SOC 201

INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY

COURSE OUTLINE

TOPIC 1: SOCIOLOGY, SCIENCE AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCES

 What is Sociology?
 What is Science?
 The Scientific Status of Sociology
 The Social Sciences

TOPIC 2: THE BIRTH OF SOCIOLOGY

 The Social, historical and intellectual context of the emergence of
Sociology.
 The founding fathers of Sociology.
 Auguste Comte (1798 – 1857)
 Karl Marx (1818 – 1883)
 Hebert Spencer (1820-1903)
 Emile Durkheim (1858 – 1917)
 Max Weber (1864 – 1920)

TOPIC 3: THE SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE OF SOCIETY

 Elements of the Sociological Perspective
 The Plurality of Social Experience
 Social dynamics

TOPIC 4: SOCIAL INTERACTION AND SOCIAL RELATIONS

 Concept of Social Interaction
 Forms of Interaction

TOPIC 5: GROUPS NORMATIVE SYSTEM AND CULTURE

 Concept of a “Group”
 Normative System
 Culture

TOPIC 6: SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS

 Marriage
 Family
 Kinship
1
  Political organization
 Economic systems
 Religion and belief system

TOPIC 7: COMPLEX ORGANIZATIONS

 What are Complex Organizations?
 Types of Complex Organization
 Parsons analysis of Organizations

2
 LECTURE ONE
(a) What is Sociology?
(b) What is Science?
(c) Sociology and Science
(d) The Social Sciences
(e) Sociology as a Social Science.

What is Sociology?
All academic disciplines or areas of study are faced with the initial problem of
providing the lay-person or newcomer to the discipline with some idea as to what their
subject `is all informative, all embracing and meaningful definition of a subject or
discipline in just one sentence. More so, Sociology is a discipline of regular academic
discourse and various schools of thought and perspectives. This notwithstanding, we
shall provide select any one that he or she finds suitable for his or her purpose.
Offering a single-sentence, short-hand definition such as `Sociology is the study
of human society and human social behaviour’ may seem rather vague and
uninformative (though being essentially accurate) or not sufficiently precise as to
distinguish Sociology from other disciplines such as psychology.
The term “Sociology” is derived from the Latin Socius, companion and the Greek
logos – science. `Science’ itself is derived from the Latin scire – to know. Tentatively,
therefore, we could say that Sociology is a science of human companionship,
fellowship, association, interaction. To study sociology is to develop knowledge of the
ways in which human being interact with each other. (Wilmot, 1985).
Wright and Randall (1975) defined Sociology as the study of the relationships
existing between people living together in groups; it tries to discern patterns in those
relationships which may justify or refute generalizations about them.
The Oxford Advanced Dictionary of Current English defined Sociology as the
science of the nature and growth of society and social behaviour. According to Otite &
Ogionwo (1981) “Sociology can be defined as a study of social aggregates and groups.
It studies man and the consequences of his being a member of society. It deals with

3
social institutions and their organizations in different societies down the ages. It
concentrates on social systems and subsystems, and on relationships within on social
systems and subsystems, and on relationships within groups and organizations.
Sociology is especially interested in human interactions and is thus the scientific study
of behaviour or of social action in human groups.
For Ekong (1988), Sociology as a discipline refers to the systems or scientific
study of human society and social behaviour. It focuses on processes and patterns of
organization and conduct which are recurrent in society.
Ritzer, Kammeyer and Yetman (1979) also came up with a more embracing
definition of Sociology. According to them-Sociology is the study of individuals in a
social setting that includes groups, organizations, cultures, and societies; and of the
interrelationship of individuals, groups, organizations, cultures and societies. It can be
seen as a discipline concerned with a range of social phenomena, from the microscopic
(individuals) to the macroscopic (societies).
Macroscopic sociology – A focus on larger social units such as entire societies,
large groups (e.g. corporations), and social institutions (e.g. religion) Microscopic
Sociology – A focus on smaller social units, particularly on individuals and their
experiences within groups, organizations, cultures, and societies.

Divisions within Sociology

Sociology is subdivided into such areas as Industrial Sociology, Political
Sociology, Economic Sociology, Urban and rural sociology, Sociology of the family,
Medical Sociology or Sociology of Medicine; Criminology and deviance, Social Change
and Development, Communication Studies, Sociology of Religion and the Sociology of
education.

What is Science?
Science is considered and defined as an organized body of knowledge. This
definition makes science appear passive, as if all scientific discoveries, facts and ideas
have been completed already. It would appear as if all that can now be done is to learn

4
these facts and ideas. This is certainly not what science is. Rather Science is dynamic,
active and ever-expanding. New discoveries continue to be made and they enrich what
we already know.
Science is better defined as a process or method for finding out or discovering
our world. Knowledge from such discoveries can be organized to give us a better
understanding of the world. Then we began to see relationships, characteristics,
operations and to develop explanation for observations that we make in nature.
Through science, man gains the skill of describing with increasing accuracy, the things
which happen or exist in our environment.
Science is therefore seen as a body of internally consistent principles or
propositions that attempt to explain and predict phenomenon. Science is the systematic
pursuit of knowledge following careful rules of research so as to be faithful to facts and
cautions about conclusion.
According to Barry Barnes (1974), science is the most elaborated and
systematized of all forms of knowledge, and the least anthropomorphic. In many ways,
it is the easiest of all forms of knowledge to study. It is accessible and for the most part,
unconstrained by norms of secrecy and restricted access, it is remarkably well defined
and bounded by those who transmit it, its history is well documented and can be studied
more reliably than that of oral tradition.

Method of Science
Science has its own special method, commonly called the scientific method. It
begins with observation. To observe, we use the senses and to describe an
observation; we utilize the characteristics or properties of materials. Our little guess
with little or no testing, is known as a hypothesis. A hypothesis is a sensible, informed
guess which is capable of being tested or verified. Results from tests of the hypothesis
are put together and from them a generalization is formulated. Other scientific
investigators would perform the same tests to confirm the finding that gave rise to the
generalization. If confirmed, the generalization becomes a law.

5
The Scientific Attitude
1. Unbiased basis for conclusion.
Every individual has his own feelings and biases. These influence our decisions
and judgment. A scientific finding must not be influenced by such personal factors
which cannot be put to test.
2. Quickness to identify the significance of observations made. Discoveries are not
just lucky accidents. Rather, they are a credit to the alertness of scientific
investigator.
3. Respect of the principle of causes and effect.
4. Curiosity. This is a desire to learn something new. Curiosity is the force that
motivates inquiry.
5. Respect for experimentation. It is through testing, not guessing, that new
knowledge is acquired. The tests must be valid ones, with controls to eliminate
all chance results.
6. Respect for accuracy. The observations and records of the scientist are, first and
foremost, accurate and precise.

Sociology and Science

To study sociology is to develop knowledge of the ways in which human beings
interact with each other. And this knowledge can be said to be scientific to the extent
that it discovers the general laws of this process of interaction and companionship.

Preconditions of Science
To perform its role scientifically, sociology must satisfy certain preconditions
which are necessary characteristics of all science; it must have an object specific to it,
must use methods commensurate with that object, and use a relatively specialized
language to explain its dynamics and movement.

Sociology as the Science of Society

The significance of the description of Sociology as the science of society should

6
now be apparent.
(1) It is, first, the study of the relationships existing in any given community so that
facts relating to those relationships may be discerned; e.g. the customs and laws
relating to marriage and family, the class structure or the moral ideas.
(2) The facts are classified and examined to see if meaningful generalizations about
them are possible; e.g. that social classes in the community appear to be related
to occupation or income.
(3) Sociology tries to discern whether tendencies or trends appear; e.g. whether the
emphasis in the general conception of the social classes is changing.
(4) Sociology constantly searches for new facts so that the description of the pattern
is checked and, if necessary, modified.
From all indications and perspectives Sociology is a science. First, it is the
scientific study of human behaviour. Secondly, it has adopted and makes use of the
methods of the natural sciences. Thirdly, the findings are obtained from scientific and
systematic observation of social phenomena and subjected to validity and reliability
tests. The findings are impressionistic observations.
Sociology is a science to the extent that it forsakes myth, folk fore, superstition,
and wishful thinking but bases its conclusions on scientific evidence or empirical
findings. This is because sociology has developed a kind of scientific tradition which is
distinguishable from common sense because of its objectivity in arriving at conclusion
which are based on accepted criteria and are detached from emotional or personal
prejudices.
All the previous submissions notwithstanding, it is remarkable to note that
Sociology has not gone so far as to deduce laws or principles of universal application
and validity, which can be invoked with confidence in dealing with new situations. To
this extent, Sociology is not as scientific the way the natural sciences are.

The Social Sciences

The Social Sciences are those disciplines which are concerned with the scientific
study of man in society. They deal with human interactions and with the relationships

7
between people. Although various discipline deal with one aspect or the other of human
society, the term social sciences normally refers to Anthropology, Economics, Political
Science, Social Psychology and Sociology. Some faculties of the social sciences
include other disciplines such as Demography, Ethics, Geography, History, Law and
Statistics.
The Social Sciences are academic disciplines. They deal with man in his social
and cultural contexts. Each has its own historical development, its perspectives and
interest, and its own special emphasis in methods and techniques of research. Yet
there is a common ground for all the social sciences in their study of man in society.
Hence, although each social science discipline is distinctive on its own, their boundaries
are not rigid. They overlap and converge in themes, coverage and in methods.

Sociology as a Social Science

Sociology from all indications – themes, methods, and coverage is a social
science discipline. Some Sociologists claim that Sociology is the queen of all the social
sciences. Sociology is a social science because its subject-matter is “man’s social
behaviour” which is in fact all parts of one general subject-matter of all the disciplines in
the social sciences. In other words the point of focus of all the social sciences are the
same – “man’s social behaviour” or human interactions and with the relationships
between people (i.e. common coverage and themes).
In accordance with the current interdisciplinary emphasis in the social sciences,
we have therefore considered Sociological studies as a part of the social sciences.
Classifying Sociology as a social science could not have been a deviation from the
original conception of one of the founding fathers – Comte who called Sociology `Social
physics’ or `Science of society’.

8
 LECTURE TWO
THE BIRTH OF SOCIOLOGY, ITS FOUNDING FATHERS AND HISTORY
The Birth of Sociology, Founding Fathers and Its History
The Birth of Sociology
There is no precise date as regard the birth of Sociology. Some Sociologists
trace its birth to the 18th century. Coser and Rosenberg (1976) argued that the birth
could be said to begin at a point in time when sociology is programmatically freed from
social philosophy. That point comes in the nineteenth century. Many Sociologists
however agree that Sociology may be said to be very largely a child of “The
Enlightenment”. The period of the enlightenment provides the most logical point of
departure in tracing the origins of sociological findings. The period provides a more
consistent and systematic point in the emergence of the scientific method in the study of
man.
During this period there was a significant shift of interest among intellectuals,
even ordinary people in the search for truth and knowledge. Emphasis shifted from
mere speculation or revelation. People started to make use of reasoning and asked
critical questions.
Another school of thought argued that the origin of Sociology can be traced to the
reaction of influential European thinkers and writers against the French revolution. The
conservative traits in Sociology could be traced to the effects of the French revolution.
The more notable writers in Europe reacted conservatively by condemning the leaders
and the supporters of the revolution. Their criticisms had a lasting effect on the content
and direction of sociological theory. Historians and scholars usually describe these
views against the French revolution as a conservative reaction. It is within this historical
and intellectual context that Sociology as a formal and scientific discipline had its origin.
Some of these enlightenment European thinkers are – Voltaire, De Maistre,
Condorcet, Saint Simon, Montesquieu and Comte in France, Lessing, Von Herder, and
Fichte in Germany; and Locke, Hume, Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham in Britain.
Sociology at its birth was designed to tackle the social upheavals and the violent
revolutions that pervaded Europe and to restore the society back into a state of

9
equilibrium – social order.
Therefore, the birth of Sociology can be conveniently traced to:
(1) Thinking of the enlightenment period
(2) The French revolution
(3) Reactions against the French revolution
(4) Views and writings of Karl Marx
(5) Reactions which the writings of Karl Marx generated.

THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF SOCIOLOGY

Auguste Comte (1798 – 1857)
Sociology as a Science in its own right, as distinct from social or political
philosophy, began with Comte; who is often referred to as “the father of Sociology”. He
was the first man to envision a fully rounded science of society which he coined social
physics and which he later changed to Sociology in 1838. Comte was an erudite man
with powers of encyclopedic absorption, who greatly benefited from the intellectual
labour of others.
Comte was able to give Sociology its start and its position among the sciences
because he put together a set of ideas that was appropriate for the changing times in
which he lived. The founder of Sociology lived in a period of tremendous upheaval, of
disorganization and reorganization, when many people confidently believed that the
world which was collapsing before them could be remade after their hearts’ desire.
Science had performed wonders in subduing nature. What could be more logical than
the extension of methods already established as successful in natural science to the
one unit of study left untouched by them? – The study of man and the society in which
he lives.
Comte’s work is important to Sociologists for several reasons. First, he sought to
develop a sociology that could deal with societal change and the changing human
experience. Second, Comte made such a strong case for a science of society that
Sociology eventually gained an established place in intellectual discourse. He set the
tone for Sociology as a scientific discipline. Third, Comte introduce the idea that

10
sociology was a science that could solve introduce the idea that sociology was a
science that could solve social problems such as war, revolution, crime and poverty.
KARL MARX (1818 – 1883)
The influence of Marx on recent sociology can hardly be overestimated, but his
work was not accepted as significant until almost eighty years after his death. His ideas
were initially dismissed because they were highly political, which seemed to be
inappropriate for the science of sociology. However, it has become clear that there is a
very valuable sociological approach to be found in Marx’s work, although he was not,
strictly speaking, a sociologist.
Marx attributed considerable importance to the economic aspects of society. His
ideas can be summarized thus:
(1) Marx took a materialistic view of history, believing that the evolution of societies
has been determined by economic needs. He preached a theory of the class
war, justified by his theory of the “surplus value” which is added to all goods by
the labour which produces them.
(2) Marx predicted the collapse of capitalism and the establishment of a proletarian
classless society.
(3) Though Marx’s predictions have not been fulfilled, his formidable work “Das
Kapital” and particularly the Communist Manifesto, drawn up by Marx and his
friend Engels, has had a tremendous effect on political thought throughout the
world.
His theories of class war and of the self-destruction of capitalism have hardly
been realized in the states of Western Europe. In fact, events and news from around
the world confirms that Socialism is heading towards extinction while capitalism
continues to widen its base unabated.

Herbert Spencer (1820-1903)

Herbert Spencer, who is often referred to by some scholars as “the second
founding father of Sociology”, was born in England. He wrote his `Principles of
Sociology” in three volumes, taking thirty-three years to fulfill this task. He used

11
evidence from biology and anthropology, and applied his criteria of complexity,
differentiation and integration to human society; the differentiation of functions in society
and an increasing “positivistic” move toward s scientific control of the human
environment would result in greater production, more leisure and a greater pursuit of
ideals.
Spencer’s main concern in Sociology was with Evolutionism. He was interested
in changes in societies and their institutions, from homogeneity to heterogeneity, from
simplicity to complexity. Spencer regarded evolution as a universal process. It is the
law of everything that exists, be it organic or inorganic. The law of evolution is supreme.
Sociology as a science is possible development. Spencer is identified with the “organic
school” in sociology.
Spencer asserts that Sociology as the `science of super organic evolution’ must
employ methods of learning through inspection, “the relations of co-existence and
sequence” involving different societies with their comparative structures and functions in
the evolutionary process. His methods of social investigation were thus both
comparative and functional.

Emile Durkheim (1858 – 1917)

Durkheim, the brain child of Comte, is credited by many scholars as the “first
French academic sociologists”, he was also the first full professor in social science in
France. His works as a sociologists include – The Division of Labour in Society (1893).
The Rules of Sociological Method, (1895) Suicide (1897) and his last work, The
Elementary Forms of Religious Life published in 1912.
Durkheim developed his scientific explanations of human behaviour from the
French conservative tradition. While Comte tried to combat the influence of the French
Revolution during the first half of the nineteenth century, Durkheim sought to counteract
the influence of socialism and communism, which were threatening to change European
society in the late 19th century. Although Durkheim recognized the need to reform
society, he did not believe that revolution, and in particular a socialist revolution, was the
answer. He wanted to maintain society basically as it was then constituted. He aborted

12
the radical politics, the working-class orientation, and the potential for violence he saw
in socialism. He was aware of social problems such as poverty and crime, but he
sought only to diagnose the causes of those problems and offer reforms to help
alleviate them.
Durkheim’s emphasis is on the group, on society rather than on the individual.
He is thus opposed to Spencer’s individualism. Durkheim distinguished between
mechanical and organic solidarity. Mechanical in which the individuals are similar;
organic solidarity is characteristic of modern or advanced societies which consist of
dissimilar individuals. Collective conscience as a uniting force, and common beliefs and
sentiments, are characteristic of mechanical solidarity. Here, there are minimal
individual differences. That is the people in small, uncomplicated societies were tightly
bound together by the similarities of their everyday activities. In smaller, simpler
societies the individual was comfortably integrated into the common morality. In such
societies virtually everyone shared the same moral assumptions. On the other hand,
organic solidarity rests on inter-dependence which is itself a product of the division of
labour. It derives from differences between individuals as a society becomes
increasingly differentiated in functions.
In societies characterized by organic solidarity people are held together by their
dependence on each other for survival, a dependence created by the specialization of
labour. The “jack-of-all-trades” of simpler societies has been replaced by many highly
specialized workers.
The happiness of the individual, he contended, is assured by socially approved
norms or standards. In the absence of these, the individual personality suffers a
disorganization – a state he called “anomie”. Anomie means normlessness; it refers to
situations in which individuals are uncertain about the norms of the society.
In the Elementary Forms of Religious Life he explored the relationship between
the individual personality and the social system.
Durkheim divided sociology into three divisions, which are as follows:
(1) Social Morphology: Which is concerned with the geographical basis of peoples
and its relation to types of social organization; such problems as the distribution

13
 of population would come within its scope.
(2) Social Physiology: Which deals with the various branches of sociology, each
concerned with a special set of social facts e.g. morals, law and economics.
(3) General Sociology: Which synthesizes the conclusions of the social sciences
such as economics and social institutions, in so far as it determines what are
social facts and seeks to establish whether there are any general laws relating to
these facts.
All these contributions have given him a prominent position in contemporary
sociology.

Georg Simmel (1858 – 1918)

Simmel applied the philosophy of Immanuel Kant to the problem of society and
wrote about the forms which social relationships take. He investigated the relation
between the individual and the group, and considered such forms of social relationships
as competition, subordination and division of labour, which could be studied as forms of
relationships labour, which could be studied as forms of relationships occurring in all
societies. Simmel’s major interest was in individuals and their place within the larger
society. He was more interested in the effect of social changes on individual
experiences than Durkheim, Marx and Weber, who concentrated somewhat more on
macroscopic social changes.
Although he believed that the individual has greater freedom in modern society,
Simmel also had negative feelings toward the modern world and its effect on the
individual.

Max Weber (1864 – 1920)

Weber pursued the idea of forms or types in social relationships. By categorizing
ideal types we can arrive at a basis of comparison; such ideal types include capitalism
and Protestantism. Weber wrote about world religions and bureaucracy on these lines.
Weber is seen as been in confrontational dialogue with Karl Marx. He disagreed

14
with most of Marx’s postulations – most especially the emphasis placed on economic
determinism. Weber finds the Marxist view as a narrow and shallow perspective of
explaining relationships in the society. The lack of Man in society is rather too complex
to be amenable to such a singular explanation.
Weber’s Sociology is based centrally on the science of social action. Weber
defined sociology as a “comprehensive science of social action”. I attempts to interpret
and explain social action. According to him, Sociology is that science which aims at the
interpretative understanding of social behaviour in order to gain an explanation of its
causes, course and effects. This interpretative understanding Weber calls “Verstehen”.
Weber advocates that both objective and subjective indicators should be used in
the science of society. This is where Sociology differs from the natural sciences with
depends on the objective indices alone. From the subjective dimensions, one can
evaluate the actors’ definition of the situation (inner feelings).
Weber also introduced the use of ideal types into Sociological theory. One of the
most famous examples of Weber’s ideal type is his three types of legitimate authority.
Weber believed that society is moving inescapably toward more structured,
formal, and rationalized patterns as it grows larger and more complex. Societies
throughout the world, particularly those characterized by advanced capitalism and
socialism, are moving in the direction of more and more bureaucratic organization.
Weber’s contributions to Sociology are quite outstanding.

An Overview of the Works of the Founding Fathers

Durkheim, Marx, Weber, and Simmel all lived at a time characterized by the
increasing urbanization, industrialization, and bureaucratization of the societies of
Western Europe. They all tried to understand what these changes meant in terms of
social life and individual human experience. Their understandings and explanations
were sometimes similar and sometimes radically different, but their basic aim was to
develop sociological theories that would explain and interpret the changing nature of
modern life.

15
 LECTURE THREE
SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE OF SOCIETY
Sociology is one of the social sciences. Its long-run aim is to discover the basic
structure of human society, to identify the main forces that hold groups together or
weaken them, and to learn what conditions transform social life. In this, sociology, like
any pure or basic science, is a disciplined, intellectual quest for fundamental knowledge
of the nature of things.
Sociology has no official doctrine. Differences in outlook and emphasis are
accepted and even encouraged. Nevertheless, a number of intellectual commitments
are widely shared. They identify the distinctive features of the discipline and provide
dues to the working of the sociological imagination.

Elements of the Sociological Perspective beyond Common Sense

Some aspects of society are well known to most people, and almost everyone
has some specialized knowledge of a social situation; a family, a work setting, or a life-
style. The sociologist is respectful of this common-sense knowledge, and people to
learn about their experiences and interpretations. But, common-sense understandings
are often fragmentary and uncritical. This familiarity, while it has obvious advantages,
has less obvious, and therefore more harmful disadvantages. The student feels that he
already knows, and therefore loses the incentive to develop his knowledge. At the
same time commonsense conceptions block the ability to assimilate the scientific world
outlook with its greater precision, economy and predictability (Wilmot, 1985).
Sociological research tries to be more critical and more systematic than common
sense. To do so, sociology must often go beyond the categories of everyday speech
and experiences, or must invest new categories in a fresh light. Sociologists have
reacted by making their terms less familiar, less commonsensical, more obscure. They
have developed jargons, concepts, terminologies for the discipline. If the world, social
or otherwise is to be examined and analyzed, classification is indispensable and
technical terms cannot be avoided.
Men and Groups in Context
16
 The individual-in-context is a human being interacting with his social
environment. From this setting he derives his aspirations, anxieties, competencies,
satisfactions, and social identity. To understand how people behave and how they
change, the social context must be closely observed.
The social environment of industry includes the attitudes people have toward
work, the responsibilities they feel toward their families, existing traditions regarding the
employment of women, the accessibility of educational opportunities, the absence,
presence, or militancy of trade unions, and many other factors. To the sociologist, the
business firm is an enterprise-in-context, and organization that may try to pursue
specialized goals but in doing so must respond to forces and conditions in the social
environment.

Men and Groups in Action

The sociological perspective tries to encompass the acting person and the acting
group. The acting person is a specific human being who pursues goals, interprets
experience, responds to opportunities, and confronts difficulties. As an individual-in-
action he does not necessarily stay within neat boundaries of specialized activity, nor
does he always conform to conventional expectations. The perspective of action is a
gateway to sociological realism. Sociology makes a claim to realism because it
removes the decorative wrappings of social experience.

The Plurality of Social Experience

The sociological emphasis on context and action points to the concreteness of
human experience. In the experienced world; there is no abstract being called man;
there are only particular persons who live out their lives in historical time. “Every man is
like no other Man” seems to be the appropriate philosophy. Every individual has his
own history, his failures and victories, his own perception, his distinctive way of
expressing his personality and relating to others. Some of the most stimulating
sociological research describes the variety of social worlds and shows how they emerge
from action in context.

17
 Awareness of plurality is an essential ingredient of the sociological imagination.
It sharpens sensitivity to the innovations that take place as people work out new ways of
relating and new styles of life. The diversity of social experience is the seed bed of
change, an ever-present reminder of the openness and richness of human alternatives.
On the other hand, people can be captives of little social worlds and thereby
circumscribed by narrow and parochial perspectives.

Unintended Effects
Sociology is a probing discipline. It looks beneath the surface to find the hidden
springs of action, the obscure sources of motivation and control, the obscure sources of
motivation and control, the latency is an important part of the sociological perspective.
One way of probing is to look for unintended meanings and effects. Instead of
taking at face value or restricting his attention to what men say they do and what they
slay the accomplish, the sociologist studies what they actually do and what unspoken or
unintended consequences ensue (Merton, 1968). Sometimes the study of Lenten
effects is a kind of debunking, especially when a professed good or justification is
interpreted as a screen for hidden motives.

Social Dynamics
Finally, the sociological perspective involves close analysis of the sources of
change – the pressures for new ways and the characteristics that make societies
receptive toward or resistant to new influences.
In the sociological perspective change is considered normal, not abnormal.
Every society is at least potentially in flux, for each must respond to challenges from the
outside and to the play of forces within it.

18
 LECTURE FOUR
SOCIAL INTERACTION AND SOCIAL RELATIONS
The concept of interaction may be said to define the process that constitute the
very core of social life and human behaviour. It is one of the tenets of sociology that the
behaviour of human beings can never be fully understood if one does not realize that
the social acting of individuals are always oriented toward other human beings, and that
it is the interplay between the action of self (Ego) and the expected or actual reaction of
one or many others (Alters) that occupies the centre of the human stage. Thus, the
simplest unit of sociological, as distinct from psychological, analysis consists not of
solitary individuals but of at least a pair of individuals mutually influencing each other’s
behaviour.
In a sense interaction seems indeed a universal phenomenon; but what
distinguishes human interaction from other types is that this process involves norms,
status positions, and reciprocal obligations which always come into play when two or
more actors enter into relations with each other. Therefore, sociology is concerned not
so much with interaction such as it is with that form of interaction which is patterned by
the social structure within which it takes place.
Social interaction therefore entails interpersonal contact; reciprocal response and
an inner adjustment of behaviour to the action of others.
Georg Samuel (1858 – 1918), the founder of what has since been called the
`formal school’ of sociology, was the first to focus the attention of sociologists upon the
importance of interactive processes. Simmel contended that it was possible to discover
a number of relatively stable forms of interaction underlying the great diversity of
concrete social phenomena. Thus it was possible to discover patterned elements of
conflict, of cooperation, and of competition in social relationship, though the concrete
manifestations of these elements would vary according to the particularities of each
concrete social situation.

19
Forms of Social Interaction
Cooperation
As a result of human limitations in respect of time, energy, expert knowledge, and
other resources, both individual as well as group goals can be more efficiently and less
strenuously attained through combined efforts of two or more individuals. This form of
social interaction in which two or more people work together as a term to achieve
common goal(s) is termed cooperation.
Cooperation is therefore an interaction which is oriented toward specific goal(s).
Ekong (1988) identified two types of cooperation. These are informal and formal
cooperation. Informal cooperation is a more or less spontaneous solidary behaviour
among members of such primary groups as the family and neighborhood. It entails no
formal compulsion or contract but may grow out of the need to render assistance,
strengthen familiar bonds or for mere companionship. Generally, the cooperators in this
case are known to one another on an intimate, face-to-face basis and can lay claims on
each other’s assistance at any time.
Formal Cooperation – Entails deliberate and rational interaction between persons or
groups. The cooperators may not necessarily be acquainted intimately but cooperate
on contractual basis with the expected mutual obligations being spelt out in advance. In
some instances of formal cooperation, some elements of compulsory or coercions may
be involved e.g. in a cooperative society, each member is expected to pay his due on
time or face stipulated sanctions.

Competition
Most known resources exist in limited quantities and are therefore scarce.
Competition is that form of social interaction in which people struggle for the possession
of those material and non-material rewards which are in limited or scarce supply. In
polygynous settings, the wives compete for the affection of the husband.
Where competition is allowed, the society often devises rules to guide those in
such competition. Competition also sharpens individual initiative and may enhance

20
productivity.

Conflict
Competition, as we have seen in bound by rules which spell out how the game is
to be played. However, when competition is so keen that competitors flout the rules and
seek to weaken or eliminate each other, conflict has set in. Conflict is therefore that
form of social interaction in which the actors seek to obtain scarce rewards by
eliminating or weakening other contenders. This may take the form of a fist fight,
threats, legislation or total annihilation. An example is boundary or land disputes in rural
communities; management and the workers, criminals and the police, etc.
Conflict has both positive and negative effects. Its negative effects include the
disruption of social unity; generation of bitterness and hostilities which may lead to
destruction and bloodshed; generation of inter-group tension; disruption of normal
channels of cooperation and the diversion of member’s attention from group goals.
During conflict, group cohesion and solidarity increase and this positive effect
can be directed for a more efficient attainment of group goals. Conflict keeps the group
alert to members’ interest and such awareness helps to prevent future conflicts.
In general, conflict is disintegrative on the social system hence societies seek to
prevent internal conflicts. This they do by devising laws and regulations defining
property and personal rights and establishing definite channels for obtaining redress in
cases of violation.

Exchange
An exchange is a transaction between two individuals, groups, or societies in
which an event of give-and-take occurs. Two persons or groups are in exchange
relations when one gives or receives gifts, goods, services, etc. from the other. People
also exchange greetings, god deeds, etc., while living in societies. In the same manner
money and commodities change hand sin the market, and daughters are exchanged for
bride wealth between two social groups during African marriages.
There are two main traditions of social exchange. First, there is the

21
“collectivistic” tradition in French sociology as shown by Levi Strauss. This school
emphasizes morality in social exchange. There is moral obligation in the acts of giving,
receiving, and repaying, between groups or between persons as group representatives,
rather than between status-free individuals. Hence social exchange is collectivistic with
a special morality which flows into all aspects of life in societies.
Second, there is the “individualistic” tradition in British and American Sociology
by Homans. He emphasizes that exchange involves dyadic relationships, of profitable
and fair exchanges.
Both traditions involve a motivation for exchange based on self-interest with
calculations of gains, losses, and rewards for the group or individual, as the case may
be, but the collectivistic tradition points to the relevance of corporateness and system
integration as a central product or objective of the acts of the exchange of goods,
services, obligations etc.
Ekeh (1974), argued that there is an economic basis for all social exchange
relations. In addition, there is a high degree of morality in the social exchanges in non-
western societies such as in indigenous Africa in which re-distribution and reciprocity
systems govern socio-economic relations. Social exchange relations cannot be
explained solely in terms of psychological or behavioural terms alone.
Systems of reciprocity and redistribution abound in African societies. The
prevailing principles of life based on brotherhood and social interdependence provide
conditions favourable to reciprocity and redistribution. Reciprocity involves the giving-
and-taking of gifts, goods, services, etc., between persons or groups in a society. When
one receives, one is also expected to give in return, but not necessarily an equivalent
amount nor to the original giver. Reciprocal relations may involve several people or
groups who render or receive services or contribute and receive goods amongst
themselves. For example neighbours or categories of kinsmen in African societies
contribute their labour to cultivate their farms in turn.

22
 LECTURE FIVE
GROUPS, NORMATIVE SYSTEM AND CULTURE
The concept, group, is common is sociological studies. The emphasis in the
concept is the integration of the whole unit rather than a mere total or categorization of
individuals. There are other aspects to the concept. A group involves two or more
persons who are in communication with one another. This implies that there must be
some rules or expectations governing the unit. Each individual in the unit is expected to
perform functions which benefit the whole group. Groups therefore arise when two or
more people interact, interstimulate themselves, and respond to one another.
Worchel and Cooper (1979) defined a group as people who (1) are interacting
and communicating in a face-to-face relationship, (2) feel that they belong together, and
(3) share a common goal. Collectives are gatherings of people who do not have a face-
to-face interaction but are engaged in a common activity. Among the reasons that
people gave for joining groups are to satisfy their need to belong, to achieve goals that
they could not achieve by themselves, and to receive rewards (both psychological and
material) from the group.
Merton (1968) defined a group as “a number of people who interact with one
another in accord with established patterns”. One of the key features defining a group
is the interaction of its members with each other. A society is distinguished from a group
by the fact that all the members of a society cannot interact with each other. In a
society, there are usually too many people for this to be physically possible. On the
other hand a small number of people do not necessarily constitute a group. We cannot
speak of several people who meet briefly at a bus stop as a group because they are not
interacting on the basis of patterns they have established.

Social Groups
According to Ekong (1988), the term `social group’ refers to aggregates or
categories of persons who have a consciousness of belonging or membership and of
interaction. The word `aggregate’ refers to a number of people held together in some
physical sense but not interacting with each other. For example, the audience watching
23
a play or persons in a market place. The term `category’ refers to a number of persons
who share certain characteristics, qualities, interests, etc. e.g. market women, cocoa
farmers, etc. A gathering of persons, according to this definition, does not necessarily
make a social group. These persons must come to share certain values and norms and
identify with each other more than with those outside the group. It is this consciousness
of membership and of joint interaction rather than mere physical closeness which
distinguishes a social group from any gathering of people.
A social group may therefore be defined as a collection of people who relate to
one another in a distinctive integrated whole.

Classification of Human Groups

Primary Group
This is a relatively small, intimate, simple group of people. People in a primary
group are in face-to-face relationship, for example, a family group. A primary group has
some form of permanence and its small number of people interact relatively intimately,
intensely and frequently. Interactions in such groups are affective, diffused and
relatively permanent. In such groups members find the satisfaction of the need for love,
loyalty and acceptance. There is a high level of group consciousness and solidarity
amongst members of a primary group. The primary group is the one in which an
individual often has his earliest form of education and training according to the local
culture and values. Primary groups may also be called informal groups.

Secondary Group
This is also known as formal groups. These are in a way contrasts to primary
groups. They are larger groups in which members do not necessarily come to know
each other intimately. They are more impermanent, and have more causal
relationships. There is less frequency and intensity of contact between members of the
group. There are also fewer ties of deep sentiment amongst members either towards
one another or towards the group as a whole. All the members of a secondary group do
not often know themselves, nor do all the members live in close proximity. Although

24
secondary groups may also have face-to-face relationships, contacts between
individuals in a group are very ephemeral and impersonal. Calculations are rationalized
most things are explicitly stated as in a contract.

Kinds of Group
1. Kinship and Descent Groups
2. Ethnic group
3. Sex Groups
4. Peer or Age Groups
5. Pressure Groups

NORMATIVE SYSTEM
Durkheim knew that biology, economics, and psychology took up various phases
of human activity and shed light upon them. But they only told part of the story. It
seemed to him that the older social sciences overlooked those ways of acting, thinking,
and feeling that are not mere products of the individual’s consciousness. These ways
may eventually, and in most cases do, conform to what a person feels subjectively.
However, they are not his creations. He inherits them – they are, we would now say,
culturally transmitted to him, through formal and informal education. Society provides a
large number of predefined conventions that must be obeyed on pain of ridicule,
isolation, incarceration, or death.
Norms govern our lives, they are exterior to us, and we are constrained to accept
them. What follows from these premises is something sociologists have come to know
as the normative determination of human behaviour.

NORMS
This refers to the generally accepted rules that govern what should and should
not be done in particular situations. Norms are rules detailing what should or should not
be done in given situations (Williams, 1970). The idealist approach defines a norm as

25
an idea in the minds of members of a group or society specifying what certain people,
under certain circumstances, are expected to do.
There are four basic types of cultural norms. Cognitive norms are the procedural
rules to be followed in performing a wide range of acts – from very simple acts to the
complex rules.
Second, there are moral norms that define what people should or should not do.
These are usually deeply felt and supported by members of the community. Positive
moral norms, for example, include caring for one’s parents if they are in need. Negative
moral norms include such proscriptions as the rules against murder.
Third, there are rules labeled conventional norms. These are practices that
people are expected to follow in their everyday lives. For example, people are expected
to brush their teeth and take their bath in the morning.
Finally, there are aesthetic norms that encompass standards of taste and beauty
in society e.g. Black is beautiful is acceptable to the blacks and not to the whites.
Norms vary in terms of distribution enforcement, transmission, and conformity.

Distribution of Norms
Norms vary in their distribution throughout society. They are distributed in part on
the basis of two has knowledge of them. Some people are familiar with certain norms,
while others are comparatively ignorant of them e.g. queuing at a bus stop.
The distribution of norms is also determined by the number of people who accept
social norms. Although people are familiar with a norm, they need not accept or agree
with it e.g. the norm of tipping does not seem to have universal acceptance.
Some norms are easier to reject than others e.g. tipping and walking nude
through the streets, the latter is much difficult to reject.
Another aspect of the distribution of norms is the lack of universality with which
they are actually applied. Some individuals and groups are exempted from some
norms. For example, elite groups in society can often violate some norms, even some
rather strongly held norms, without being sanctioned. A person from the lower social
classes, however, may be punished for the same behaviour.

26
Enforcement of Norms
On the simplest level, conformity to norms is likely to be positively sanctioned or
rewarded, while violations of norms are likely to be negatively sanctioned, or punished.
There is also a great variation in the severity of punishment or in the magnitude of
reward.

Transmission of Norms
A third source of variation within the normative system is the transmission of
norms. Some norms are learned in childhood, while other norms are not acquired until
one reaches adulthood. Along the same lines, there is variation in which transmits
norms. In childhood, parents, teachers, or peers may transmit norms, while in
adulthood it may be a spouse, boss or colleagues.

Conformity to Norms
Finally, there is variation in the amount of conformity to, or deviation from,
societal norms. Some norms elicit almost universal conformity, while with others there
is almost universal deviation. Almost everyone conforms to the norm against incest, but
the norm against premarital sexual intercourse is widely violated.
Sanctions are rewards or punishments aimed at effecting compliance with norms.
Rewards are positive sanctions, punishments negative sanctions. Deviance reflects the
degree of nonconformity

Conformity
Kiesler and Kiesler (1969) defined conformity as “a change in behaviour or belief
toward a group as a result of real of imagined group pressure”. The gist of this
definition is that group pressure causes the individual to change his or her behaviour
and to act in a way in which he or she would not have acted without group pressure.
There are two types of conformity; simple compliance and private acceptance. In
simple compliance the individual yields to the group pressures at the overt or public

27
level but retains original attitudes or desires. In private acceptance the individual
changes both public behaviour and private attitudes to more nearly reflect the group’s
position.
Values: Values are the standards of desirability within a culture. They are the
guidelines that we use to judge virtually everything we come into contact with as good
or bad, beautiful or ugly, pleasant or unpleasant, appropriate or inappropriate. Values
are the standards that help us decide (but do not determine what food to eat, which
person to marry, how many children to have, whether or not to have an extra-marital
affair and so on.
Values are not neutral; they are positively or negatively charged, varying in
degree from very strong to very weak. Values deal with fundamental and important
parts of life; they do not focus on trivial parts of social life. Values are not in themselves
concrete goals, but rather the criteria by which goals and objectives are judge.
Values vary from society to society. What one group or society considers
desirable may be viewed as underivable by another society or group. Values affect
individual behaviour, although in highly diverse ways because each person emphasizes
some parts of the values system and de-emphasizes others.

Culture
Culture is generally defined as the way people live. This way of life includes
arrangements and methods of obtaining food from the environment and of adapting to it.
It includes rules and regulations that govern people’s behaviour in a particular society.
Also included in a way of life are beliefs, religion, moral behaviour, and whatever the
people concerned have produced using their available materials and knowledge.
Mitchell (1969) defined “Culture as that part of the total repertoire of human
action (and its products) which is socially, as opposed to genetically transmitted”.
Ritzer et al (1979) defined “Culture as the entire complex of ideas and material
objects that the people of a society use in carrying out their collective life. The culture
includes knowledge and beliefs, technology, language, values, and norms”.

28
 A “culture” refers to the distinctive way of life of a group of people, their complete
“design for living”.
Kluckhohn and Kelly (1945) stated that “A culture is an historically created
system of explicit and implicit designs for living, which tends to be shared by all or
specially designated members of a group at a specified point in time”.
A more embracing definition which is acceptable to many anthropologists and
sociologists alike is that given by E.E. Tylor in 1891. He defined culture as the complex
whole of man’s acquisitions of knowledge, morals, belief, art, custom, technology etc,
which are shared and transmitted from generation to generation.
All these definitions of culture indicates that it has both material and non-material
aspects, and is acquired by every member of a society. Material culture refers to the
product of industry, technology, art etc.; that is every visible or concrete acquisition of
man in society; bridges, pots, hoes, houses, cooking utensils, handicrafts, etc. These
are directly observable as the cultural products of any society.
The non-material aspects of culture consist of the knowledge, philosophy,
morals, motivation, language, attitudes, and values etc. shared and transmitted in a
society. These are not visible or tangible but they are manifested through the
psychological states and behaviour of a people.

Theory of Culture
1. Culture is learned
2. Culture derived from the biological environmental, psychological and historical
components of human existence.
3. Culture is structured
4. Culture is divided into aspects
5. Culture is dynamic
6. Culture exhibits regularities that permit its analysis by the methods of science.
7. Culture is the instrument whereby the individual adjusts to his total setting, and
gains the means for creative expression.

29
GROUPS, NORMATIVE SYSTEM AND CULTURE GROUPS
In sociological terms, a group is any number of people with similar norms, values
and expectations who regularly and consciously interact. The concept, group, is
common in socio-logical studies. The emphasis in the concept is the integration of the
whole unit rather than a mere total or categorization of individuals. There are other
aspects top the concept. A group involves two or more persons who are in
communication with one another. Each individual in the unit is expected to perform
functions which benefit the whole group. Groups therefore arise when two or more
people interact, inter-stimulate themselves, and respond to one another.
Merton (1968) defined a group as “a number of people who interact with one
another in accord with established patterns”. Worchel and Cooper (1979) defined a
group as people who:
(1) are interacting and communicating in a face-to-face relationship;
(2) feel that they belong together and
(3) share a common goal
One of the key features defining a group is the interaction of its members with
each other. A society is distinguished from a group by the fact that all the members of a
society cannot interact with each other. In a society there are usually too many people
for this to be physically possible. On the other hand a small number of people do not
necessarily constitute a group. For example, we cannot classify several people who
meet briefly at a bus stop as a group because they are not interacting on the basis of
patterns they have established.
Every society is composed of many groups in which daily social interaction takes
place. We seek out groups to establish friendship, to accomplish certain goals, and to
fulfill social roles that we have acquired.
Groups play a vital part in a society’s social structure. Much of our social
interaction takes place within groups and is influenced by the norms and sanctions
established by groups. Being a student or a lecturer takes on special meanings as
individuals interact within groups designed for people with that particular status. The
expectations associated with many social roles, including such roles as brother, sister

30
and student, become most clearly defined in the context of a group.
Groups do not merely serve to define other elements of the social structure, such
as roles and statuses; they are an intermediate link between the individual and the
larger society. For example, members of occupational or social groups may be
acquaintances rather than close friends; consequently, they are likely to connect other
members to people in different social circles. This connection is known as a `social
network’ – that is, a series of social relationships that link a person directly to others and
therefore indirectly to still more persok9ns.
Type of Groups
The study of groups has been an important part of sociological investigation
because they play such a key role in the transmission of culture.
Primary Group: According to Cooley (1902) the term refers to a small group
characterized by intimate, face-to-face association and cooperation. Examples are
members of a family living in the same household or members of a college drama
group. Primary groups play a pivotal role both in the socialization process and in the
development of roles and statuses.
Secondary Group: This refers to a formal, impersonal group where there is little social
intimacy or mutual understanding. Although secondary groups may also have face-to-
face relationships, contacts between individuals in the group are very ephemeral and
impersonal.
Comparison of Primary and Secondary Groups
PRIMARY GROUP SECONDARY GROUP
General small Relatively small
Relatively long period of interaction Short duration, temporary
Intimate, face-to-face association Little social intimacy or mutual
understanding
Some emotional depth in relationships Relationships, generally superficial
Cooperative, friendly More formal and impersonal

In-Groups and Out-Groups

31
 A group can hold special meaning for members because of its relationship to
other groups. People sometimes feel antagonistic to or threatened by another group,
especially if the group is perceived as being different culturally or racially. Sociologists
identify these “we” and “they” feelings by using two terms first employed by W.G.
Summer (1906) in-group and out-going.
An in-group can be defined as any group or category to which people feel they
belong. Simply put, it comprises everyone who is regarded as “we” or “us”. The in-
group may be as narrow as one’s family or as broad as an entire society. The very
existence of an in-group implies that there is an out-group viewed as “they” or “them”.
More formally, an out-group is a group or category to which people feel they do not
belong.

Reference Group
Sociologists use the term reference group when speaking of any group that
individuals use as a standard for evaluating themselves and their own behaviour.
Reference groups have two basic purposes. First, they serve a normative function by
setting and enforcing standards of conduct and belief. Second, reference groups also
perform a comparison function by serving as a standard against which people can
measure themselves and others.
Other Types of groups are:
1. Kinship and Descent groups
2. Ethnic groups
3. Sex group
4. Peer or Age groups
5. Pressure Groups e.g. NADECO

Normative System
Durkheim knew that Biology, Economics and Psychology took up various phases
of human activity and shed light upon them. But they only told part of the story.
Durkheim saw that the older social science overlooked those ways of acting, thinking

32
and feeling that are not mere products of the individual’s consciousness. The individual
inherits values, ways of life which are culturally transmitted to him, through formal and
informal education. The society provides a large number of predefined conventions that
must be obeyed on pain of ridicule, isolation, incarceration or death.
Norms govern our lives and we are constrained to accept them. What follows
from these premises is something sociologists have come to know as the normative
determination of human behaviour.
Norms
Norms are unwritten patterns of behaviour learnt socialization during
socialization. It refers to the generally accepted rules that govern what should and
should not be done in particular situations. According to Williams (1970) norms are
rules detailing what should or should not be done in given situations. The idealist
approach defines a norm as an idea in the minds of members of a group or society
specifying what certain people, under certain circumstances, are expected to do.

Types of Norms
1. Cognitive norms
2. Moral norms
3. Conventional norms
4. Aesthetic norms
1. Cognitive Norms: These are the procedural rules to be followed in performing a
wide range of acts – from very simple acts to the complex rules.
2. Moral Norms: These are norms that define what people should or should not
do. These are usually deeply felt and supported by members of the community.
There are two types of moral norms – (1) Positive moral norms and (2) Negative
moral norms. Positive moral norms include caring for one’s parents if they are in
need. Negative moral norms include such prescriptions as the rules against
murder.
3. Conventional Norms: These are practices that people are expected to follow in
their everyday lives. For example, people are expected to brush their teeth and

33
 take their bath in the morning.
4. Aesthetic Norms: Those norms that encompass standards of taste and beauty
in the society e.g. the slogan 1Black is beautiful’ which is accepted to the blacks
and not to the whites.
Sociologists also distinguish between norms in two ways. First, norms are
classified as either formal or informal. Formal norms have been written down and
involve strict rules for punishment of violators. By contrast, informal norms are
generally understood but are not precisely recorded. Standards of proper dress are a
common example of informal norms.
Norms are also classified by their relative importance to society. When classified
in this way, they are known as “mores and folkways”.
Mores are norms deemed highly necessary to the welfare of a society, often because
they embody the most cherished principles of a people. Each society demands
obedience to its mores, violation can lead to severe penalties. Thus, most civilized
societies has strong mores against murder, treason, rape and child abuse.
Folkways are norms governing everyday behaviour whose violation raise
comparatively little concern. For example, if a clerk decides to go to the office in his
bathroom slippers, such a behaviour will not result in a fine or a jail sentence (other
example are exchanging Christmas cards or shaking hands with the opposite sex).

Acceptance of Norms
Norms are not followed in all situations. Those who do not conform to these
shared behavioural standards may commit acts of deviancy and be labeled as deviants.
If a social norm is completely integrated into a person’s self he is said to have
internalized it, that is, it has become part and parcel of his life.
Most people accept the norms of their society without question and become so
familiar with them that they take them for granted. Changing situations within a
particular society may lead to new norms, while norms differ from one society to
another. For instance, the down turn of the Nigerian economy has brought the “Egunje”
or settlement syndrome into limelight and it is almost becoming an accepted norm.

34
What is accepted among the Ibos may be unacceptable to the Yorubas. For example
among the Ibos, prostrating for elders is not part of the Ibo culture while among the
Yoruba it means so much.
Norms may change to fit conditions. Killing fellow-human in peace time is
regarded as murder, but in war time it may be regarded as murder, but in war time it
may be regarded as the height of patriotism.

Why do People Break Norms?

1. In some cases, people evade a norm because they know it is weakly enforced
e.g. the rule prohibiting the sale and consumption of alcohol before 12 noon in
Nigeria. Drivers break this rule without impunity.
2. In some instance, behaviour that appears to violate society’s norms may actually
represent adherence to the forms of one’s particular group e.g. smoking of Indian
hemp by `musicians’.
3. Norms are also violated in some instances because one norm conflicts with
another.
4. Even when norms do not conflict, there are always exceptions to any norm. The
same action, under different circumstances, can cause one to be viewed either
as a hero or as a villain.
5. Acceptance of norms is subject to change, as the political, economic and social
conditions of a culture are transformed, violate them more frequently and openly
and are less likely to titled `MS’ no longer hide their identities in Nigeria unlike in
the past when such title had a social stigma attached to it. Times are changing
and traditional are dying.

Sanctions
Sanctions are penalties and rewards for conduct concerning a social norm.
Conformity to a norm can lead to positive sanctions such as a pay rise, a medal, a word
of gratitude or a pat on the back. Negative sanctions include fines, threats, punishment,
excommunication; banishment, proscription and even stares of contempt. The most

35
cherished values will be most heavily sanctioned, matters regarded as less critical on
the other hand, will carry light and informal sanctions.

Values
Each individual develops his or her own personal goals and ambitions, yet
culture provides a general set of objectives for members. Values are these collective
conceptions of what is considered good, desirable, and proper, or bad, undesirable, and
improper – in a culture. They indicate what people in a given culture prefer as well as
what they find important and morally right or wrong. Values may be specific, such as
honoring one’s parents or they may be more general, such as health, love, and
democracy. Values influence people’s behaviour and serve as criteria for evaluating the
action of others. Values vary from society to society.

Culture
According to E.B. Tylor (1891) culture is defined as the complex whole of man’s
acquisitions of knowledge, morals belief, art, and custom, technology etc. which are
shared and transmitted from generation to generation. Kluckhohn and Kelly (1945)
defined “a culture as a historically created system of explicit and implicit designs for
living, which tends to be shared by all or specially designated members of a group at a
specified point in time”. Ritzer (1979) defined culture as the entire complex of ideas and
material objects that the people of a society use in carrying out their collective life.
Schaefer (1989) stated that culture is the totality of learned, socially transmitted
behaviour. It includes the ideas, values and customs of groups of people.

Components of Culture
There are two main components of culture. These are:
(1) Material and (2) Nonmaterial.
Material: Material culture refers to the physical or technological aspects of our daily
lives, including food items, houses, factories and raw materials. These are directly
observable and concrete products of any society.

36
Nonmaterial: Nonmaterial culture refers to ways of using material objects and to
language customs, beliefs, philosophies, governments, and patterns of communication.
These are invisible aspects of culture but are manifested through the behaviour of a
people. Generally, the non-material culture is more resistant to change than the
material culture is. Foreign ideas are viewed as more threatening to a culture than
foreign products are. People embrace foreign technological innovations but reject new
ideologies. Language is the foundation of every culture. Language is an abstract
system of word meanings and symbols for all aspects of culture. Language includes
speech, written characters, numerals, symbols, and gestures of other nonverbal
communication.

Cultural Universals
Despite their differences, all societies have attempted to meet basic human
needs by developing aspects of shared, learned behaviour known as cultural universals.
Cultural universals such as language, are general practices found in every culture.
George Murdock (1945) compiled a list of such universals. The examples identified by
Murdock include:
Athletic sports
Attempts to influence weather
Bodily adornment
Calendar
Courtship
Dancing
Dream interpretation
Family
Folklore
Food habits
Funeral ceremonies
Games
Gift giving

37
Language
Laws
Medicine
Music
Myths
Numerals
Personal names
Property rights
Religion
Sexual regulations
Tool making
Many cultural universals are, in fact, adaptations to meet essential human needs,
such as people’s need for food, shelter, and clothing. The manner in which these
cultural universals are expressed varies from culture to culture.

38
 LECTURE SIX
SOCIAL INSTITUTION
INTRODUCTION
An institution is a regular and firm way of getting things done by a group of
people. It denotes the sharing of a particular kind of behaviour by a group of people in
an area of life. It thus involves values and interests which concern important aspects of
group life. For example, marriage is an institution because it deals with a pattern of
behaviour approved by a group as the proper means by which a man and a woman,
and their families, as the proper means by which a man and a woman, and their
families, are brought together. I also deals with the relationships that exist between
spouses and their in-laws, the raising of children and the complementary duties of those
involved in the marriage.
In all cases, a social institution denotes an accepted orderly and enduring way in
which people relate to one another in a particular sphere of life. Institutions are
independent of those individuals who have duties to perform in them. But the duties
that these individuals perform are important for the existence of the institution
concerned. Social institutions can be shown diagrammatically thus:

Political Institutions

Social Institutions

39
 Now, we shall examine briefly, different areas of society in which we have
institutions.

Marriage
Marriage is not easy to define because of the diversities in the systems of
marriage throughout the world.
Marriage is defined as “a union between a man and a woman such that the
children born to the woman are the recognized legitimate offspring of both partners”.
The meaning and implications of marriage vary from society to society. Whereas
some societies define marriage in relation to sexual relations shared only by a couple,
others define it as the only means by which children can have legal status and rights. In
general, however, the term marriage refers to the arrangements, including the
ceremonies, which a society approves for a man and a woman to come together and
form a family. This definition is much more embracing and broader than the first one.

Type of Marriage
There are three main kinds of marriage. First, there is the traditional marriage.
This is sometimes called customary marriage, the way that our forefathers married.
Secondly, we have religious marriages. Religious marriages are those marriages
conducted in Christian churches (Anglican, Catholic, Protestant, etc.) and mosques.
Lastly, we have the ordinance marriage. This is a type of marriage through the
court. It is celebrate and witnessed in the registry of a court of law.
Marriage Systems/Forms of Marriage
1. Monogamy – one man one wife
2. Polygamy – plural marriage which could either be:
(a) Polygyny – one man with two or two wives;
(b) Polyandry – one woman with two or more men and
(c) Adelphic Polyandry – one woman married to two brothers.

40
3. Sororal Polygyny – one man married to two related sisters. Non-Sororal
Polygyny – one man with two wives who are not related.
4. General Polygyny – one man married to women who may or may not be related
sisters.
5. Levirate – a man marries the widow of his dead elder brother.
6. Sororate – a man marries the sister of his dead wife
7. Ghost Marriage – a man marries a wife in the name of his dead brother.
Endogamy – marriage within ones group
Exogamy – marriage from outside ones group.

Link Between Marriage, Family and Kinship

There is an obvious connection between marriage, family and kinship. Without
marriage, there may be no family. Without marriage and family, there may be no
kinship. Thus, kinship relations are the products of marriage and family. Those who are
married also form part of the family as well as being close Kinsmen.

THE FAMILY
There is apparently no particular definition of the family which is comprehensive
enough to describe all known forms of family relations. Ekong (1988) defined the family
as a kinship group linked by blood and marriage and occupying a common household.
A household is not the same thing as the family. It refers to all persons occupying the
same house.
The family as a social group is made up of a man, his wife or wives and children
living under a common roof, interacting and influencing the behaviour of each other in a
more intimate manner than with others who do not belong.
As a social institution the family entails the formalized, regular, patterned way or
process by which family life is carried out. It involves (a) a set of common procedures –
courtship, betrothal or engagement, wedding, honeymoon; (b) a common set of values
and norms e.g. incest taboo which prohibits sexual intercourse with blood relations
thereby necessitating marriage outside the immediate family (exogamy) love between

41
husband and wife in a manner different from that which is expected between brother
and sister and rules on descent, residence and authority; (c) a network of statuses and
roles or social relationships e.g. husband who provides for and protects the family and
also husband who provides for and protects the family and also satisfies wife’s sexual
needs; wife, who bears children, provides love, socializes the kids and gratifies
husband’s sexual needs; children who uphold family identity and perpetuate family
name; Relatives, who provide affection and mutual support. (Ekong, 1988).

Types of Families
1. Nuclear Family: This is the most universal form of family. It consists simply of
parents and their children. It is also called the simple family, and the biological family.
A Typical Nuclear Family
=

2. Extended Family: An extended family consists of two or more nuclear families.

An External Family
=

= =

The emphasis in the extended family is the blood ties between relations hence it is also
referred to as a consanguine family.
3. Monogamous and Polygynous Families
Families could also be described as monogamous and polygamous reflecting the
kind of marriage contracted. Both can lead to extended families but whereas we can

42
get one nuclear family from monogamy, a polygynous family has many (depending on
the number of wives) nuclear families, each centered on a wife/mother and shares in
one father/husband. Each of these mother-centered families is often called a
matricentric or matrifocal family.
The family of orientation or natal family refers to the family in which individuals
are both into – by birth. The family of procreation or the conjugal family refers to the
family formed by marriage – that is one in which the individual raises to bring forth
children.

Functions of the Family

Marriage and family combine to regulate sexual activity within any society.
Without the family and the rules governing its coming into being as well as its continuity,
social confusion and conflicts could result from sexual freedom.
The family is a means, but not the only one, by which society replaces its
members. People are born, mature, age and die. But replaced through births.
The family is one of the means by which a person can teach his children their
culture and how to be members of society. This is known as socialization. The early
views of life and of people which a child gets from his family influence him significantly
when he or she grows up.
The family gives identity to its offspring. The family is also a unit of economic
inheritance of private property.
The family by imparting certain values and norms to its members, contributes to
social order and control.

KINSHIP
The terms family and kinship are used interchangeably. However, they mean
different things. Kinship is a more inclusive term than family. Kin refers to a network of
relatives who may or may not live together while the family is a kin-based cooperative
unit.
Kinship has biological and socio-cultural aspects. The biological basis is a

43
convenient starting point but it is not the sole determinant. A reckonable common
ancestry is the usual basis of kinship, supplemented by other recognized ties such as
affinity, through marriage or adoption. Kinship thus involves the relationships of blood,
affinity, and adoption or some other form of kinship fiction.

Principles of Descent
Descent can broadly be either unilineal or non-unilineal. Unilineal descent is
more common. It is of three types –
1. Patrilineal 2. Matrilineal 3. Double Unilineal
Patrilineal Descent – Descent is traced through the father side. Matrilineal
descent – descent is traced through the mother’s line.
Double Descent – Both lineages are recognized at the same time.
Non-Unilineal descent. This is does not produce the clear-cut descent systems
like unilineal descent systems. It could be bilateral, that is both sides are recognized;
cognatic; multilineal or omnilineal in which an individual is linked with several groups of
kinsmen through both sides.

Functions of Kinship
The first is the allocation or rights such as those of residence, group membership
and citizenship, succession to office, and inheritance of property which are
transmissible from one generation to another.
Secondly, descent and kinship enjoin certain social obligation such as moral
support and material dependence or assistance when needed. There is normally a high
degree of trust amongst kinsmen.
Thirdly, descent and kinship regulate sexual relations. For instance it is a taboo
to sleep with ones sister.
Fourthly, kinship terms, such as father and mother, are a shortened form of
expressing relationships; they contribute to social order and to the prediction of
behaviour in society.

44
Political Institutions
Politics refers to the way in which people are organized and controlled in order to
achieve the common good of that society.
The political system is a social institution with the following characteristics.
1. The political system is the organization within a territorial society that is granted
legitimate monopoly over the use and regulation of force.
2. The political system is given the responsibility for maintaining the society of
which it is a part.
3. To maintain the society, the political system uses power to advance society’s
goals, maintain internal order, and regulate foreign relations.
There could be no coherent social life unless social relationship which bind
people together were at least to some degree orderly, institutionalized and predictable.
To only alternative to order is chaos. Because most people want to control others or get
what they want, they struggle with one another. There is always conflict therefore
between groups and individuals in the political sphere.
There are several political institutions. For example, in the traditional society, we
have kingship as an institution (the institution of Oba, Obi and Emir, Obong, Ovie etc.).
There is also the institution of chieftaincy. In modern Nigeria we have the Presidency,
parliament, state governorships and even the Nigerian state itself.
Political institutions deal with power, how to use it, and how to control others.
The main purpose however, is how to organize society so as to achieve its goals.

Legal Institutions
Legal institutions deal with law. A law is generally defined as a rule made by a
society or a group to guide behaviour of its members. Law in a society consists of the
body of such rules. A law shows concern for what the society defines as right or wrong
and the idea of justice. This includes the village elders’ council as a legal or judicial
institution; the modern courts, and customary courts. The main function of these
institutions is the maintenance of order and the control of members of the society.

45
Health Institutions
Health may be defined as a state of physical and mental well-being. In reality, no
one can be completely healthy. Mental disturbances, ill health and other changes in
th4e body always take place from time to time.
Both in traditional and modern times, institutions such as hospitals, clinics or
herbal homes under the charge of traditional doctors, deal with health. Societies
provide health institutions for many reasons. A man with a healthy body and a healthy
mind can work, attend school, be a leader or follower, or do anything that his position
requires of him.

Educational Institutions
Like the broader process of socialization, education has a dual significance. It is
person-centered and society-centered. Education enhances the capabilities of the
individual and contributes to his self-realization; at the same time, education does
symbolic and practical work for the social system.
Broadly speaking, education refers to the bringing up of people, particularly the
young. It also deals with moral training. In traditional African societies such education
was and is informal. People learn by watching others and by doing things and taking
part in family and society’s activities. Nowadays, the European form of education which
was brought to Nigeria in the 19th century, uses such institutions as the school, college
or university.
One important function of educational institutions is to help children and adults
learn about their culture, their society and their environment. Educational institutions
are therefore about their way of life and how to develop or maintain this in a particular
environment.

Religious Institutions
Institutions in the religious sphere of society deal with beliefs and the
supernatural. They deal with the relationship between a society, or some of its

46
members, and their ancestors or their gods.
In Nigeria, there are various religions, for example, we have Islam, Christianity
and traditional religions. In each of these, we have beliefs in God or the supernatural.
This is the most characteristic element by which to differentiate certain religious
institutions from others.

Economic Institutions
Economic institutions deal with man at work in society. They are concerned with
production and the distribution of the goods produced. Economic institutions deal with a
society’s resources and how these can best be organized and utilized to improve the
standard of living of the members. Factories, Banks and breweries are economic
institutions. These institutions deal with production and the use of resources etc, to
improve the material well-being of the members of the society. Economic institutions
are important because unless we have something to eat or buy, or to use to satisfy our
needs or make other commodities, other aspects of life in society will be difficult.

47
 LECTURE SEVEN
COMPLEX ORAGANIZATIONS
The term “organization” suggests a certain bareness, a lean no-nonsense system
of consciously coordinated activities. It refers to an expendable tool, a rational
instrument engineered to do a job.
Parsons (1951) defined an organization as a particular type of social system
which is deliberately constructed to seek specific goals and values.
Banard (1958) defined organizations as systems of collaborative effort around
defined purposes or missions. He consistently emphasize that organizations are
cooperative systems, formed because certain ends cannot be achieved by individual
action.
Ekong (1988) defined an organization as “a corporate group embodying
structured interaction within some identifiable boundary and some division of labour in
carrying out its functions. It refers to human groups that are deliberately formed to
achieve specified goals.
In an attempt to define `organizations’, Sociologists have often given examples
rather than satisfactory definitions of what constitutes an organization. But usually they
emphasize that organizations are bodies persisting over time, which are specially set up
to achieve specific purposes or aims.
Sofer (1972), defined “organization” as associations of persons grouped together
around the pursuit of specific goals; while Broom and Selznick (1973) see organizations
as structures characterized by a pattern of relationship which is formalized and the role
of each participant clearly defined.
One common feature of these definitions is that organizations are seen to be
deliberate creations in the pursuit of certain goals or objectives.
In the sociology of organizations, a distinction is usually made among the
different types of organization. A distinction is made between formal and informal
organizations. Some organizations are classified as `social’ and some as `complex’
organizations. Whatever these differences are, every type of organization is a specific
creation and the result of collaborative efforts of human beings. Our society has come
48
to be called an “organization society peopled by `organization men’. We are born into
organizations, live in organizations and die in organizations. Man is born free yet is
everywhere in organizations.
Formal or complex organizations are usually established for the explicit purpose
of achieving certain goals; and possess both rules (designed to anticipate, and to shape
behaviour in the direction of these goals) and a formal status structure with clearly
marked lines of communication and authority. Aldrich and Marsden (1988) defined
formal organizations as systems of concerted collective action towards an apparent
common purpose. Their activity systems are deliberately designed toward the
accomplishment of specific goals. They are characterized by a formal structure,
authority relationships, prescribed communication channels and so forth. Since formal
organizations are often very large and complex, some authors refer to them as `large-
scale’ or as `complex’ organizations.
Social organization is used to describe a situation where social life is carried on
without a framework of explicit goals or rules which define a formal status structure.
Armies, business enterprises and churches are therefore, quite different from families,
friendship groups and communities.

Features of Organizations
One basic feature of organizations is that they are relatively permanent social
entities. They have continuous existence, sometimes they outlive the founders/owners.
Another underlying characteristic of organizations is their goal-oriented nature.
Organizations are designed for a purpose and much of the behaviour within and
between organizations reflects that purpose.
Specialization is yet another basic aspect of organizations. Attaining
organizational goals usually requires the use of highly specialized skills.
A final fundamental characteristic of organizations is that they have structures.
All organizations have a set of prescribed and regularized ways of bringing together
their various work activities. This is essential if the organization is to achieve its goals.
In sum, organizations are relatively permanent social entities characterized by

49
goal-oriented behaviour, specialization, and structure.

The Need for Complex Organizations

Organizations are a necessary element of civilized life for several reasons: They
enable us to accomplish things that we could not do as well – or at all – as individuals;
they help provide a continuity of knowledge; and they serve as an important source of
careers.
It is clear that organizations by overcoming our limitations as individual, enable
us to reach goals that would otherwise be much more difficult or even impossible to
reach.
Organizations help to preserve knowledge. Organizations (such as universities,
museums, and corporations) are essential because they store and protect most of the
important knowledge that has been gathered and recorded. In this way, they help to
make that knowledge a continuous bridge between past, present, and future
generations. In addition, organizations themselves add to our knowledge by developing
new and more efficient ways of doing things.
Organizations are important for still another reason; they provide their employees
with a source of livelihood and perhaps even personal satisfaction and self-fulfillment.
People tend to associate career opportunities with a variety of organizations, such as
churches, government agencies, schools, hospitals and

Types of Complex Organizations

Katz and Kahn identified four types based on the functions that is performed.
That is the type of activity in which an organization is involved as a sub-system of the
larger society. These are:
1. Productive or Economic Organizations e.g. a business Enterprise – Coca Cola,
The Breweries, and others.
2. Maintenance Organization – e.g. Schools.
3. Adaptive Organization e.g. research institutes e.g. NISER, CRIN, NIFOR.
4. Managerial or Political Organizations e.g. the State, Political parties, Pressure

50
 groups.
Goffman identified another type which he called `Total institutions. Prisons,
hospitals, monasteries, military camps, whaling ships holiday camps and boarding
schools are examples of total institutions. They are all institutions in which participants
live in the organization.
Worsley et al also identified voluntary organizations. These include religious,
political and leisure associations.
Blau and Scott also came up with their own typologies. These are:
1. Mutual Benefit Organizations e.g. parties, unions and clubs.
2. Business Concerns e.g. Banks, Cooperative Societies, Insurance Companies
etc.
3. Service Organizations e.g. Hospitals, Schools, Universities, Social work.
4. Common Weal Organizations – e.g. Police force, Fire Services, Customs, the
Army and others.

Persons Analysis of Organizations

Parsons sees an organization as a social system which is composed of various
sub-systems. These sub-systems in the case of a complex organization would consist
of various departments e.g. faculties in a University, departments in Industries.
Each system or sub-system no matter how small or large must come to terms
with what Parsons identified as the four basic functional pre-requisites. These are the
problems which every organization or system must solve if it must survive. The four
functional pre-requisites in order of importance are:
1. Adaptation – (operations of the economic system)
2. Goal attainment – (Political)
3. Integration (legal)
4. Pattern Maintenance (socialization, family, religion, education).
Adaptation and Goal attainment stresses the relationship between the
organization and the environment while Integration and Pattern maintenance are mainly
concerned with the internal problems of the organization.

51
 The problem of Adaptation is mainly that of obtaining necessary resources for
achieving organizational goals. These resources include human and material resources
e.g. an hospital needs adequate professional staff and equipments. More specifically
adaptation refers to the normative pattern which regulates the processes of personnel
recruitment, financing, land procurement and the acquisition of Managerial skills.
Goal attainment has to do with the mobilization of resources of the organization
for the accomplishment of organizational goals. The question is on “How best to use
the resources to achieve the desired goals”. This deals with the decision making
processes and the norms which govern such decision making processes.
Integration deals with the relationship between the units of the organization. The
problem centres on how to bring together the various units of the organization in order
to bring about solidarity and cohesion within the organization. How does each of the
various units function to ensure the survival of the whole? To integrate is to unite into a
larger whole.
Pattern Maintenance deals with the conditions within the units themselves. That
is, how the relationship within the sub-systems or various units are maintained so that
they maintain their relevance in the larger system.

52