Sociology As A Discipline

The Discipline of Sociology explores the nature, structure, and dynamics of social life, and also its causes and consequences for the world. With this broad mandate, sociology encompasses a diversity of substantive interests, methodological approaches, and theoretical orientations. Sociologists study diverse social phenomena ranging from online conversations, friendship, and families to neighborhoods, governments, and global markets.

Emergence of Sociology

Sociology, as a discipline, was the pioneering science to address the entirety of social life. It examined the complete framework of social institutions and social groups that collectively form a society.

Intellectual Causes

Sociology has a fourfold intellectual origin in :

Political philosophy,
Philosophy of history,
Biological theories of evolution and
Movements for social and political reform.
Conservative reaction to enlightenment.

The perception of change as a potential challenge to a fair social order initially began to shift thanks to philosophical historians who ventured beyond viewing society solely as the political construct of the state. Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, and Herbert Spencer deserve recognition for their contributions in this regard. Additionally, the emergence of the social survey, stemming from two distinct sources, introduced a significant dimension to the field of sociology.

The growing conviction that scientific methods could be used to study human society.
The growing concern with poverty (and other social evils) and the recognition that it wasn’t a natural phenomenon but a result of human ignorance or exploitation. Under these two influences, the prestige of natural sciences and the movements of social reform, the social survey came to occupy an important place in the new science of society.

Material Causes

The new interest in history (the traditions of philosophy of history) and social change (origin of sociology) was aroused by the enormity of social changes that Europe underwent in the 18th and 19th centuries, namely the Industrial revolution and the French Revolution.

Industrial revolution

The surge in urbanization during this period resulted in widespread urban poverty and squalor. While the working class endured appalling living conditions, the aristocracy reveled in unimaginable luxury and opulence. This stark dichotomy served as a catalyst for the emergence of social reform movements, as well as the development of Marxist ideology.

French Revolution

The very idea that people could select their own government was revolutionary for aristocratic Europe at that time. As till then Monarchs were seen to be divinely appointed.
Social survey emerged from the idea of application of natural science methods to human society. It also took support from the acceptance of the new understanding of social evils, which were manifested by the material possibilities of the industrial age. A social survey, of poverty or any other social evil in fact, only made sense if it was backed by the belief that something could be done about it. Thus, the original attempts at sociology were attempts to guide the process of social change towards what was perceived as progress (nature of progress as envisioned then was highly Euro-centric). The development of sociology in India is due to much the same reasons as at an earlier stage in Europe. The emergence of new social problems emerging from rapid economic and social changes introduced by the colonial regime and the desire to direct and control these changes.
Sociology as a basis of reform took shape in the 70s post Vietnam war era in the USA. Rise of conflict in the form of race riots (Civil right movement), student revolts and reactions to the Vietnam war were triggers which raised the popularity of conflict theories which saw social conflict as a constant fact and challenged the authority of the functionalist perspective which was preoccupied with the maintenance of social order. This marked the turn of sociology from a theoretical to an applied science with the aim of resolving social problems rather than construction an objective science of society. WEB DuBois was a prominent sociologist who explore the problems of race in the US.

Joseph De La Maistre was a leading conservative critic of the changes in European society and felt that modernity, capitalism, and industrialisation were leading to a society of despair as opposed to the society of hope envisioned by enlightenment scholars.
Sociology emerged as a combination of enlightenment means aimed at achieving conservative goals.

Although the two had vastly different origins, due to the changes that they have undergone over time they are now practically indistinguishable. However, in terms of

Concepts,
Methods of investigation and analysis, and
Focus of study the two disciplines are still widely separated.

In the past, Anthropologists primarily focused on studying traditional or non-industrial societies, while Sociologists were more concerned with advanced or modern societies. Anthropologists engaged in fieldwork, focusing on small, culturally distinct societies that differed significantly from their own. These pronounced differences allowed anthropologists to maintain ethical neutrality while examining these societies as integrated entities. Moreover, due to the limited change and historical records in such societies, adopting a historical approach was often impractical.

Initially, the divergence between the two disciplines stemmed largely from their differing areas of focus. Anthropologists employed a functionalist approach, whereas sociologists were inclined towards historical comparisons, as exemplified by Durkheim’s work on comparative sociology.

However, recent trends indicate a shift as non-industrial societies undergo transformation under the influence of Western ideas and technology.

Both sociologists and anthropologists are increasingly addressing issues related to societies undergoing economic growth and social change, particularly in regions like Asia and Africa. Additionally, anthropological studies are expanding to include research in advanced societies, examining aspects such as “little communities” and kinship groups.

MN Srinivas said that sociology in India is more akin to social anthropology due to the great diversity which makes it difficult to apply macro generalisations.

Psychology

J.S. Mill’s perspective, asserting that all properties of human beings in society are rooted in the nature of the individual, stands in stark contrast to Durkheim’s belief that social facts exist independently of an individual’s psyche. It’s evident that these two viewpoints represent opposite ends of the spectrum, suggesting that reality likely lies somewhere in between.

Psychology, to some extent, can be seen as inherently social, as psychological phenomena occur within a social context that can influence them. However, it can still be argued that social psychologists often feel a closer affinity with general psychology than with sociology. This is because they frequently adhere to psychological methodologies, emphasizing experiments and quantitative studies, sometimes overlooking the structural aspects of the social situation in their research. For instance, in the study of war and conflict, there have been mutually exclusive sociological and psychological explanations.

Various efforts have been made to bridge the gap between these two disciplines, exemplified by Gerth and Mills, who viewed social roles as the intersection of individual and social structure. They believed that analyzing social roles could provide insights into both individual character and social structure using the same framework. However, this approach eventually fell out of favor, and presently, the prevailing academic landscape often features divergent studies in which the two disciplines maintain their distinctions.

Economics

Several critical studies have argued that economics, as a discipline, cannot function in complete isolation. The prevailing notion suggests that the foundational principles of economics are essentially hypotheses that require validation, and this can only be achieved through sociological inquiry.

Over time, both economics and sociology have shown a growing interest in the interplay between the two disciplines. Economic studies have started delving into social theory, while sociological research has examined the fundamental aspects of economic systems. The literature is particularly abundant in the latter category, with sociologists exploring facets of economic behavior that economists may have overlooked or treated superficially. There is a substantial body of sociological work dedicated to the study of capital and its societal impacts.

While economics and sociology had their roots intertwined, they diverged over time but have gradually reconverged, especially in recent years. This resurgence can be largely attributed to the shifting focus of economic studies from free market mechanisms to broader concepts like GDP/GNP and economic planning. This shift has prompted an examination of the social factors influencing economic growth, reigniting interest in understanding the motivations behind human actions.

In this collaborative endeavor, economists have played a significant role by incorporating sociological concepts and generalizations into their research. Conversely, only a few sociologists have gained the necessary expertise in modern economic theory to specialize in the study of economic phenomena. Similar to the fruitful partnership between economists and psychologists, exemplified by Tversky and Kahneman in behavioral economics, there exists ample potential for studying group economic interactions in the crossroads of economics and sociology.

Political Science

Traditional political science encompasses three key dimensions: descriptive, practical, and philosophical. However, the theoretical development within political science has often been limited to the classification of various forms of government. Sociology has exerted significant influence in expanding the horizons of this field.

The sociological essence of political science becomes particularly evident in two specific areas: the proliferation of comparative studies and the examination of political behavior and institutions within the broader context of other societal institutions. Political science essentially constitutes the study of a specific social institution, namely, the state. It warrants recognition as a distinct discipline for several compelling reasons:

Special importance of political institutions and the importance of the problems of distribution of power in society.
Many sociologists in their observation of actual behavior have tended to ignore the political structures, thus coming up with Generalisations which have been irrelevant.

History

The interrelations between historiography and sociology are intricate and diverse, owing to the various approaches within each discipline.

Firstly, historians often supply the raw material that sociologists employ in their analyses. Early sociological evolutionary theories, for instance, were grounded in historical studies of social structures and extrapolated from historical data. Likewise, comparative sociology, as exemplified by Durkheim’s work, relies on historical data to contrast social institutions across different societies.

Secondly, historians also utilize sociology to comprehend the values and ethics of the historical periods they investigate. Biographical works, such as Churchill’s biography, utilize the societal context (e.g., the Victorian era) to elucidate the motivations of key figures. Furthermore, history benefits from a solid grounding in sociology to better interpret events from diverse perspectives, as seen in the development of subaltern and feminist studies.

Modern historiography and sociology have both drawn inspiration from the philosophy of history, incorporating theoretical ideas and concerns that were previously absent in narrative histories. This philosophy has introduced historical typologies to sociology, forming the foundation for the classification of societies. In essence, historiography and sociology differ in their primary focus: historians are more concerned with explaining how the present came to be, while sociologists focus on how the present state of affairs impacts individuals and social institutions.

Philosophy

Sociology originated largely as a philosophical ambition; to account for the course of human history; to explain the social crisis in 19th century Europe; and to provide a doctrine to guide social policy. In its recent developments though sociology has for the most part abandoned such aims.
However, there still remains connection between the two disciplines in three respects:

There is a philosophy of sociology much in the tradition of philosophy of science, i.e. an examination of the methods, concepts and arguments of sociology, and this scrutiny is more needed in sociology than in the traditional natural sciences due to the different nature of the subject.
There is a close relation between sociology and moral/social philosophy. Sociologist on a Meta level study values and human valuations, as facts. Reflexive sociology (Alvin Gouldner) is also called moral sociology.
Sociology inspires philosophical debate. Ex. Merton’s ideas of latent and manifest functions were critiqued for having abandoned all moral judgment.

Sociology and Common Sense

Andre Beteille highlights that sociology, distinct from common sense, possesses a body of concepts, methods, and data, albeit loosely coordinated, which common sense, even when astute and well-informed, cannot replace. However, he cautions against overly emphasizing this distinction, as it might tempt sociologists to make the subject unnecessarily esoteric, ultimately undermining the goal of making society more understandable.

Common sense often serves as the source of hypotheses for sociological investigations, providing a basis for empirical evaluation. Sociological understanding, with its positivist orientation, tends to overlook subjective interpretations, whereas common sense places importance on subjective comprehension of events. For instance, common sense might assert that Bengali women divorce frequently, but this argument overlooks the fact that Bengali women, with a longer history of empowerment, may be more comfortable with divorce if a marriage proves unsuccessful. Sociology aspires to achieve a higher level of generalization than common sense.

Sociology transcends the realms of economics, politics, and domestic life, focusing instead on the interconnectedness of various facets of social existence. While this approach may be labeled as having a functionalist bias by some, contributions by scholars like Merton remind us that studying interconnections does not inherently assume their functional, dysfunctional, or non-functional nature.

Historically, sociologists have emphasized that common sense alone is insufficient for attaining the depth of understanding sought. Durkheim’s methodology in the study of suicide exemplifies this, as he advocated freeing investigators from preconceived notions to uncover social facts behind suicide rates. An intriguing counterintuitive finding was that suicide rates rose not only during economic downturns but also during economic upswings—a discovery unlikely to emerge from common sense alone.

Sociology provides insights into ground-level realities that often diverge from common sense perceptions. Indian examples abound, with MN Srinivas revealing the fluid nature of caste hierarchy through concepts like sanskritization and modernization, challenging the prevailing notion of caste as rigid. Village studies across India similarly exposed the discord and inequality within communities often perceived as harmonious little republics.

In essence, sociology is more than just organized common sense. Its systematic methodologies and cross-society comparisons grant it a broader perspective and a higher level of generalization, enriching our understanding of everyday societal occurrences.