Anthropology

Proponents of Sociology

Auguste Comte

Auguste Comte (1789-1857) is commonly credited with being the founder of sociology and as having coned the name "sociology" for the new science.

He emphasized that the study of sociology must be scientific, and he urged sociologists to use systematic observation, experimentation, and comparative historical analysis as their methods.

Comte divided the study of society into social statics and social dynamics. Social statics involves those aspects of social life that have to do with order and stability and that allow societies to hold together and endure. Social dynamics refers to those aspects of social life that have to do with social change and that pattern institutional development. Although the specifics of his work no longer direct contemporary sociology, Comte exerted enormous influence on the thinking of other sociologists, particularly Herbert Spencer, Harriet Marneau and Emile Durkheim.

Harriet Martineau

She was an English sociologist who paved the way for the new discipline through her observations of social behavior in the United States and England. Like Comte, she insisted that the study of society represents a separate scientific field. Among her contributions was the first book on the methodology of social research, How to Observe Manners and Morals, published in 1838. She also undertook the comparative study of the stratification systems of Europe and the United States. Throughout her career Martineau was an ardent defender of women's rights. In masterly fashion she showed the similarities between the position of women in the Western world and that of American slaves and called for freedom and justice in an age in which they were granted only to white males.

Herbert Spencer

An English sociologist shared Comte's concern with social statics and social dynamics. He viewed society as having important similarities with a biological organism and depicted it as a system, a whole made up of interrelated parts. Society is made up of institutions like the family, religion, education, the state, and the economy. Like biologists who portray an organism in terms of its structures and the functional contributions these three structures make to its survival. Spencer described society in similar terms. Intrigued by the Darwinian view of natural selection, Spencer applied the concept of the survival of the fittest to the social world, an approach termed Social Darwinism. He sought to demonstrate that government should not interfere with the natural processes going on in a society. Only in this manner would people who were "fit" survive and those who were "unfit" die out. If this principle were allowed to operate freely, human beings and their institutions, like plants and animals, would progressively adapt themselves to their environment and reach higher levels of historical development.

Spencer's social Darwinist outlook shows that the ideas we hold about the universe and ourselves are shaped by the social age in which we live. Spencer's social Darwinist ideas were used extensively within England and the United States.

Karl Marx

Although Karl Marx considered himself a political activist and not a sociologist, in truth he was both- a philosopher, historian, economist, and political scientist as well. He viewed science not only as a tool for transforming it. Marx was especially anxious to change the structure of capitalist institutions and establish new institutions in the service of humanity. Although born in Germany, Marx was compelled to spend much of his adult life as a political exile in London.

Marx has influenced sociological thinking both by his penetrating insights and by the fact that some sociologists have constructed their work specifically against his theory.

He focused his search on the economic environments in which societies develop, particularly the current state of their technology and their method of organizing production. At each stage of history, these factors dictate the group that will dictate society and the groups that will be subjugated.

He believed that society is divided into those who own the means of producing wealth, and those who do not, which gives rise to class conflict. All history, he said is composed of struggles between classes.

Class antagonisms revolve about the struggle between the oppressing capitalist class or

bourgeoisie and the oppressed working class or proletariat. The former derive their income through their ownership of the means of production, primarily factories, which allows them to exploit the labor of workers. The latter own nothing except their labor power and, because they dependent for a living on the jobs provided by capitalists must sell their labor power in order to exist.

Marx adapted the idea of dialectical materialism, the notion that development depends on the clash of contradictions and the creation of new, more advanced structures out of these clashes. In the Marxian view of history, every economic order grows to a state of maximum efficiency; at the same time, it develops internal contradictions or weakness that contributes to its decay. The roots of an opposing order already begin to take hold in an old order. In time, the new order displaces the old order, while simultaneously absorbing its most useful features. Marx depicted slavery as being displaced by feudalism, feudalism by capitalism, capitalism by socialism, and ultimately socialism by communism (the highest stage of society).

Marx portrayed political ideologies, religion, family organization, education, and government as making up the superstructure of society. The economic base of society- its mode of producing goods and its class structure- influences the forms that other institutions take. When one class controls the critical means whereby people derive their livelihood, its members gain the leverage necessary to fashion other aspects of institutional life- the superstructure- in ways that favor their class interests. Marx thought that when the working class became armed with a revolutionary ideology that fostered its class-consciousness, it would overturn the existing social order and establish one that would pursue humane goals.

Emile Durkheim

Emile Durkheim focused his sociological eye on the question of how societies hold together and endure. Central to Durkheim's sociology is the notion that social integration is necessary for the maintenance of the social order and for the happiness of individuals. In particular, he suggested that happiness depends on individuals' finding a sense of meaning outside themselves that occurs within the context of group involvement.

In The Division of Labor in Society, Durkheim examined social solidarity. He distinguished between the types of solidarity found in early societies the social structure was relatively simple, with little division of labor. They derived a sense of oneness because they were so much alike, what Durkheim termed mechanical solidarity. Complex social structures and a sophisticated division of labor, in contrast, characterize modern societies. People perform specialized tasks in factories, offices, and schools. Since each person performs a relatively narrow range of tasks, no one person can be self- sufficient, and all must depend upon others to survive. Under these circumstances, society is held together by the interdependence fostered by the differences among people. What Durkheim labeled organic solidarity. Durkheim ascribed ultimate social reality to the group, not to the individual. He contended that the distinctive subject matter of sociology should be the study of social facts. Social facts are aspects of social life that cannot be explained in terms of the biological or mental characteristics of the individual. The social fact serves to constrain their behavior. Durkheim insisted that the explanation of social life must be sought in society itself.

Durkheim convincingly demonstrated the critical part social facts play in human behavior in his book suicide.

Max Weber

Among sociologists, he is not only known for his theoretical contributions but for a number of specific ideas that in their own right have generated considerable interest and research.

Weber believed that sociologists can derive an understanding of their subject matter in a manner that is unavailable to chemists and physicists.

In investigating human behavior, sociologists are not limited to such objective criteria as weight and temperature; they can examine the meanings individual bring to their interactions with one another. Weber contended that a critical aspect of the sociological enterprise is the study of intentions, values, beliefs, and attitudes that underlie people's behavior. Weber employed the German word Verstehen - meaning "understanding" or "insight"- in describing this approach for learning about the subjective meanings people attach to their actions. In using this method sociologist mentally attempt to place themselves in the shoes of other people and identify what they think and how they feel.

Another notable contribution of Weber is his concept of the ideal type. An ideal type is a concept constructed by a sociologist to portray the principal characteristics of a phenomenon. Weber also stressed the importance of a value-free sociology.

He insisted that sociologists must not allow their personal biases to affect the conduct of their scientific research. Weber recognized that objectivity is not neutrality. Neutrality implies that a person does not take sides on an issue; objectivity has to do with the pursuit of scientifically verifiable knowledge.