
different.According to primitive logic, they explained this feeling in terms of the presence of
some supernatural force. Durkheim calls this feeling as collective effervescence, which
takes individuals away from the concerns of profane social life. Primitive people create a
totem to represent and regain that feeling. When people assemble near the totem, they
relive that feeling again.

Thus ED argued that totems are the material representations of the nonmaterial force that
is at their base, and that nonmaterial force is none other than the society itself.

According to Durkheim, it is easier for man to visualise and direct his feelings of awe towards
a symbol like totem and idol rather than towards a complex metaphysical thing like a society.
This Durkheimian logic also explains idol worship in many religions like Hinduism.

He sees religion in functional terms as well.

 ● Religion becomes the basis for similarity and thus, brings people together. In modern
societies, which are highly individualised and differentiated, religion performs the
function of bringing people together.
● Religion is a social necessity. It plays the role of conflict resolution.translates negative
solidarity to positive solidarity.
● Religion is a mechanism of social control

criticism
1. MALINOWSKI: He studied Australian tribes of New Southwales and Trobriand Islands.
Found that apart from Clan Totemism, there were other forms of Totemism . Criticised
ED for his selective and value biased analysis Observed that Totem also has a divisive
role which ED ignored and that it is not universal. Other forms of religion such as
Animism, Naturism, Fetishism etc. existed which didn't have a totem. He also termed it
arm chair theory because ED never visited Arunta.
2. RODNEY STARK: Called ED's analysis more idealist than realist. Religion's role in
society is more divisive than unifying and the reasons for growing strength of religion is
not due to its +ve rather
● Disheartened persons facing limitations of Science going back to religion
● Increasing protectionism against growing non-believers
● Attempt to effectively oppose enchroachment by modernity
● Those facing expoitation and inequality take recourse to religion
3. RUNCIMAN: questioned relevance of ED's theory in MS. Diengagement is a feature of
MS and individuals are moving towards 'Cult and Sect formation', which creates division
and segmentation. Religion has become contractual and the engagement is no longer
emotional or moral.
4. ROBERT BELLAH: Civil Religion where old sacred is replaced by new sacred, which
now plays the unifying role. (Such as bollywood, cricket etc.)
5. ED also didn't explain why a particular totem is chosen. Generalisation of primitive
religion to modern times is a bit farfetched.
6. His theory fails to explain the cause of solidarity in multicultural polytheistic societies
like India also ignored the conflict caused by religion and focused only on its
functional aspects

CIVIL RELIGION
ED gave a functional theory to
religion - centred around
sacred. Religion is a product of
CC and can't be replaced by
Science. Also distinguished
true religion (unifying) from
false religion (dividing).
ED gave a new form to religion by saying that anything done for the progress of soceity is a ritual
and driven by nationalism and patriotism, people should contribute towards collective welfare.
Civil religion: original to Rousseau and developed by ED. It is the beliefs, symbols, rituals and
institutions which legitimate the social system, create social solidarity and mobilize a community
to achieve common political objectives.
*Patriotism - expressed through deeds
Nationalism - voluntary feeling

3.Max weber - social action, ideal types, authority, bureaucracy,

protestant ethics and spirit of capitalism

Weber bridged the gap between Positivism and Idealism. Sticking to Positivism, he favoured
the use of Scientific Method in Sociology for the purpose of achieving objectivity and drawing
from idealists like Neo-Kantians, he developed the scope of Sociology as the meaning
attached by the actors to their actions.

In his book, Methodologies of Social Sciences,he defined Sociology as -"Sociology is a

science which attempts Interpretivist understanding of social action, in order thereby, to
arrive at an explanation of its cause and effect."

● Pioneer of interpretative approach.

● Socio can bridge the gap b/n ideographic (specific) and nomethetic (general) enquiry
● Middle ground bw Positivism and Idealism -> used scientific methods and inspired
from Neo Kantians (idealists) to focus on meanings attached by actors to their
actions.
● It is subjective understanding of objective reality
● Social life is an organised chaos (not fixed as assumed by Positvists and Marx) -
need to understand and not merely explain
● Universal laws can't be developed in Socio (rejects Spencer, Comte, Marx etc.)
● Disagreed with Positivist idea of value neturality and objectivity by staying away from
researched. Said Value relevance is required because individual behaviour can't be
isolated from their own culture and value.
● Socio shouldn't go for mechanistic use of scientific methodology rather use spirit of
science (knowledge furthering, value neutral, continuous endeavour)
● On Science: both go for study of structure, study specific form out of infinity and
cause effect study
● Weber considers Socio as an analytical discipline unlike Positivist who make it
prescriptive and Marx who is hyper prescriptive

1.social action
According to Weber, the subject matter of Sociology is to study social action which he
defined as -Any action is social by the virtue of the meanings attached to it by the
actors, it takes into account the behaviour of others and is thereby, oriented in its
course." In this definition. Weber mentions two conditions for any action to become social-
1. Action is social if some meaning is attached to it by the actor, i.e actor must be
conscious of his or her action, These meanings are in the form of motivation of an
 individual, which is his own subjective state. Weber rejected the independent
influence of values on individuals, rather the values are interpreted by the actor,
according to his or her motivation and according to that, an action is taken.
2. Action is social if it is oriented to some other, The orientation can be physical or
mental, i.c., the other person may or may not be present in a social action.

2 kinds of social action:

1. Overt: directly visible. Positivists only study this, called it as fact.
2. Covert: invisible. As per Weber, Socio should interpret these invisible social actions.

Ideal type of Social Action: classified according to their modes of orientation

1. Traditional action: guided by customs and long standing beliefsEx: 'pranam' in

Indian culture. It is voluntaristic and spontaneous due to socialisation and inherent
tendencies. This action is a borderline case of social action (due to absence of
motives or meanings). Since these actions are exhibited by a majority, they can be
studied through DOV.
2. Affective / Emotional action: it is a psychological action that results from the
emotional state of mind of the actor.
3. Wert rational action or Value Rational Action: It is for the sake of certain values like
honour and patriotism driven by an inner command. Ex: soldier laying down his life
for the love of his country. During the manifestation of this act, the consequences are
ignored. It can't be manifested on a regular basis.
4. Zweck rational action or Goal Rational Action: directed towards obtaining a goal. It
involves deliberation, planning, monitoring and rationally chosen means. Ex:
Engineer constructing a bridge.

A social action can be a combination of all 4 actions. For Ex. War itself involves planning to
win (Zweck SA), soldier need to fight with patritiosm (Wert SA) and begin fighting by
performing certain small army rituals like touching the ground (traditional SA). Victory in the
war leads can lead to tears of joy (affective SA

But how to establish the meanings? He suggested some methods for it, like-

Methodology is the conceptual and logical research procedure by which knowledge is

developed. Max Weber was particularly concerned with the problem of objectivity in social
sciences.
Weber influenced by DILTHEY: Both visible and invisible factors affect individual
behaviour. Can't ignore the invisible factors.
1. Verstehen- Vertehen is defined as an interpretative understanding of social
actions through 'empathetic liaison' so as to build a sequence of motives to
trace the 'cause and effect' of social action. this method literally means
comprehending or understanding at the level of the actor.Life world of people is
their own making. Individual actions in a situation are driven by multiple
factors: moods, motives, meanings, rationality, values etc. -> This makes social
action and reality vast, unorganised, dichotomous and chaotic. This is why it
can't be studied in totality.
Steps of investigation:
1. Investigator should reconstruct situational choices and constraints of the actor.
2. Investor should be at the same wavelength as that of the actor.
3. Should not have any sympathy. Indifference ensures objectivity.
4. Investigator can enter conversation and use primary methods of data collection.
In this way, by using some systematic and scientific approach, Weber maximises the
probability of establishing meaning. He discusses two types of understandings which can be
used to decipher the meanings-
a. Direct observation understanding, i.e, what the investigator observes.
b. Explanatory understanding, i.e., in which, the investigator draws meanings by explaining
the situational constraints and meanings.

2.Causal Pluralist Methods-Weber rejected the mono-causal explanations, and stressed

that the causes can be multiple or plural. This approach is also termed as a probabilistic
approach. He favoured identification of probable factors, rather than emphasising upon the
singularity of the causes his idea of social action and other methods and approaches are
generally criticised on following grounds-
1. According to Hans Gerth and C Wright Mills, although Weber implied that he had a
great concern with mental processes, he actually spent little time on them.
2. He laid greater stress on individual meanings and ignored the influence of social
structure in the understanding the reality.
3. His claim of objectivity is also not true. His methods of Verstehen and Ideal Types are
highly susceptible to subjectivity of the investigator.
4. His idea of social action has focused on individual and collective action is ignored.
5. Weber also ignores unintended meanings and consequences of social action.
Merton highlights such consequences in terms of latent functions.
6. His definition of social action is also handicapped by inclusion of orientation towards
others. Parsons expanded the meaning of social action by including situational
choices, constraints and aspiration of the actor as well.

2. Ideal types
Ideal Type is the one sided accentuation of reality from the limited point of view of the researcher
arranged into a unified analytical construct.

● It is a methodological tool or device to help in analysis of any aspect of social reality.

● They are derived inductively from the real world and not deductively from personal
judgments alone.
● Ideal type is a mental construct used to identify certain regularities in social
life.According to Weber, Ideal Type is not a reality in itself, but a way to express the
reality. The individual elements may be meaningless, but when combined with other
elements, they form the reality
● Ideal Types are abstractions or pure types constructed through emphasising on
certain traits of a given social item, which are employed in order to understand the
complexities of the social world are therefore hypothetical constructions, formed from
real phenomena, which have an explanatory value.

1. According to Lachman, They are heuristic devices which act as a measuring rod for
the investigator to understand the actual phenomenon.
 2. Ideal Types act as fixed point of reference helps in comparison with empirical reality,
in order to establish its divergences or similarities
3. Although derived from the real world, they are not to be mirror images of that world.
Rather, they are to be one-sided exaggerations of what goes on in the real world.

Need for building social reality itself is complex to comprehend. One can know the reality in
parts, and not whole at a time. To understand each part, features of that part must be
understood separately. In this process, some critical features have to be given more
importance over the others.

Formulation formed by a number of elements which, though, found in reality, may or may not
be discovered in their specific form. These elements must be found by trained investigators
in the form of abstractions drawn from subjective meanings of the individual. Investigators
must be capable of looking at the phenomenon from the eyes of an individual actor. These
elements are thus, based upon the interpretation of the investigator

Weber used Ideal Types extensively in his works like Economic and Social Organization,
The City and Sociology of Religion. Ideal Types developed by Weber are grouped into
many categories -
1. . Ideal Types of Historical Particulars - These are Ideal Types of particular historical
phenomena like some ancient city, protestant ethics and capitalism.
2. Ideal Types of Abstract Phenomena in Social Reality - It involves developing abstract
phenomena like social action and authority which can be used to understand a social
phenomenon.
3. Structural Ideal Types - These are forms taken by the causes and consequences of
social action, For example, traditional domination.

Weber's argued that Ideal Types should be neither too general nor too specific. For example,
in the case of religion, he would reject Ideal Types of the history of religion in general, but he
would also be critical of Ideal Types of very specific phenomena, such as an individual's
religious experience. Rather, Ideal Types are developed for intermediate phenomena such
as Calvinism, Pietism, Methodism and Baptism.

Ideal Types are also not developed once and for all. Because society is constantly changing,
and the interests of social scientists as well, it is necessary to develop new typologies to fit
the changing reality.

Ideal Types perform various functions for the researcher.

1. They act as a measuring rod for a social process.
2. They act as a ready reference and save the researcher from the hassles of studying
a phenomenon afresh. For example, Ideal Type of capitalism
3. It makes prediction possible. Situations which approximate an Ideal Type will have a
similar outcome.
4. It also helps in establishing linkages between multiple social phenomena, as
demonstrated by Weber in his Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism.

However, this heuristic device of Weber is criticised for the following reasons-
1. Weber has not suggested any specific method to identify elements of Ideal Type and it is
totally left on investigator
II. Despite his claim of objectivity, Ideal Type is highly susceptible to subjectivity of
investigators. especially in selection of elements of Ideal type

3. Authority

Power is defined by Weber as The chance of a man or a number of men to realise their own
will in a communal action, even against the resistance of those who are participating .
Authority, according to Weber, is power which is considered legitimate in society coercion
differentiates power from authority.

Weber identifies three sources of legitimacy-tradition, rationality and affective or charisma

and on the basis of these, he developed three pure types or Ideal Types of authority.

1. Traditional Authority- stems out from traditional social actions ie., authority based upon
beliefs, customs and values. ex- authority exercised by a hereditary monarch, a feudal lord,
a caste Brahmin.rulers enjoy personal authority by virtue of their inherited status.Weber saw it
as barriers to the development of rationality and rise of rational economic structures, in
particular. capitalism - as well as to various other components of a rational society

2. Charismatic Authority - result of personal qualities of the person who exercises it. It
corresponds to affective social action.ex, Mahatma Gandhi over masses his sense of
charisma was also dependent on the group of disciples and the way that they define the
charismatic leader. To Weber, charisma was a revolutionary force becomes more
pronounced in times of crisis and turmoil, when other types of authority seem to be
failing.According to Weber, a charismatic system is inherently fragile. It survives only as long
as the charismatic leader lives or the crisis lasts..Not written or derived from traditional
belief.not organised; therefore there is no paid staff or administrative set-up

3. Legal Rational Authority- based on Zweckrational social action.rational system because

appointed on the basis of qualifications which are codified and prescribed and is legal because
it is in accordance with the laws of the land Legal-rational authority can take a variety of
structural forms, but the form that most interested Weber was bureaucracy, which he
considered the purest type of exercise of legal authority.
Actual authority may be a combination of above Ideal Types of authority. For example,
Franklin D Roosevelt, \ and Nehru ruled on all three bases as they were elected in
accordance with a series of rational-legal principles. By the time they were elected three
times, a good part of the rules had traditional elements. Finally, many disciples and followers
regarded them as charismatic leaders.

Further, a particular type of authority may change over time and transform into another type.
Weber refers to this as routinisation of charisma where transformation of charismatic
leadership into institutionalised leadership where an office takes the place of a personality as the
focus of authority.
Problem of succession arises with the death or disappearance of the leader. The original
charisma gets transformed either into traditional authority or rational-legal authority. If the
charismatic figure is succeeded by a son/daughter or some close relative, traditional authority
results. If charismatic qualities are identified and written down, then it changes into rational legal
authority. Ex: charisma passed on to IG from JLN through 'Letters to my daughter' gave dynasty
rule - transformed to traditional authority. RC also exists within the continuity of bureacracy and
gives continuity of legal rational authority.

His theory of authority is criticised on various grounds-

1. Weber's conception of authority is primarily criticised for the anomaly in Ideal Types of
social action and Ideal Types of authority. He mentions four types of social actions, but
mentions only three types of authority,

2. Michel Foucault has argued that authority and power don't lie with particular institutions
and persons, as Weber suggested. Power is highly dispersed in society and operates at all
levels in different situations.

3. According to Robert Dahl, authority is situational and one may hold different kinds of
authority. It is also relative. One may be in a controlling position in one instance and may be
controlled by others in another instance.

4. Bureaucracy - “theory of social and economic organisation”

According to Weber, bureaucracy is a hierarchical organisation, designed rationally to

coordinate the work of many individuals, in the pursuit of large scale administrative tasks and
organisational goals.

● bureaucracy is capable of attaining the highest degree of efficiency and is formally

the most rational known means of exercising authority over human beings.
● It is superior to any other form in precision, in stability in the stringency of its
discipline, and in its reliability
● formally capable of application to all kinds of administrative tasks.

Ideal type - main features of bureaucracy:

1. In order to function adequately, it relies on rules and regulations, such as:
○ activities are distributed as official duties
○ stable or regular system by which authority is delimited by law of land
2. there is a hierarchy of officials in authority and levels of graded authority with a
firmly ordered SYSTEM OF SUPERORDINATION AND SUBORDINATION
3. management is carried out through written documents or is codified
4. A DIVISION OF LABOUR based on specialised functions and responsibilities
5. Selection AND PROMOTION BASED ON TECHNICAL COMPETENCE,
SPECIALISED KNOWLEDGE OR SKILL.
 6. Provision for PECUNIARY COMPENSATION AS A FIXED SALARY.
7. THE SYSTEM OF TENURE FOR LIFE. Normally the position of the bureaucrat
is held for life as specified by contract.

Characteristics of Officials in Bureaucracy:

1. Office-work is a ‘vocation’ for officials.
2. They are specially trained for their jobs.
3. Their qualifications determine their position or rank in the office.
4. They are expected to do their work honestly.
5. A CLEAR DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE SPHERE OF OFFICE AND THAT OF
THE PRIVATE AFFAIRS OF THE INDIVIDUAL.

Impact on personal lives:

1. enjoy a high status in society

2. jobs carries transfer liabilities - some instability in their professional and personal
lives
3. receive salaries not in accordance with productivity but status
4. enjoy good career prospects

Weber argues that bureaucracies of modern societies are slowly moving towards this pure
type as this type of organisation has technical superiority over other types of organisations.

Iron Cage of Bureaucracy:

● Despite being the most efficient organisation, Weber foresaw it as a source of alienation
of human beings.
● Rationalisation that dominates all aspects of bureaucratic life becomes a threat to indiv
liberty and creativity.
● He referred to it as an iron cage of rationality which makes human beings, slaves
of rationality, who cannot escape it as they get too addicted to it. It produces
specialists without spirit.
● He decribed bureaucracy as escape proof, practically unshatterable and among the
hardest insti to destroy once they are established.
● Unlike Marx, he didn't forsee dictatorship of proletariat but dictaorship of officials.

He believes that a strong parliamentary form of government could control state bureaucracy
and suggested that state bureaucrats be made directly accountable to parliament for their
action and can be done through parliamentary committees.

1. Roberto Michels, bureaucracy so dominating in democracy, that it reduces a

democracy into an oligarchy. Bureaucratic institutions reduced human beings as
simply cogs in the organisational machines.
2. ROBERT K MERTON: Book - 'Bureaucratic Theory and Personality'
 a. Merton gave this theory in the backdrop of 1960s America when Bureaucracy
was deeply involved in the corruption and spoils system. While Weber looked at
Bureaucracy as a institution, Merton saw it with a person-centric view. Rule
bound, non-emotional, business like, cool and composed. This insensitivity
reduces people’s trust in them. Bureaucratic personalities don’t trust other
people, this creates fear among people. Mechanistic system causes delays. The
quality of invisibility disincentivises B to take initiatives. They do a routine job.
Bureaucracy was introduced to increase efficiency but in reality they simply follow
rules and laws and don’t go beyond. All this results in goal displacement of
Bureaucracy from gratifying institution’s interests to self-interests.
3. James Vander Zenden – they are completely detached from human values. This is
also known as ‘dehumanisation’.
4. Tom Burns – He studied 20 electronics companies of Britain and found that with
excessive written and formal rules,unable to make quick decisions which cost
companies
5. Peter Blau –Some informalities can increase its efficiency.
6. Alvin Gouldner – argued that the degree of bureaucratisation depends on the type
of work. In his study of gypsum plant and mine - good for work which require routine
and predictable work while for unpredictable work it lead to inefficiency.Gouldner
identified three types of bureaucracy in his studies with very specific patterns
7. Seymour Lipset – He studied province of Canada (Saskatchewan) and found that
bureaucracy successfully prohibited the implementation of socialist policies of the
new government.

Paul Du Gay, argues that bureaucracies have an unmatched ethos which includes equal
treatment of all despite race, colour and caste. various limitations are due to their increasing
politicisation. According to Martin Harris in the contemporary world,t there is a decline of
paperwork due to widespread use of electronic platforms and it has significantly altered the
way modern bureaucracies function.

5. Protestant ethics and spirit of capitalism

Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism, 1904, known for its use of scientific methods in
Sociology, possibility of studying macro phenomenon in terms of micro and a demonstration
of his idea of causal pluralism or probabilism, as he factored in political, economic and
religious factors in the rise of capitalism.

Unlike Marx who gave primacy to economic structure and material aspects, Weber put more
emphasis on ideas leading to an economic system.

He was concerned with Protestantism, mainly as a system of ideas, and its impact on the
rise of another system of ideas, the spirit of capitalism, and ultimately on a capitalist
economic system.

HE observed that modern business leaders, higher grades of skilled labourer,technologically

and commercially trained personnel are predominantly protestant.
In order to explore the possible correlation, Weber developed the Ideal Types of Capitalism
and Protestant Ethics. He chose Calvinism as the most original ffor this purpose. he made a
comparative study to establish causal linkages between the two.

Features of Protestantism (Ideal Type):

1. Material asceticism: simple, frugal life-style was recommended along with hard work.
Hard earned money couldn't be spent on worldly pleasures, so it was reinvested.
2. Doctrine of Pre-destination: God has already written everyone's destiny in gold and it
can't be changed through rituals or discource to priests. One can prove that they are
the chosen one by prospering on Earth. One shall work for the glory of God.
3. Good behaviour: to stay away from ceremonies and rituals. “Work is worship” and
“time is money”. Conformity to rules and laws.
4. Notion of “calling”: God has created each individual with a purpose. Nothing is mere
work but a calling or a mission and needs to be performed with devotion and
sincerity.
5. This-worldly religion: doesn't believe in idea of re-birth. Tries to create the Kingdom
of God on earth through collective efforts

Ideal Type of capitalism is explained with following elements-

● aimed at unlimited accumulation of profit.
● Work in modern capitalism is organised rationally.
● ethics in capitalism are, time is money, work should be done well, work is for an end
called profit.
● Capitalism honours individualism, innovation, profit pursuit and hard work.

Correlated both and said

● Doctrine of pre-destination causes anxiety -> this worldly success considered as being
the chosen one.
● Asceticism -> savings and reinvestment
● Notion of calling -> harworking
● Concluded that there is an elective affinity bw both - ie coincidence bw requirements of
capitalism and tenets of calvinism.Weber tried to validate his correlation through
historical comparitive studies of various religions.

Features of Judaism in West Asia: Ancient Judaism, 1952

● Judaism could have generated the “spirit of capitalism”. However, certain historical forces
prevented this. The Exodus or mass migration of the Jews from their homeland due to
persecution left them scattered all over the world.
Catholicism:
● Necessary ethics of discipline, hardwork and capital accumulation are present. However
obstacles such as excess commitment to Church and rituals, belief in rebirth and other
worlds prevent Cap from developing fully.
Features of Confucianism in China (book - 'Religion of China'):
● Despite the presence of well developed economy, trade and commerce in ancient China
western style capitalism didn't develop there because:
1. Ultimate aim to maintain order with the nature
2. Strong obligations to family and kin
3. Behaviour to be guided by tradition

Features of Hinduism in India (book - 'Religion of Inida'):

● Weber expressed a strict negative attitude towards the possibility of rational capitalism
existing within the ethos of Hinduism.
1. The ideas of “Karma”, “dharma” and “punarjanma” (the cycle of births and rebirths)
made Indians defeatists, fatalists (ie subjugation to fate)
2. The Hindu ideal of “moksha” or salvation states that our souls can be liberated only
when we empty ourselves of worldly desires
3. The material world is an illusion or “maya”
4. Hinduism preaches “other-worldly asceticism”
5. Caste system is an obstacle to Cap. It kills merit, efficiency and mobility creating a
pathological form of DoL
● Plurality of causes -> both spirit and substance (was already there in the form of
technology, capital etc.).

Criticism -
1. He seems to be selective while drawing elements for his analysis. For example,
according to Milton Singer, he took selective elements out of Hinduism; there is an
equivalent of Calvinists in forms of Chettiars of Madras.
2. Wallerstein believe that colonialism is responsible for the rise of capitalism in the
West.as it got huge markets in Asia, Africa and America, cheap labour and raw
materials. which led to accumulation of wealth and hence capitalism.
3. Alexander Gerschenkron:Russia's economy grew post-revolution due to death of
religion by State's role.
4. Bendix and Lipset Cross cultural connections led to Cap in Germany. Germans
borrowed technology from Britain, ideology from France and insititutions from America to
emerge as one of the strongest capitalistic countries.
5. Ayal and Bellah: Studied Cap in Japan and cited the reasons as history and nature. He
suggested that strong nationalism emerged after war and also Japanese have a strong
fighting spirit due to harsh environmental conditions in which they live - full of
earthquakes and disasters.
4.Talcott parsons - Social systems, pattern variables

His theory of Social Action borrows ideas from economic Sociology, Culturology and
Psychology. He combined them and developed a grand theory of social action that claimed
to capture every possible human behaviour in time and space.

Systemic view of society - concerned about order and integration of society Value consensus is
the integrating force result of roles performances, which are institutionalised in society,Through
socialisation, role expectations, values and goals of society are inculcated in individuals. Acc to
him, main task of Socio is to analyse the institutionalised pattern of values.

Parsons divides earlier contributions into the utilitarian, the positivist, and the idealist He
integrated it to develop his own synthetic approach.
● The utilitarians-social action-highly individualist fashion. Emphasise as products of
rational impulses of human beings- unable to accommodate the fact that social life is
collectively cohesive
● positivists -social actors have complete knowledge of their social situation. no room
for error or variation among actors- finality and inflexibility only one way to act: the
correct way.
● The idealist- social action realisation of the social spirit and ideas assume that
human beings act only to fulfil a grand mental design.not enough emphasize social
practice

Each of these say something important, it is their exclusivism, which Parsons objects to.
Keeping the above in mind, Parsons offers another approach to the study of social systems
termed as “action approach”

1.Social action

In an attempt to arrest all possible empirical action into one universal theoretical framework,
proposed a Voluntaristic Theory of Social Action which sought to bridge the differences
between positivists and the idealists/Interpretivists by incorporating both micro and
macro elements
 Social Action is defined by Parsons in his seminal work The Structure of Social Action,
1937 as Any act, consciously performed is a Social Action

Parsons instead gave four conditions-

1. It occurs in a social situation, ie, actor is a member of society while performing a
Social Action
2. It is oriented towards attainment of a particular goal, i.e An actor is motivated.
3. Action is regulated by norms and values.
4. It involves investment of energY.

Voluntaristic theory of social action/Action Theory: Every

actor is rational, and voluntarily chooses a goal. He uses a
series of alternate means to negotiate with constraints to
acheive his goals. Man is not absolutely free but his
behaviour is determined by his negotiation with normative
and situational constraints. All actions manifested can be
divided in three types, supported by 3 kinds of values and
motives.

An actor is a goal seeking individual with alternative means to attain those goals and is
influenced by 2 factors
1. Motivational Orientation: due to personal condition of the actor. (CCE)
2. Value Orientation: influence of norms and values of society. (CAM)

Motivational orientation (needs) CCE Values (evaluation) CAM Actions IEM

1. Cognitive motive: need for 1. Cognitive value: evaluation 1. Instrumental action: driven by
objective and material gratification based on material and objective cognitive motives and actions to gratify
standards objective and material needs.
Evaluative component is most
dominating, both means and ends are
logically decided.

2. Cathetic motive: need for emotional 2. Appreciative value: evalutaion 2. Expressive action: oriented to gratify
and asthetic gratification based on emotional and asthetic emotional and asthetic needs implicitly.
standards Appreciative component is dominant.

3. Evaluative motive: need for self 3. Moral value: evaluation based 3. Moral action: oriented for self
assessment and quest for unbound on absolute standard evaluation, self glorification and self
appreciation accomplishment. Actor's own
motivation is subordinate to the values
of society.
Further, actions do nor occur in isolation, but in constellations. Such a constellation,
in the form of institutionalised social interactions is called the Social System.
● institutionalisation of all instrumental actions provides Social System
● institutionalisation of all expressive actions provides Cultural System
● institutionalisation of all moral actions provides Personality System

Society is held together by negotiations between all 3 systems. The social and cultural systems
give inputs to personality systems to play their roles. Parsons explains this through the
Mechanism of Social Control. Presentation of behaviour depends on socialisation and social
control.
Socialisation: converts biological beings to social beings. 3 types:
● Cultural Socialisation: values, étiquettes, normes etc.
● Social Socialisation: rules, laws, profession etc.
● Psychic Socialisation: deals with anger, anxiety, happiness etc.
Social control
● formal Mechanism of Control: indicates roles befitting a situation. If not followed, subject
to punishment.
● Informal Mechanism of Control: when FMC is not followed, family and other elements try
to exercise control through counselling
● Coercive Control: when both FMC and IMC are breached, coercive methods are adop

2.Social system -The Structure of Social Action, 1937, and The Social System 1951.

Parsons Developed his idea of social system from the works of Tonnies. Durkheim, etc. He
also took the idea of the Cultural System from Malinowski, WHR Rivers, etc. and the idea
of Personality System from G H Mead, C H Cooley, etc.

Social System is defined as-" Consisting of plurality of individuals actors interacting with
each other, in a situation which has an environment with actors who are motivated in terms
of a tendency to the optimization of gratification. A society becomes a Social System when it
has three things present:
1. Integration
2. Interdependence
3. Reciprocation

Gave concept of Action Systems as a precursor to idea of Social System:

1. Organismic or Biological or Behavioural System: physical or
biological aspect of social reality. Storehouse of energy.
2. Personality system: internal hidden aspects of society resulting
from motives. Storehouse of motivation.
3. Social system: pattern of actual interaction bw units. 4 subsystems
->Economic system (for adaptation), political system (for goal
 attainment), social institutions for social control (for integration), socialisation system or
fiduciary system (for latency and pattern management)
4. Cultural system: norms and values. Storehouse of information.

Every Action System has following characteristics:

1. System is a unified whole made up of interdependent parts called subsystems and each
sub system can be treated as a system itself.
2. Each system has a boundary.
3. Systems or subsystems are organised in a relatively stable manner. So definite pattern of
inter-relations exist.
4. Certain functional prerequisites for existence of a system (AGIL)

Parsons gave functional pre-requisites of a social system:

● social systems must be structured to operate compatibly
● must have requisite support from other systems
● system must meet significant proportion of needs of its actors
● adequate participation from its members
● at least min control over disruptive behavior
● if conflict becomes sufficiently disruptive, it must be controlled
● requires a language to survive
Initially,through his Mechanism Equilibrium Phase viewed Social System in terms of structure
only, later through his Requisite Functional Phase, Parsons talked of Social System in terms
of fulfilment of functions or functional prerequisites or AGIL functions.

ROLES FUNCTIONS SUB-SYSTE

MS

A generation and acquisition of resources from env and adapts => Adaptive Organismic
survival. Roles: ex Economy
Identification of resources, usefulness and preperation for exploitation
of resources

G Identification and prioritisation of goals. Fix means to acheive. Change Goal Personality
goals when not attainable. (consumatory - means achiving ends) attainment Ex political
system

I Gives instructions to other sub systems. Helps to maintain coherence Integration Social
and solidarity. Formulates rules and laws, amends them and Ex Law
implements them to control indiv and insti
 L Stores, organises and maintains motivational energy of elements. Latency Cultural
Dance, drama, music etc entertainment for tension management. (tension Ex schools,
management
Ethics values, norms for pattern maintenance. and pattern family etc.
Gives solution in times of conflict b/n institutions. maintenance)

Parsons also sees their inter-relation and

inter-linkages. Social System is linked with other
systems through Energy flow and Information
control, which Parsons termed Cybernetic
Hierarchy of Control.
Moving Equilibrium: The system of inputs and
outputs between the environment and the 4 systems.
This leads to Cybernetic Control, which is a
continuous invisible control that exists at all times.
● Organismic system with exposure to env. collects info about resources and passes it on
to personality system
● Personality sys then defines goals and puts limited and reasonable demands on social
sys based on socialisation
● Social sys creates opportunities to achieve goals by integrating different systems
● Cultural sys then passes its norms and values to social sys expecting it to change its
rules accordingly, similarly outputs are passed to lower level and through negotiations the
system attains equilibrium.
Change promotes continuity. Every change is consensual and not coercive or arbitrary.
Equilibrium is due to harmony b/n the systems but it is not fixed. It is dynamic and that makes
society a story of 'moving equilibrium' with cybernetic control

According to Parsons, re-establishing of equilibrium was required as When due to external

(cultural contact) or internal factors (sub-system incompatibility), stresses develop among
the sub-systems,

Parsons said that as structural differentiation increases, energy flow also increases. This
leads to an adaptational upgrade. This in turn creates a need for integration which is met
by value generalisation, which ensures greater inclusion. These two are in sync with each
other. Thus social change occurs when there is a change in the energy flow or the
information control as equilibrium stage is disturbed.it is controlled by

● Socialisation - shared values are transmitted from one generation to another.

● Social control - discourages deviance.

Criticism of social system-

1. little practical utility and low on

empirical testability, too abstract with little
empirical verifiability. Dahrendorf called his conception as utopian

2.According to Jonathan Turner, structure functionalism suffers from illegitimate teleology

and tautology They often take cause and effect and vice-versa.

3.HABERMAS: criticised for its neglect of class conflict that exists in society.According to
Turner he was obsessed with integration.

4. Percy Cohen sees the problem in the social system that all the elements of a society are
seen as reinforcing one another as well as the system as a whole. This makes it difficult to
see how these elements can also contribute to change.

5. Horowitz says that Parsons tends to see conflict as necessarily destructive which is a
wrong assumption.

3. Pattern variables

Defn: Parsons defined them as the fundamental dilemmas that actors face in any situation. They
are choices bw alternative variables while performing roles.
● PV is the connecting link bw Parsonian idea of social actions and social system.
● While PVs are dilemmas, social system is the solution.
● PVs allow for categorisation of dichotomies of personality system, normative demans and
value orientations.
● Dilemmas can be resolved by role institutionalisation and role internalisation.

Such dichotomous variables exist in 5 pairs

1. Self orientation vs Collective Orientation - fulfilment of self interest or collective
interest.
2. Affectivity vs Affective Neutral - dilemma bw emotional attachement or ditachment.
Ex relation of doctors with patients is largely affactive neutral.
3. Particularism vs Universalim - standard of values to be used in an evaluationary
process.
4. Ascription bs Achievement - to judge the actors in a situation.
5. Diffuseness vs Specificity - dilemmas regarding relations and obligations.

Parsons says social institutions tend to cluster arund opposite poles in these dichotomies. Ex In
family - relations are particularistic, affective and diffused. True for Gemeinschaft also.
At workplace - relations are universalistic, affectively neutral and achievement based. True for
Gesellschaft Ideal Type of Tonnies.

Choice of one pattern over another is dictated by cultural values and institutionalised norms, ie
social action is guided by social system.
On the basis of PVs, he identified 4 types of structures of social systems:
1. Universalistic Achievement Pattern - Modern American society
 2. Universalistic Ascription Pattern - Nazi Germany. as an organisation, it was rational, but
notions of superiority and inferiority were assigned based on birth.
3. Particularistic Achievement Pattern - Classical Chinese family. Even royal blooded
members had to prove their worth via individual achievements.
4. Particularistic Ascription Pattern - traditional indian caste system.

PV explains multiple situations, not only a theory but a paradigm. It is also a congnitive
consonance as it gives a mental framework to explain social organisation
● explains both macro and micro level
● Can explain social change and continuity
● Can explain relation b/n or within institution and actors
● structural difference b/n MS and trad soc
● To understand Microscopic Behaviour because rational humans understand demands of
situation and present appropriate behavior
● Dilema of an actor in action situation
● Influence of culture and values on behaviour

PATTERN VARIABLE A PATTERN VARIABLE B

Cathetic motive -> Appreciative Cognitive motive -> Cognitive

value -> Expressive action value -> Instrumental action

Identity (borrowed this from Ralph Ascriptive Achievement

Linton)

Degree of emotion possible in a Affective Affective neutral

relationship

Range of obligations Diffused Specific

Pattern of committment Particularism Universalism

Mode of attachment Collective orientation Self orientation

Parsons introduced a systematic outlook in the discipline of Sociology. He is also known to

introduce sophisticated terminology, which at times attracted criticism as well. His legacy
was carried forward by functionalists like Merton. Despite his frequent criticism, his imprint
on the discipline is indelible. Recently, attempts to revive his ideas have been made by
Parsonsian sociologists like Bryan Turner and Jeffrey Alexander.

C.W. Mills considers that an institution is a set of roles graded in authority. For example, in
doctor-patient , the doctor wants to maintain distance from a normal patient, vice-versa if the
patient is VIP he tries to develop closeness.

5. Robert.K.merton - latent and manifest functions, conformity and deviance

and reference group
Merton was influenced by Pitirim Sorokin who tried to balance large-scale theorising with a
strong interest in empirical research; and thus he modified functionalism with not only
emphasising on theoretical work, but empirical reality a well. And is called
neo-functionalist

functional theories of Radcliffe-Brown and Malinowski, which were formulated to deal with
the realities of a simpler tribal society, could not be applied to contemporary societies which
are complex.

Merton argues that an institution such as religion, which is universally integrative in simpler
tribal societies, may cause disharmony in our own society, where there are many religions,
So, religion, instead of being functional it may become dysfunctional in society.

Thus he suggested their modifications in following paradigm -

1. Modification of postulates of functional unity- implies that the various parts of a
social system show a high level of integration. Due to this, functional approach has
acquired a conservative bias.Merton argues that whatever exists does not provide
the function of unity to the system although it may be true of small, primitive societies,
this generalization cannot be extended to larger, more complex societies
2. Modification of postulate of universal functionalism- early functionalists assumed that
if a social item exists, it must therefore have had positive consequences for the
integration of the social system.Merton argued that the context in which the social
item is studied should also be taken into account. it may be functional in one context
and dysfunctional in another.
3. Modification of postulate of functional indispensability- it argued that there are some
indispensable functions to be performed in the society and there are some social
institutions which are indispensable to perform such functions. For example, Davis
and Moore claim that religion plays a unique and indispensable part in society.
Merton questions this assumption of indispensability and argues that the same
functional prerequisites may be met by a range of alternative institutions. For
example a political ideology like communism.
Thus According to Merton, an all-encompassing theory is, at best, a philosophical system,
marked by its architectural splendours as well as its sterility.

He believed that empirical tests, and not theoretical assertions, are crucial to
functional analysis.so he developed his own functional paradigm of analysis as a
guide to the integration of theory
1. Functional analysis must concern empirical systems, not abstract systems.
2. Investigation must focus on a particular structural pattern of interest
3. Using both primary + Secondary techniques & sources Identify Manifest function and
Latent functions (motives not identified by individuals)
4. Then assess the positive, negative, and nonfunctional consequences of them and
establish a "net balance of consequence.

Middle range theories

1. Merton saw that while many sociological studies focused on either the macro-level of
society as a whole which were too ambitious or the micro-level of social interactions which
 had little practical consequence. To rectify this, Merton argued for middle range theories as
middle path between the macro and micro.
2. It focuses on a limited set of assumptions, from which specific hypotheses can be
derived and empirical testing can be done.
3. It came as a rejection of the mega theory of Parsonian sociology and advocated that
theory building in sociology should not be governed by intellectual aggression or
academic speculation as sociological theories cannot afford to be rogue, unrealistic,
jargon focussed and simply logical.
4. Rather theories in sociology should arrange the empirical facts in a consolidated
manner. Hence sociological theory should be fact driven ,coming out of facts to explain
the facts in systematic manner
5. MRT's aim is to fill the gap between raw empiricism and grand theories by taking
specific aspects of social reality which can be theorised and rested empirically.
6. It must be supported by quantitative as well as qualitative methods and should use both
primary and secondary sources of data. Thus, middle range theories are a triple alliance
of theory, data and method.

Advantages of middle range theories include scientific nature, restability, empiricism,

practical applicability, etc. However, subjective identification of middle range phenomena is
challenging in research

Ex: Role Conflict Theory, Reference Group Theory, Deviance Theory, Self Fulfilling
Prophecy, Self Defeating Prophecy etc.

Vis a vis Ideal Type: MRT are less abstract than IT, just above a hypothesis. IT formed from
existing writings, historical phenomenon and own judgement. It loses significance after
research ends and is specific research focused. MRT developed on real, everyday issues.
Facts are first collected and then the theory is developed.

Role Conflict Theory: Every person plays multiple roles befitting to their cultural norms, but
when there are incompatible demands from different roles, it creates role conflict. Ex: When
the teacher also happens to be the child's parent. Inadequate performance due to extensive
demands on energy, time or resources creates role strain. Ex: Single parent.

Latent and manifest functions

Merton criticised aspects of structural functionalism and add new dimensions to it by

suggesting that there should be multiple levels of analysis with social items and laid out
theory of manifest and latent function in "Social Theory and Social Structure"1949 which
Functions, according to Merton, are “those observed consequences which make for the
adaptation or adjustment of a given system”.

But one social fact can have negative consequences for another social fact. To rectify this
omission in early structural functionalism, Merton gave the idea of a dysfunction. Just as social
items could contribute to the maintenance of parts of the social system, they also could have
negative consequences for them.
Merton also posited the idea of non-functions, – as consequences that are simply irrelevant to
the system under consideration.ex-“survivals” from earlier historical times which may had
positive or negative consequences in the past,

Merton also introduced the concepts of manifest and latent functions which are important
additions to functional analysis. Manifest functions are the actual intention of the actor. These
are the functions understood by the actor himself and are subjective dispositions of the actor.
It refers to the micro aspect of reality and is usually studied mainly through a Non-Positivist
approach.

Merton also gave the concept of — unanticipated consequences. Actions have both intended
and unintended consequences.sociological analysis is required to uncover the unintended
consequences;

Peter Berger has called this “debunking”, or looking beyond stated intentions to real effects.
Merton- unanticipated consequences and latent functions are not the same. A latent function
(neither intended nor perceived by the actor) is one type of unanticipated consequence, one
that is functional for system. But there are two other types of unanticipated consequences that
latent dysfunctions”, and “those which are irrelevant to the system.

Thus Difference between Manifest and Latent function can also be seen as the difference
between conscious intention and actual outcome.

He gave examples of Hopi Tribes and their rain dance in his Social Theory and Social
Structure, 1967. The manifest function of such rain dances is to appease rain gods, but
their latent function is to reinforce the solidarity of the tribes. Benefits of manifest and latent
functions analysis -

1. FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES BECOME RATIONAL: Hopi Indian ceremony seems to

be an irrational act at the first glance, but its analysis shows that an irrational activity
has become rational and meaningful.
2. ENHANCES SOCIAL KNOWLEDGE: Veblen’s theory of leisure class talked about
conspicuous consumption- People purchase commodities to further comfortable life
but also show conspicuous consumption to show off their status in society. Apart from
it, the rate of inflation is affected with such activities, which is harmful for the
economy of the country.
3. OPEN NEW VISTAS FOR RESEARCH: A sociologist searches for hidden
consequences that goes beyond surface-level observations
4. Challenging Established Morals -Merton asserts that even actions deemed “immoral”
may serve latent functions, although this does not necessarily make them moral. The
“immoral” political machine, according to Merton, fulfils what official democracy
fails as In an impersonal democracy, voters are often treated as amorphous masses.
In contrast, the political machine recognizes individual voters within specific
neighbourhoods, addressing their unique problems and wants.
5. Multidisciplinary approach - combined psychological and socio-cultural aspects
6. Resolved contradiction between positions & non– positivism and gave new direction
to Sociology away from deterministic approach. Marx -Conflict determinist,Parsons -
 Functionalist determinist RKM - everything could be functional, disfunctional and
non-functional.

Limitation of Merton’s theory of functionalism :

1. LACK OF RATIONALITY: It is difficult to tell rationally, to what extent any activity is
functional or dysfunctional.
2. LACK OF OBJECTIVITY AND UNIVERSALITY: Like Brown and Malinowski, Merton
also presented an example of simple societies (Hopi Indians). In that way, his
universality is questionable;also there is lacks objectivity.

Merton contended that not all structures are indispensable to social system. Some parts of
our social system can be eliminated. This helps functional theory overcome its conservative
biases. And recognize that some structures are expendable and open the way for
meaningful social change.

Conformity and deviance

Conformity is that action which is oriented to social norms or expectations and falls within the
toleration prescribed by the society. It causes lies in socialisation, laws and rules, religion,
vested interests, etc.

Deviance is deviating from the accepted path. positively sanctioned- Nobel Prize for deviant
scientific activities or negatively sanctioned -punishment (deviant criminal behaviour )also
Deviant in one society may be normal in other societies - Teton Sioux Indians (USA) mutilate
their bodies as a display of valour, it may be termed as madness in other societies.

Earlier approaches to deal with deviance before merton :

● Biological Theorist Dr. Lombroso in the 19th century accounted for deviance in
terms Size of jaw, limbs, body built etc.
● Psychological Theories Sigmund Freud:- deviance is the result of inherited psychic
abnormality acquired as result of inadequate socialisation.
● Merton's deviance is based on conception of anomie, in the backdrop of The Great
Economic Depression

Durkheim defined anomie as a form of normlessness (failure of society to regulate or

constrain the ends or goals of human desire) and defined it as a pathological state, due to
pathological division of labour. Which always has negative consequences and is transitory in
nature, and he defines symptoms of anomie being reflected in high rate of suicides, marital
breakdown and industrial conflict. He suggests curing it by making people organically linked
with society.

Also According to Durkheim deviance is unavoidable as There can never be complete

socialisation, Conscience collective cannot be fully followed and also it is normal and healthy
for some degree of deviance to prevail as if collective conscience becomes too repressive. It
may suppress reform and innovation
 Merton, on the other hand, views anomie as a part of the
system and a general feature of society which is always
there. He sees it in terms of the structure of society and
Deviance is considered as a result of anomie.

Merton explains his idea of deviance in his Social

Structure and Anomie, 1938. Which is analysis of the
relationship between culture structure, and anomie and
defined it as – A situation in which there is a
discrepancy between culturally defined goals and
structural means available to achieve them And
Deviance is considered as a result of anomie.

According to Merton, in American society, the culture places a great emphasis on material
success, but many people fail to achieve such success due to their position in the society
because structural means are not sufficient which creates a feeling of deprivation . Thus
chronic discrepancy between cultural promises and structural realities cause structural strain
that produces deviance. When people experience this social strain, they channelize their
strains in different ways in order to manifest different forms of anomic behavior

THUS According to Merton, the structure of society itself produces deviance rather than
psychological factors and a deviant person may resort to various responses such as

1. Conformist - accepts both goals and means and despite their utility and keeps on
pursuing them with some degree of indifference. ex– school students continuing for
years even if the method (the means) is not suitable for them.
2. Innovator- accepts culturally defined goals, but rejects socially accepted means.
Merton – members of the lower strata are most likely to resort to this route to
success. Merton argues that innovators are imperfectly socialised. So, they abandon
institutional means while retaining aspirations of success.
3. Ritualist - accepts socially understandable means, but fails to understand the goals.
Red-tapism in bureaucracy follows ritualism. Members of the lower middle class are
the most likely adopters of this
4. Retreatist- rejection of both means and goals. Alcoholics, drug addicts, vagrants,
etc. fall in this category..
5. Rebellion- first, the rejection of both goals and means and then the creation of new
means and goals.Social reformers
Importance - showcase MRT and unintended consequences of lack of structural means.
merton's theory of anomie is criticised on the following grounds-
1. Interactionists like Howard Becker,One is labelled as a deviant ,Same person may
not be labelled as deviant by one group, but can be by another group.
2. Laurie Taylor -those who wield power decide who will be deviant .Ex Homosexuality
is legal in some countries and is deviance in rest of the countries.
3. Albert Cohen -deviance is due to a specific subculture that members of particular
subgroups develop. Hence, it is collective in nature and not at an individual level also
Metron has failed to take into account non-utilitarian crime such as vandalism, which
don't produce any rewards
 4. Chicago School develops an ecological approach according to which, in a given city
or town, deviance levels vary from area to area depending upon relative economic
prosperity and other factors.

Reference group

first appeared in - Archives of Psychology of Herbert Hyman, later Merton added a

functional dimension in his Social Theory and Social Structure which was primarily
inspired from Samuel Stouffer's - The American Soldier,1949

Reference Group is defined as a group, with which one always makes a comparison, in
order to evaluate one's achievement, aspirations, role performance and ambition. They act
as normative standards for the individual.

Merton l distinguished between Reference Group and Interaction Group. Interaction groups
are a more general part of the individual's social environment but may neither set normative
standards for individuals nor serve as a standard of comparison. On the other hand, the
reference group is the aspirational group and is defined in normative terms as a standard of
comparison and relative deprivation is akin to it.
Reference groups can be of two types-
1. Membership Groups
2. Non-Membership Groups
It is totally up to an individual to decide what reference group one will make. So, a
membership group may not be a reference group, but a non-membership group can be
Further, classified as -positive and negative reference groups. Positive reference groups are
the ones that individual wishes to join: negative are those which individual wishes to avoid.

He also gives the concept of anticipatory socialisation in which an individual starts to

behave in a manner in which members of an aspirational reference group behave. It leads to
change in the value system of individual and it facilitates easy merger of individual in the
aspirational group

He also sees some dysfunctional aspects of anticipatory socialisation in case of closed

systems. In such a situation, an individual becomes a pariah in his own social group and
also fails to gain entry into the reference group and is reduced to a marginal man.

Merton also mentions that, In a closed system the individual is unlikely to choose a
non-membership group as a reference group bcoz in a closed system rights and obligations
of each stratum are generally held to be morally right, an individual even if his objective
conditions are not good, would feel less deprived. But in an open system he compares his lot
with relatively better off non-membership groups hence remains perpetually unhappy and
discontented.

Merton also suggested some factors which are decisive in making a group, a reference
group-
I Power and prestige
II. Isolation in membership group
III. Open vs close group
IV. role models in a group

Further, reference groups don't always remain the same. The choice of reference groups
depends on the nature and quality of norms and values one is interested in and as interests
change, reference groups also change. One's reference group in the political field may not
be the same as those in the religious field. As the choice of reference group is entirely upon
an individual, often, there is a considerable difference in the type of groups chosen by
different generations. This, to some extent, explains the phenomenon of Generation Gap.

Importance and Functions

1. T. Newcomb (1953) writes: “The significant thing about a reference group is, in fact,
that its norms provide frames of reference which actually influence the attitude and
behaviour of a person.”
2. A reference group motivates the individual to accept its values, attitudes and
behaviour-pattern and many newer values, ideals,are added to an individual's
personality,and also emerges possibilities of his going high in social status because
of those new values, thoughts etc.
But when the reference group is of negative nature, its influence on individuals can be
dysfunctional.
1. When the society is closed it does not tolerate such individuals who discards the
accepted traditional norms as a result social tension and conflict emerges.
2. Can lead to Status inconsistency: due to an attempt to get into a reference group by
leaving their current strata. Ex. Lingayats (KN) and Upadyays (OR)
3. in the attempt to get to RG, might face downward mobility. Ex. Bedas and Smith of
Karnataka

6. Mead - Self and identity

Mead was associated with the Chicago School and offered a distinct social-psychological
theory that stood in stark contrast to the prevailing theories and played a key role in the
evolution of symbolic Interactionism.

His ideas are contained in Mind, Self and Society, 1934,compiled by Herbert Blumer,
intellectual roots of Mead's are associated with philosophy of pragmatism and
psychological behaviourism.

He gave priority to the social world in understanding a social experience against traditional
social psychology that began with the psychology of the individual. He says A thinking,
self-conscious being is impossible, without a prior social group,To explain this took help of
various concepts like gesture, symbols, mind and self.

The gesture is in Mead's view, the basic mechanism in the social act .When a gesture is
consciously thought of, it is a significant gesture. While “it becomes significant symbols
when they arouse in the individual, who is making them, the same kind of response, they are
supposed to elicit from those, to whom the gestures are addressed”. A significant symbol
is a kind of gesture, which only humans can make.

In Mead's theory, significant symbols perform crucial functions-they make the mind, mental
processes, and so on, possible. It is only through them, especially language, that human
thinking is possible. He defines thinking as implicit conversion of the individual with himself,
or it is a conversation between I and Me.

Self

Self is defined by Mead as the peculiar ability to be both subject and object. Thus
general mechanism for the development of the self is reflexivity,

According to Mead. Self of an individual is a process and not a thing. It is not a biological
phenomenon and an individual is not born with a self, but it develops as the individual grows
in the society. It is developed through communication and interactions, Mead traces the
genesis of the self through two stages in childhood development
1. Play Stage- during this stage children learn to take the attitude of particular/discrete
others to themselves. Children play various roles and learn to take roles from others
around them. As a result the child learns to become both subject and object and
begins to become able to build a self. However, it is a limited self, because the child
can take only the roles of distinct and separate others and they lack a more general
and organised sense of themselves.

2. Game Stage- the child takes the role of everyone else involved in the game, ie, takes
the roles of, which Mead terms as generalised others. Compared to the play stage,
in the game stage, a definite personality starts to emerge. Children start to learn to
be able to function in organised groups and, most importantly, determine what they
will do within a specific group, thus While play requires only pieces of selves, the
game requires a coherent self.

Through these two concepts, Mead elaborates a process of social interactions which lead to
the development of self. Mead tries to demonstrate that whatever social capital we possess
is acquired and learned and we are not born with that.
Mead looks at the self from a pragmatic point of view. At the individual level, the self
allows the individual to be a more efficient member of the larger society, Because of the self,
people are more likely to do what is expected of them in a given situation and they are more
likely to avoid the inefficiencies that come from failing to do what the group expects. Thus
the self allows for greater coordination in a society as a whole.
But it doesn't mean actors are little more than conformists and that there is little individuality,
As Mead is clear that each self is different from all the others because There is not simply
one grand generalised other but that there are many generalised others in the society, as a
result, multiple selves. Each person's unique set of selves makes him or her different from
everyone else. Furthermore, people need not accept the community as it is. They can reform
things and seek to make them better. In other words, to stand up to the generalised other,
the individual must construct a still larger generalised other, composed not only from the
present but also from the past and the future, and then respond to it. This idea adds
dynamism to Mead's concept of self.
Thus In Mead's analysis, Self is greatly dynamic because-
1. It carries the capability to read the self of others.
2. It has the capability to go for an internal interaction between I and Me.
3. It has the capability to communicate with the mind.

I and Me

While Mead takes an evolutionary view of self through the play and game stages, he also
identifies two other aspects, or phases, of the self, which he labels the / and the Me.
According to Mead, the self is essentially a social process going on with these two
distinguishable phases. The I and the Me are processes within the larger process of the self
and like the self, they are also not things.

The I is the immediate response of an individual to others. It is the incalculable,

unpredictable, and creative aspect of the self. People do not know in advance what the
action the / will take in a social situation. We are never totally aware of the / and through it,
we surprise ourselves with our actions. We know the I only after the act has been carried
out. Thus, we know the I only in our memories. Mead lays great stress on the / for four
reasons-

1. First, it is a key source of novelty in the social processes and gives dynamism to the
individual personality, which otherwise, sounds conformist to the society.
2. Second, Mead believes that it is in the I that our most important values are located.
3. Third, the / constitutes something that we all seek, which is the realisation of the self.
It is the / that permits us to develop a definite personality
4. Finally, Mead sees an evolutionary process in history, in which people in primitive
societies are dominated more by the Me, while in modern societies, there is a greater
component of the I.

This gives Mead's theoretical system some much-needed dynamism and creativity. Without
it. Mead's actors would be totally dominated by external and internal controls. Since every
personality is a mix of the / and the . the great historical figures are seen as having a larger
proportion of the / than most others have. But in day-to-day situations, anyone's I may assert
itself and lead to a change in the social situation. Uniqueness is also brought into Mead's
system through the biographical articulation of each individual's/and Me. That is, the specific
exigencies of each person's life give him or her a unique mix of the / and the Mr.

The / and the Me have contrasting natures. The I reacts against the Me, which is defined by
Mead as the set of attitudes of others which one himself assumes. In other words, the Me is
the adoption of the generalised other and Mead calls it Social Self. In contrast to the /,
people are conscious of the Me The Me involves conscious responsibility.

As Mead says. The Me is a conventional, habitual individual, Conformists are dominated by

the Me although everyone, whatever his or her degree of conformity has, and must have, a
substantial Me. It is through Me that society dominates the individual Indeed. Mead defines
the idea of social control as the dominance of the expression of the Me over the expression
of the I

Mead also looks at the / and the Mein pragmatic terms. The Me allows the individual to live
comfortably in the social world, while the I makes a change in the society possible. Society
gets enough conformity via the Me, to allow it to function, and it gets a steady infusion of
new developments through the I to prevent it from stagnating. The / and the Me are thus, a
part of the whole social process and allow both individuals and society to function more
effectively. We achieve self-awareness when we learn to distinguish between the Me and the
Individuals become self-conscious when they begin to see themselves as others see them.

GH Mead gave a distinct social-psychological explanation when Sociology was dominated

by macro theories. He indicated that the foundation of human life is human behaviour, ie.,
neither it is normatively defined values as earlier sociologists like Emile Durkheim have
argued, and is purely driven by instinct as indicated by Sigmund Freud, nor, behaviour is
totally guided by material considerations as explained by Marx. Rather, human behaviour is
reflective, reactive and modifiable in interactional situations

1. Mead is often criticised for ignoring biological/genetic influence on human attitude.

According to Ropers, Mead's analysis sees social activities as only discrete episodes
without any historical continuity.
2. Interactionism in general focuses upon individual interactions in vacuum.
3. Patrick Baert, in his Social Theory in Twentieth Century and Beyond, 2010, argues
that Mead saw social life as too consensual. Critics also point out that Mead and
other symbolic Interactionists fail to elaborate the origin of meanings.
4. Manford Kuhn and Bernard Meltzer: They criticised the vagueness of essential
concepts such as mind, self, I and me. Because these concepts are imprecise and so
testable logic cannot be generated.
5. Weinstein and Tanur: They criticised the tendency to downplay or ignore large scale
structure. The concept of social structure is necessary to deal with the incredible
density and complexity of relations through which episodes of interaction are
interconnected.
6. Petras criticised median theory for ignoring the importance of factors such as
unconsciousness and emotions as well as needs, motives, intentions and
aspirations.
7. Peter Hamilton: According to him, if Mead can be faulted for anything, it is for being
overly optimistic about contemporary man’s capacity for reflective intelligence. He
may also have been unrealistic or naïve in regard to divisive categories and habits of
thought that hold and constrain the self-realisation process of the ordinary man. We
live in a world of racism, sexism, nationalism and a hundred other ‘isms’ which serve
to retard Mea