Paper I Topic 1.

THE SOCIAL CONDITIONS IN

WHICH SOCIOLOGY EMERGED
Sociology emerged as a distinct science in nineteenth century Europe. Europe then
was passing through a period of immense changes which had set in with French
and the Industrial Revolutions. Indeed, sociology can be considered above all a
science of the new industrial society.

But before we go on to describe the salient points of the Industrial

Revolution we will explain to you the Commercial revolution and the Scientific
Revolution which took place in Europe between the fourteenth century and the
eighteenth Century. It was during these two revolutions in Europe, covered by
what is popularly known as the ―Renaissance‖ period, when there took place a
revival of art, literature, music, sculpture, Science and so on.

The Commercial Revolution

The ―Commercial Revolution‖ refers to a series of events between 1450 to

approximately 1800. These events signaled to a shift from the largely subsistence
and stagnant economy of medieval Europe to a more dynamic and worldwide
system. The Commercial Revolution in this sense, signified the expansion of trade
and commerce that took place from the fifteenth century onwards. It was of such
large scale and organized manner that we call it a Revolution. This expansion was
a result of the initiative taken by certain European countries to develop and
consolidate their economic and political power. These countries were Portugal,
Spain, Holland and England.

Let us now study some of the important aspects of the Commercial Revolution,
namely overseas discoveries and conquests. Europe‘s trade with the oriental of
Eastern countries like India and China was transacted by land routes. The northern
Italian cities of Venice and Genoa were the major centers of trade. The result of
the Italian monopoly was that the prices of goods like spices and silks imported
from the East were extremely high. Portugal and Spain therefore wanted to
discover a route to the Orient that would be independent of Italian control.

1
Thus began a shift from land routes to sea-routes. The Portuguese were the
pioneers in adventurous navigation and exploration, you probably known of the
historic voyages of Vasco da Gama, who in 1498 landed on the Indian coast after
having sailed around the southern tip of Africa.

Christopher Columbus, an Italian under the patronage of the Spanish King and
queen, set sail for India. However, he landed on the shores of North America. This
accidental discovery of America was to prove very beneficial to Spain. It laid the
foundations of what was to become a Spanish empire in America.

Britain, France and Holland soon followed spain and Portugal. These parts of India
and Africa, Malacca, the spice Islands, West Indies and south America came under
the economic control of Spain, Portugal, England, France and Holland. Commerce
expanded into a world enterprise. The monopoly of the Italian cities were
destroyed. European markets were flooded with new commodities; spices and
textiles from the East, tobacco from North America, cocoa, Chocolate and quinine
from S. America, ivory and above all, human slaves from Africa. With the
discovery of Americas, the range of trade widened. Formerly, the items sought for
were spices and cloth, later, gold and silver were added to the list.

As the commercial revolution progresses, the position of Portugal and Spain

declined. England, Holland and France came to dominate Europe and the world.

Expansion of Banking

One of the important features of the Commercial revolution was the growth of
Banking. Credit facilities were expanded, making it easy for merchants all over
Europe to do business. The ―cheque‖ was invented in the eighteenth century. Paper
money came to replace gold and silver coins.

Growth of companies: As trade and commerce expanded, new kinds of Business

organizations had to be devised to cope with this growth ―regulated companies‖
arose in the 16th Century. These were associations of merchants who bonded
together to cooperate for a common venture.

―Joint-Stock‖ companies emerged in the 17th Century. In this set up, shares of
capital were distributed to a large number of investors. Some of these were also
―Charted companies‖, their governments gave them a charter or a contract which
2
guaranteed them a monopoly of the trade in a particular region. Examples of these
companies include the British East India Company and the Dutch East India
Company.

The Rise of New Class

One of the most distinctive characteristics of this period was the Rise of the
middle class to economic power. By the end of the seventieth century, the middle
class had become an influential group in nearly every western European country. It
included Merchants, bankers, ship-owners and investors. Their power, at this stage,
was mainly economic.

“Europeanistation” of the world

By this term, we mean the transplanting of European manners and culture in other
societies. The activities of traders, missionaries and conquerors saw the
Europeanization of the Americas. Later, with the strengthening of colonialism, this
took roots in Asia and Africa as well.

This period saw the strengthening of monarchy, the decline of the church and the
rise of the middle class. It marked the beginning of the process of
―Europeanization‖, which was to reach a peak with colonialism. Thus Europe
charted new areas for economic expansion. The whole world had become Europe‘s
oyster.

The Scientific Revolution and the Renaissance Period

In this section, the changes and development is that took place in a very significant
area of human activity-science. Europe produced ―a scientific revolution‖ in the
Renaissance period of the fourteenth to sixteenth century A.D. the impact of the
scientific revolution was not crucial just in changing material life, but also people‘s
ideas about Nature and Society.

The history of Science does not mean a list of dates and events to be memorized. It
is a story of the interconnection between science and society, polity, economy and
culture.

3
Social Functions of Sciences

Science does not develop independent of society, rather it develops in

response to human needs e.g., various vaccines were not developed just out of the
blue, but out of the necessity to cure diseases.

Apart from influencing the physical or material life of society, science is

intimately connected with ideas. The general intellectual atmosphere existing in
society influences the development of science. Similarly, new developments in
science can change the attitudes and beliefs in other areas as well. It is important
to keep this fact in mind. We shall constantly demonstrating how new scientific
ideas influenced scholars to think about society in new ways. The emergence of
sociology in Europe owes a great deal to the ideas and discoveries contributed by
science.

Science in the Medieval Period

Medieval society was characterized by the feudal system. The church was the
epicenter of power authority and learning. Learning was mostly of the religious
variety. Nothing could challenge the ‗dogmas‘ or rigid beliefs of the church. New,
daring ideas could not flower in such an atmosphere. Thus the development of
ideas could not flower in such an atmosphere. Thus the development of science
was restricted mainly to improvements in techniques of production

The Renaissance period

The Renaissance period saw the beginning of the ‗Scientific Revolution‘. It

marked an area of description ad criticism in the field of science. It was a clear
break from the past, a challenge to old authority. Let us briefly observe some of the
major developments in art and science of this period.

Visual Art

Art, Literature and science all flourished. A scientific approach to nature and the
human body became prevalent. We can see this in the paintings of that period,
which explored the smallest details of Nature and the Human body.

4
Medicine

Dissection of the human body became acceptable, doctors and physiologists

directly observed how the human body was constructed. The fields of anatomy,
physiology, and pathology thus benefited greatly.

Chemistry

A general theory of chemistry was developed. Chemical processes like oxidation,

reduction, distillation, amalgamation etc. were studied.

Navigation and Astronomy

Vasco da Gama reached the Indian shores in 1498. Columbus discovered America
in 1492. Remember, this was the era of expansion of trade and the beginning of
colonialism. A strong interest grew in astronomy, which was important for
successful navigation.

The Copernican Revolution

The first major break from the entire system of ancient thought came with the work
of the Dutchman, Nicholas Copernicus.

It was generally believed that the earth was fixed or stationary and the sun and
other heavenly bodies moved around it. (This is known as a ‗geocentric‘ theory.)

Copernicus however thought otherwise, with the help of detailed explanations he

demonstrated that the earth moved around a fixed sun. (This is known as
‗heliocentric theory‘). The work of Copernicus is considered revolutionary because
it drastically altered patterns of thought about the universe. Human being was not
at the centre of the universe, but a small part of a vast system.

In a nut shell, science in the Renaissance period was marked by a new attitude
towards human beings and nature. Natural objects became the subject of close
observation and experiment.

The copernician revolution shattered the very foundations on which the old world
rested.

Important Post-Renaissance Developments

5
The work of physicists and mathematicians like Galileo Galilei (1564-1642),
Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) and subsequently, Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
revolutionized science. It brought to the forefront the experimental method. Old
ideas were challenged and alternatives were suggested. If these alternative ideas
could be proved and repeatedly verified and checked out, they were accepted. If
not, new solutions were sought.

Scientific methods thus came to be regarded as the most accurate, the most
objective.

Biology and Evolution

Dissection of human body helped people gain a better understanding of its

working; Circulation of Blood was discovered by William Harvey (1578-1657).
This led to a lot of rethinking. The human organism came to be viewed in terms of
interrelated parts and interconnected systems. This had its impact on social
thought of Comte Spencer, Durkheim, to name a few.

Let us now come to one of the most interesting contributions in the biology, which
created a furore in the society of that time. The British naturalist Charles Darwin
(1809 – 1882) published the Origin of species in 1859. It was based n the
observations made whilst travelling for five years all over the world. Darwin put
forward the theory that various living organisms compete for the limited resources
the earth has to offer. Thus ―survival of the fittest‖ is the natural law. Some species
evolve or develop certain traits,, which make their survival possible., other species
die out.

Darwin studied ‗human evolution‘, tracing it in his work, Descent of man (1863).
He traced the origins of the human species to some ape like ancestors, which, over
the centuries, evolved into modern human beings. This book created an uproar. It
was believed that ‗God‘ made humans ―in his own image‖ and conservatives were
not willing to accept that they were descended from the monkey.

Darwin‘s evolutionary theory did, however, gain wide acceptance,. T was applied
to the social world by evolutionary thinkers, notably Herbert Spencer. Ot just
organisms, but societies were seen as constantly ‗evolving‘ or developing from a
lower to a higher stage.

6
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION

The Industrial Revolution began around 1760 A. D. in England. It brought

about great changes in the social and economic life of the people first in England,
then in other countries of Europe and later in other continents. In Europe,
especially England, the discovery of new territories, explorations, growth of trade
and commerce and the consequent growth of towns brought about an increase in
demand for goods. Earlier goods were produced at domestic levels. This means
that there existed as domestic system of production. With increased demand, goods
were to be produced on a large-scale.

New Inventions

During Industrial Revolution, new tools and techniques were invented,

which could produce goods on a large-scale. During 1760-1830 A.D., a series of
inventions in tools and techniques and organizations of production took place and
it gave rise to the factory system of production. Thus a change in economy from
feudal to capitalist system of production developed. Subsequently, there emerged a
class of capitalists, which controlled the new system of production. Due to this
revolution society moved from the old age of hand-made goods to the new age of
machine made goods. This shift heralded the emergence of Industrial Revolution.

One of the significant mechanical inventions, which led to a quicker and

better method of production in various industries, was the Spinning Jenny,
invented in 1767 by James Hargreaves, an English weaver. It was simple machine
rectangular in shape. It had a series of spindles, which could be turned by a single
wheel. In 1769, Arkwright, an English barber, invented another tool, which was
named after the name of its inventor and called Arkwright‘s Water Frame. This
Water Frame was so large that it could not be kept in one‘s home and a special
building was required to set it up. Thus on account of this it is said that he was
responsible for introducing the factory system. Another invention called ―the
Mule‖ was by Samuel Crompton in 1179 in England. There were several other
inventions, which all contributed to the industrial growth of European society.

Impact of the Industrial Revolution on Society

7
 With the change in the economy of society several social changes followed.
As capitalism became more and more complex, the developments of banks,
insurance companies, and finance corporations took place. New class of industrial
workers, managers, capitalists emerged.

The peasants in the new industrial society found themselves with thousands
of other people like themselves, winding cotton in a textile mill. Instead of the
famous countryside they found themselves in unhygienic living conditions. With
the increase of production, population started increasing. Rise of population led to
the increased rate of urbanization. The industrial cities grew rapidly. In the
industrial cities socio-economic disparities were very wide. The factory workers
were involved in repetitive and boring work, the result of which they could not
enjoy. In Marxist terms the worker became alienated from the product of his/her
labour. City life in the industrial society became altogether a different way of life.

These changes moved both conservative and radical thinkers. The

conservatives feared that such conditions would lead to chaos and disorder. The
radicals like Engels felt that the factory workers would initiate social
transformation.

Though the judgment of values differed, social thinkers of the time were
agreed upon the epoch-making impact of the Industrial Revolution. They also
agreed upon the importance of the new working class. The history of the period
from 1811 to 1850 further indicated that this class increasingly agitated for their
rights.

Significant Themes of the Industrial Revolution

The significant themes of the Industrial Revolution which concerned the

early sociologists were as given below.

i. The condition of labour: A new population earning their livelihood by

working in the factories arose. In the early years this working class lived in
poverty and squalor. They were socially deprived. At the same time they
were indispensable in the new industrial system. This made them a powerful
social force. Sociologists recognized that the poverty of this class became

8
 during the nineteenth century the subject of both moral and analytical
concern.
ii. The transformation of property: The traditional emphasis on land lost its
value while money or capital became important during the Industrial
Revolution. The investment in new industrial system came to be recognized.
The feudal landlords became less significant while the new capitalists gained
power. Many of these new capitalists were the erstwhile landlords.
Property was one of the central issues that were raised in the French
Revolution too. Its influence on the social order is considerable. Property is
related to economic privileges, social status and political power. A change in
the property system involves a change in the fundamental character of
society. Sociologists have grappled with the question of property and its
impact on social stratification since the days of Marx, Tocqueville, Taine
and Weber.
iii. The industrial city, i.e. urbanism: Urbanisation was a necessary corollary
of the Industrial Revolution. Industries grew and along with it grew great
cluster of populations, the modern towns and cities. Cities were present in
ancient period too, such as Rome, Athens, etc. but the new cities, such as
Macnchester in England, famous for its textile, were different in nature.
Ancient cities were known as repositories of civilized graces and virtues
while the new cities were known as repositories of misery and inhumanity. It
was these aspects of the new cities, which concerned the early sociologists.

THE INTELLECTUAL INFLUENCES AFFECTING THE EMERGENCE

OF SOCIOLOGY

Sociology emerged as a response to the forces of change, which took place

during eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in Europe. He ideas, which are
discussed again and again in early sociological writings, are thus essentially ideas
of that period.

The thinkers of the Enlightenment of eighteenth century affected much of

the early sociology. The Enlightenment appears as the most appropriate point of
departure in the study of the origins of sociological theory, for various reasons
including those mentioned below.

9
 Firstly, a scientific approach to the study of society dates back to the
tradition of Enlightenment. The eighteenth century thinkers began more
consistently than any of their predecessors to study the human conditions in a
scientific way using the methods of the natural sciences. They consciously applied
scientific principles of analysis to the study of human beings and their nature and
society.

Secondly, the eighteenth century thinkers upheld reason as a measure to

judge social institutions and their suitability for human nature. Human begins,
according to them, are essentially rational and this rationality can lead them to
freedom of thought and action.

Thirdly, the eighteenth century thinkers believed that human beings are
capable of attaining perfection. By criticizing and changing social institutions they
can create for themselves even greater degrees of freedom which, in turn would
enable them increasingly to actualize the potentially creative powers.

Sociological thinkers are concerned with the above three assumptions. Apart
from them, three other intellectual influences current in the post-Enlightenment
period influenced the emergence of sociology in Europe. They can be identified as

i. The philosophy of history

ii. The biological theories of evolution; and
iii. The surveys of social conditions.

These three intellectual influences are the precursors of sociology and are reflected
the writings of the early sociologists.

The Philosophy of History

In the early part of the nineteenth century the philosophy of history became
an important intellectual influence. The basic assumption of this philosophy was
that society must have progressed through a series of steps from a simple to
complex stage. We many assess the contributions of the philosophy of history to
sociology as having been, on the philosophical side, the notions of development
and progress. On the scientific side, it has given the concepts of historical periods
and social types. The social thinkers, who developed the philosophy of history
such as Abbe Saint Pierre, and Giambattista, were concerned with the whole of
10
society and not merely the politics, or the economic, or the cultural aspects. Later
the contributions of Comte, Spencer, Marx and many others reflected the impact of
the loss of this intellectual trend in their sociological writings.

The Biological Theories of Evolution

The influence of the philosophy of history was further reinforced by the

biological theory of evolution. Sociology moved towards an evolutionary
approach, seeking to identify and account for the principal stages in social
evolution. It tended to be modeled on biology, as is evident from the widely
diffused conception of society as an organism, and from the attempts to formulate
general terms of social evolution. Herbert Spencer and Durkheim are good
example of this kind of writings.

Surveys of Social Conditions

Social survey forms an important element in modern sociology. It emerged

due to two reasons, one was the growing conviction that the methods of the natural
sciences should and could be extended to the study of human affairs; that human
phenomenon could be classified and measured. The other was the concern with
poverty (‗the social problem‘), following the recognition that poverty was not
natural but social. The social survey is one of the principal methods of sociological
inquiry. The basic assumption, which underlines his method, is that through the
knowledge of the social conditions one can arrive at solutions to solve the social
problems prevalent in society.

THREE PATHS TO A
DEFINITION
Three main paths are available for delineating the subject matter of
sociology.

1. The historical, whereby we seek through study of the classic

sociological writing to find the central traditional concerns and
interests of sociology as an intellectual discipline. In brief, we
ask:‖What did the founding fathers say?‖

11
 2. The empirical whereby we study current sociological work to discover
those subjects to which the discipline gives most attention. In other
words, we ask: ―What are contemporary sociologists doing?‖
3. The analytical, whereby we arbitrarily divide and delimit some larger
subject matter and allocate it among different disciplines. We ask, in
effect: ―What does reason suggest?‖

The historical approach has piety to commend it. It offers us the opportunity
to benefit from the wisdom of the past. It enables us to understand issues which
can be grasped only if we comprehend then background. Of course, people may
read the same history quite differently. In addition, the historical method runs the
risk of making out thinking rigid, since tradition may be poorly suited to deal with
emerging problems of the present and the future.

The empirical method is least ambiguous; it mainly requires some form of

counting. Of course, what contemporary sociologists emphasize in their work may
be simply a passing fancy, having little connection with the important work of the
past or little promise for the future. In the opinion of Professor Pitrim Sorokin,
current sociological preoccupations are nothing but ―fads or foibles,‖ and, in the
view of C. Wright Mills, they indicate a decline of ―the sociological imagination.‖

The analytical approach is the least troublesome. A few lines of definition, a

few more paragraphs of explanation, and we have it. This is a time honored path
followed continuously since it was first marked out by Auguste Comte, the father
of sociology. But decrees dividing the realms of human learning have none of the
force of law. Scholars and scientists go where their interests lead them; they study
what they like when they wish; they are natural poachers with little regard for
property rights and ―no trespassing: signs. The arbitrary definition of fields of
study, while often aesthetically satisfying, is, therefore, generally a poor guide to
what is really happening. It presents a neat master plan, but for lack of effective
zoning laws the factual structure of research often bears little resemblance to it.

There is no need for us to prejudge the issue. Each perspective may offer us
something of value in understanding sociology. I have avoided imposing a ―pre-
packaged‖ definition of its subject matter, choosing instead to allow a conception
to emerge from a diverse set of relevant materials. Since the method is inductive, it

12
requires a bit of patience. Answers will not always be forthcoming straightway.
Yet I trust that those which emerge more gradually will also fade away less
rapidly. By this method of presentation, furthermore, I hope not only to delineate
the subject matter of the field but, in the course of doing so, to communicate
something of sociology‘s history and an impression of contemporary issues. Both
are themes to which we will often return.

It would not be entirely honest to say: ―I let the facts speak for themselves.‖
Facts may speak for themselves, but they cannot select themselves. I have,
however, tried conscientiously to select the facts without prejudice, allowing a
wide variety of points of view to be represented. Needless to say, included
prominently among these points of view is my own. My objective is to develop a
broad and inclusive conception of sociology. This requires searching for unifying
themes and common bases of agreement. But I have made no effort to disguise the
great diversity of opinion which exists, nor to deny the frequently deep
disagreement which often divides the sociological community.

What the Founding Fathers Said

Professor Sorokin‘s standard work on Contemporary Sociological Theories

cites well over 1, 000 men whose work is important enough to mention in a review
of the development of modern sociology. The standard ―history and interpretation‖
of the evolution of Social Thought from Lore to Science by Howard Becker and
Harry Elmer Barnes fills two volumes of 1,178 long pages, apart from notes and
appendices. In the face of this massive array, who is to say which men define the
sociological tradition?

There are four men, however, whom everyone in sociology, regardless of his
special emphasis, bias, or bent, will probably accept as the central Herbert Spencer,
Emile Durkheim, and Max Weber. Together, they span the whole of the nineteenth
and early twentieth century, during which modern sociology was formed. They
represent the main national centres—France, England, and Germany—in which
sociology first flourished and in which the modern tradition began. Each exerted a
profound personal influence on the conception of sociology as an intellectual
discipline. It seems particularly relevant, therefore, to explore their opinions about
the proper subject matter of sociology.

13
 Auguste Comte (1798-1857), who gave sociology its name, devoted more
energy to expressing hopes for and to staking out the claims of sociology than to
defining its subject matter. He felt that social science in his time stood in the same
relation to its future as once astrology stood in regard to the science of astronomy
and as alchemy stood in relation to chemistry. Only in the distant future, he argued,
would the sub-division of the field become practicable and desirable, and for his
time he felt it ―impossible… to anticipate what the principle of distribution may
be.‖ We cannot get from him, therefore, any list of topics or sub-fields of
sociological interest.

Although Comte was reluctant to specify detail the sub-fields of sociology,

he did propose and consistently treat sociology as divided into two main parts, the
social statics and social dynamics. These two concepts represent a basic division in
the subject matter of sociology which in many different forms and guises appears
throughout the history of the field and persists today. In the first case the major
institutions or institutional complexes of society—such as economy, family, or
polity—are taken to be the major units for sociological analysis, and sociology is
conceived of as the study of interrelations between such institutions. In the words
of Comte, ―The Statical study of sociology consists in the investigation of the laws
of action and reaction of the different parts of the social system.‖ the parts of a
society, he argued cannot be understood separately, ―as in mutual
relation…forming a whole which compels us to treat them in combination.‖ He
referred to this principle of ―universal social interconnection‖ as the ―master-
thought‖ of his whole approach.

The second major division of sociology which Comte proposed he called

social dynamics. If statics was to be the study of how the parts of societies
interrelate, dynamics was to focus on whole societies as the unit of analysis and to
show how they developed and changed through time. ―We must remember,‖ he
said, ―that the laws of social dynamics are most recognizable when they relate to
the largest societies.‖ Comte rather believed that he already had the problem
solved. He was convinced that all societies moved through certain fixed stages of
development, and that they progressed toward ever increasing perfection. This
view will find few supporters today. Fewer still would acknowledge that the stages
identified by Comte are those through which all societies in fact have passed or

14
will pass. What is important for us to remember, however, is that Comte felt the
comparative study of societies as wholes was a major subject for sociological
analysis.

Herbert Spencer‘s (1820-1903) three-volume Principles of Sociology,

published in 1877, was the first full-scale systematic study explicitly devoted to an
exposition of sociological analysis. He was much more precise, than Comte in
specifying the topics or special fields for which he felt sociology must take
responsibility. Thus, in the first volume of the Principles he urged that:

The Science of Sociology has to give an account of [how] successive

generation of units are produced, reared and fitted for co-operation. The
development of the family thus stands first in order….Sociology has next to
describe and explain the rise and development of that political organization
which in several ways regulates affairs—which combines the actions of
individuals…and which restrains them in certain of the dealings with one
another…. There has to be similarly described the evolution of ecclesiastical
structures and functions…. The system of restraints whereby the minor
actions of citizens are regulated has also to be dealt with…. The stages
through which the industrial part passes…have to be studied…[as well as]
the growth of those regulative structures which the industrial part develops
within itself…...

The subject matter of sociology as Spencer defined it contains quite familiar

elements. Here and there we must translate a term. For example, when he speaks of
the ―system of restraints‖ he is obviously referring to the subject which in modern
sociology is called ―social control.‖ Otherwise we have no difficulty in relating the
subject matter of sociology delineated by contemporary sociologists to the outline
given by Spencer. In the order given in the quotation, the fields of sociology
according to Spencer are: the family, politics, religion, social control, and industry
or work. In addition, Spencer explicitly mentioned the sociological study of
associations, communities, the division of labor, social differentiation or
stratification, the sociology o knowledge and of science, and the study of art and
aesthetics. An unbiased examination of the table of contents of Spencer‘s

15
Principles in the light of contemporary work described in our next section suggests
that the range of subjects with which sociology deals has been remarkably stable
for a long period of time.

Spencer would be no means have agreed, however, that sociology was

limited to a list of institutions like the family or to processes such as social control.
He also stressed the obligation of sociology to deal with the interrelations between
the different elements of society, to give an account of how the parts influence the
whole and are in turn reacted upon, and in the process may transform or b
transformed. As examples of such ―reciprocal influences‖ he called attention to the
effects of sexual norms on family life, and the relations between political
institutions and other forms of regulating and the relations between political
institutions and other forms of regulating behavior such as religion and ceremonial
activity. He also advised parallel study of the organization of the priesthood and
other hierarchies to reveal ―how changes of structure in it are connected with
changes of structure in them.‖

Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) did not set forth his conception of the proper
subject matter of sociology in as full detail as did Spencer. We can, however,
easily reconstruct his position from remarks he made in his Rules of Sociological
Method and his various other writings.

Durkheim frequently referred to what he called the ―special fields‖ of

sociology, and he clearly favoured their widespread development. Sociology could
not become science, he said, ―until it renounced its initial and overall claim upon
the totality of social reality [and distinguished] ever more among parts, elements,
and different aspects which could serve as subject matters for specific problems.‖
In reviewing his own work and that of his associates in France, he affirmed their
joint ―ambition to initiate for sociology what Comte called the era of
specialization.‖ Durkheim clearly approved the idea that sociology should concern
itself with a wide range of institutions and social processes. He said for example:
―There are, in reality, as many as branches of sociology, as many particular social
sciences, as there are varieties of social facts.

16
 Durkheim made his position unmistakably clear in the outline he established
for the early volumes of the first sociological journal, L’Annee Sociologique. He
divided the journal into seven sections, with numerous sub sections under each of
major heading. In a typical issue the major sections were: General Sociology—
including a sub-section on personality in the individual and the collectivity;
Sociology of Religion; Sociology of Law and Morals, including sub-sections on
political organization, social organization, and marriage and he family; the
Sociology of Crime, Economic Sociology, including sub-sections on the
measurement of value and on occupational groups; Demography, including a sub-
section on urban and rural communities, and on the Sociology of , Aesthetics. This
outline, dating from 1986 could easily be used for a Contemporary general review
of sociology.

Although taking a broad view of the institutions and social processes which
sociologists might study, Durkheim, like Comte and Spencer, also emphasized the
importance of analyzing the relationships among institutions and between them
and their setting. ―One of the main contributions of sociology.‖ He asserted lies ―in
the awareness that there is a close kinship among all these highly diverse [social]
facts which have up to now been studied…in complete mutual independence.‖
Each social fact, he felt must be related ―to a particular social milieu, to a definite
type of society.‖ To do otherwise, he said, is to leave social facts—the facts of
religion, law, moral ideas, and economics—―suspended in the void.‖ To
understand them is impossible, he held, ―unless they are seen in their relations to
each other and the collective milieu in the midst of which they develop and whose
expression they are.‖

Durkheim, no less than Spencer, considered societies as such to be important

units of sociological analysis. He spoke of sociology as ―the science of societies,‖
and repeatedly emphasized the importance of studying different types of society
comparatively. Thus, he said: ―One cannot explain a social fact of any complexity
except by following its complete development through all social species.
Comparative Sociology is not a particular branch of sociology; it is sociology
itself.

Max Weber (1864-1920) devoted the greater part of his observations on

sociology as a discipline to expounding the special method he advocated, called the

17
method of understanding (verstehen) and to discussing the vicissitudes of maintain
objectivity and neutrality of value judgments in social science. He did, however,
offer a general definition of sociology which, incidentally, he referred to as ―this
highly ambiguous word.‖ Sociology, according to Weber, ―is a science which
attempts the interpretive understanding of social action in order thereby to arrive at
a causal explanation of its course and effects.

From our point of view, the crucial words in this definition are ―social
action‖. To that term Weber assigned a very broad meaning indeed, including‖ all
human behavior when and in so far as the acting individual attaches a subjective
meaning to it.‖ This might suggest that Weber regarded the sociology. Weber did
in fact propose an elaborate system for classifying social acts and social
relationships, but he did not study them as such. He did not develop his sociology
as a body of descriptive statements about such acts or the patterns of their
relationship, nor did he offer any detailed explanations for such patterns. Instead,
he addressed himself mainly to the analysis of concrete institutions. The subjects
on which he wrote extensively include: religion; various aspects of economic life,
including money and the division of labor; political parties and other forms of
political organization and authority; bureaucracy and other varieties of large-scale
organization; class and caste; the city; and music.

Neither the definition of sociology offered by Weber, nor the list of subjects
on which he wrote, adequately express some of the most salient features of his
work. His recent intellectual biographer, Professor Reinhard Bendix, says of
Weber‘s justly famous studies of religion: ―his three main themes were to examine
the effect of religious ideas on economic activities, to analyze the relation between
social stratification and religious ideas, and to ascertain and explain the
distinguishing characteristics of Western civilization.‖ The first of these two
themes we will immediately recognize as another instance of the conception of
sociology as a discipline uniquely concerned with interrelations between the parts
or elements of society. And the third theme, on the distinguishing characteristics of
Western civilization, we must acknowledge to be another reference to that
comparative sociology which treats societies as its unit of analysis and inquires
into those factors which account for the similarities and difference between the as
they exist in different places and times.

18
 Although they by no means expressed themselves in precisely the same
terms, the four founding fathers we consulted seem in basic agreement about the
proper subject matter of sociology. First, all would allow, and in some cases would
urge, sociologists to study a wide range of institutions, from the family to the state.
These are to be analyzed in their own right, from the distinctive perspective of
sociology, a perspective we have not yet fully defined. Second, those who define
the classical tradition seem agreed that a unique subject matter for sociology is
found in the interrelations among different institutions. Third, they concur in the
opinion that society as a whole can be taken as a distinctive unity of sociological
analysis, with sociology assigned the task of explaining wherein and why societies
are alike or different. Finally, we must note among the classical writers in the field
some sentiment in favor of focusing sociology on ―social acts.

19