Sociology and

Common Sense
Knowledge
• The passage highlights the distinction between sociological knowledge and
theological, philosophical, and common-sense observations. It emphasizes that
common sense knowledge, often based on accumulated experiences, prejudices, and
beliefs, can be contradictory and inconsistent. Scientific observations in sociology, on
the other hand, rely on verifiable evidence and a systematic body of proof. The
passage criticizes common sense statements that may perpetuate stereotypes, such
as gender and caste biases.
• Moreover, it points out that common sense perspectives lead to widespread ignorance
and rejection of a sociological approach when understanding human behavior. People
tend to rely on familiar and simplistic explanations rooted in biology, psychology, or
morality, reinforcing their commitment to the idea of individual uniqueness.
• Sociology, in contrast, challenges common-sense notions and encourages a deeper
understanding of the social world. The passage concludes by highlighting the
transformative power of sociology, noting that it enables individuals to see the world
in a new light and emphasizes that things are not always as they seem.
• Sociologists argue that what is considered 'common sense' or 'natural' is often relative
to specific societies or time periods. The common-sense view of gender roles in our
society, based on biological and physiological differences between men and women, is
challenged by studies like Margaret Mead's research in New Guinea. Her findings
revealed significant variations in behavior across different societies, undermining the
idea that such differences are biologically determined.
• The passage contends that common sense explanations, often naturalistic and
individualistic, are insufficient and sometimes contradictory. Sociological and
anthropological investigations frequently challenge these common-sense notions,
highlighting the inadequacy of relying solely on individual behavior or naturalistic
reasons. Sociologists reject individualistic explanations for events, as they neglect
wider social forces that influence individuals beyond their control. Similarly,
naturalistic explanations are rejected because they overlook the social conventions
and learned behavior patterns that shape individuals as members of social groups or
society at large.
• Sociology distinguishes itself from common sense and philosophical thought, aiming
for meaningful insights through systematic analysis rather than relying on unreflective
observations. Although not always yielding spectacular results, sociology makes
incremental advances through the exploration of diverse connections. Unlike common
sense, sociology involves a reflective approach that questions beliefs and seeks to
understand their origins. The discipline emphasizes scientific procedures, tracing its
roots to the broader tradition of scientific investigation. This approach arose alongside
the significant developments in modern science, highlighting the sociological
perspective's evolution within a specific historical and social context.
How is sociological study different from
the common sense?
• The passage discusses the distinction between an average person's common-sense
theories about social life and the discipline of sociology. While individuals may have
personal theories on various aspects of social life, they are considered amateur sociologists
at best. Drawing an analogy, the passage suggests that just as a stargazer is not an
astronomer, a common person with theories about social life is not a sociologist.
• The text argues that a common-sense-based view of social life is not equivalent to
sociology, even if some folk wisdom statements align with sociological theories. It provides
an example where the folk saying "give the dog a bad name and it will get blamed for
many things" reflects the essence of Howard Becker's "Labelling Theory of Deviance."
• Despite the overlap in exploring certain areas, the passage asserts that sociology has a
distinct status as a specialized body of knowledge. It emphasizes that what sets sociology
apart is not exclusive access to certain phenomena but a different and more systematic
way of looking at them compared to common sense.
How is sociological study different from
the common sense?
• Sociology is a systematic study that offers a unique perspective on social life. It focuses
on the "man-in-society" standpoint, emphasizing the interdependence between
individuals and society. This approach recognizes that individuals are shaped by societal
norms, values, and culture, yet they also actively contribute to the creation of society
through their actions and meanings ascribed to social interactions. Sociology explores the
dualistic nature of social reality, illustrating how society influences individuals and,
simultaneously, how individuals play a role in shaping society. The study encompasses
various elements, including social roles, norms, beliefs, and symbols, emphasizing the
intricate relationship between individuals and their collective social environment.
• Sociology acknowledges that individuals may hold meanings and motives that differ from
commonly shared group values, potentially leading to deviant behavior and influencing
the overall group dynamics. Prominent figures like Christ, Lenin, and Gandhi are examples
of individuals who have significantly impacted and changed their societies.
How is sociological study different from
the common sense?
• Sociology adopts a unique and critical perspective towards social life, described as a
"debunking attitude" by Peter L. Berger. Sociologists act as skeptics, refusing to accept
surface-level, self-evident, and common-sense views of the world. Instead, they
intentionally delve deeper, seeking hidden patterns, implicit meanings, underlying
causes, and unintended consequences. Sociologists aim to go beyond the apparent to
uncover the complexities and nuances of social phenomena.
• This debunking attitude is exemplified in the study of religion, considered one of the
most revered institutions in society. Influential sociologists like Emile Durkheim and
Karl Marx, despite differing views on the role of religion, shared a critical perspective
on it. They offered groundbreaking contributions to sociology by challenging
traditional and often revered notions of religion, reflecting the discipline's commitment
to questioning and exploring beyond conventional understanding.
How is sociological study different from
the common sense?
• Durkheim and Marx exemplify the sociological debunking attitude towards religion,
challenging conventional beliefs. Durkheim emphasized the symbolic nature of religious
beliefs, arguing that worshiping God is, in fact, worshiping society itself, as religious symbols
represent social cohesion. In contrast, Marx viewed religion as a tool for exploiting the poor,
creating false satisfaction and diverting attention from real societal issues.
• This sociological approach involves penetrating beyond surface views of social life and
seeking explanations in terms of underlying causes, meanings, or unintended consequences.
The discontentment driving this approach can be traced to the tumultuous times of
sociology's birth, marked by the transition from ancient regimes to the industrial bourgeoisie-
dominated world. The unpredictability and complexity of this new world prompted a quest to
understand it better, leading to organized skepticism as a hallmark of sociology.
• Additionally, sociology approaches social life using specific methods, drawing on the
experiences of other disciplines. Despite being a latecomer, sociology faces the challenge of
applying these methods to study the intricate and complex phenomenon of human behavior.
Conclusion

• Common sense statements about social life are often based on guesses, biases, prejudices,
or mistaken interpretations, lacking the rigor of scientific inquiry. Sociology, with its
"debunking attitude towards the world taken for granted," challenges these common sense
perceptions, aiming to unveil hidden patterns and unintended consequences.
• Prominent sociologists, like Durkheim, assert that common sense perceptions can be
prejudices that hinder scientific study. Alfred Schutz describes common sense as organized,
typified stocks of taken-for-granted knowledge. Harold Garfinkel notes that common sense
produces a sense of organization and coherence through implicit rules acquired via
socialization and individual experience.
• Culture, with its cognitive, normative, and material dimensions, shapes how individuals
process information, follow rules of conduct, and engage in activities. The sociological
understanding of poverty rejects common sense explanations that attribute it to individual
shortcomings, instead focusing on the structural inequalities within class societies, chronic
irregularity of work, and low wages.