Get complete information on Pioneers of Sociology

Plato (428/7 – 348/7 BC) and Aristotle (384-322 BC):

Plato was the first western philosopher who attempted a systematic study of society. Plato in Republic and Aristotle in Politics dealt systematically with many social institutions.

They saw State and Society as synonymous and took the individual for granted. Plato could be said to be the first exponent of the organic theory in society and Aristotle subscribed to it too. Thus they, both, accepted society as a Unified System structured around Division of Labour and Social Inequality.

They saw Society in holistic terms and gave ‘State’ the dominant role. Aristotle thought the origin of societies lay in human nature and its structure consisted of social groups in function. Their views presented the definition of society in terms of objective laws and historical processes.

Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406):

He produced a corpus of work that had many ideas in common with contemporary Sociology. His lectures on Society and Sociology stressed the importance of linking sociological thought and historical observation. He was, indeed, committed to the scientific study of society, empirical research and the search for causes of social phenomena. He gave special attention to various social institutions (political, economic, etc.) and their inter-relationships. He was also interested in comparing primitive and modern societies. A basic principle of soiciology, he thought, was solidarity which united people together, and solidarity is the result of a common goal, he believed.

Hobbes, Thomas (1588-1679):

His conception of man was non-sociological – ‘the life of man is solitary, poor, rusty, brutish and short’, while ‘the condition of man is a condition of war against everyone.’ Thus, he claimed that men were basically in conflict with each other guided by their greatest motivation – lust for power. Consequently, order in society is possible with the existence of a strong government, the artificial leviathan – the state – which is the product of human reason and social contract. ‘The Leviathan’ (1651) is his major work.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). He is criticised for the basic contradictions in his work He claims that society itself is founded on irresolvable contradictions and that, therefore, paradox ma; be the most appropriate medium in which to understand the essence of Social Life. His argument Social Contract (1762) is that one can only conceive of a legitimate state where one can only conceive of a legitimate state where the members are wholeheartedly devoted to the good of the community and are able to identify their interests with the whole society. In Emile (1762), his treatise on education, he states the basic insight of his social theory – the impossibility of reconciling the contradiction between nature and society. The basics of The Social Contract is that no polity can be considered legitimate except insofar as its laws issue from the will of its members, that the touchstones of politics based on right are law, democratic will and popular sovereignty. Society, he thought, is inevitably corrupting. His solution to this problem lay in substituting the power of law for the power of men, making men independent of one another by making them all equally dependent on the laws of the republic.

John Locke (1632-1704):

His essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690) made a major contribution to psychology and philosophical psychology. It argued that all ideas depend on experience and attempts to critically examine understanding of causality, probability, and qualities of matter, ideas, words, God and the universe. His treatises on Government stress virtual, mutual contract as the origin of the state with the possibility of sovereign people to alter the terms of social contract to meet changing conditions the methodology for acquiring knowledge puts forth by Locke stressed on careful observation. He saw education as a socialisation process, occurring within the family, with a tutor. His Two Treatises on Government (1690) deals with the family, duties parents have towards their children and to each other and the rights and duties of citizens in a political society. He stressed both mental and physical well-being as important for growth of knowledge.

Perceiving the difference between the study of nature and history, Vico pointed out that understanding the subjective human motives, values and originations makes it possible to understand history. These ideas are reflected in the works of Dilthey and Weber. Thus, Vico thought history to be the result of human action. His views were expressed with reference to particular societies and races in which he argued that social institutions such as religion, marriage and sepulture were common to mankind.

The New Science, which attempted a philosophy of history were his major works.

Montesquieu (1689-1755):

He is rightly regarded as the founder of Modern Sociology. He gave a holistic definition of society. Society is an interconnected and self-contained integrated whole, he said. Rational and naturalistic factors influence human behaviour and institutions, the genesis of social institutions should be traced to complex social forces and the legal codes and customs should be discussed with reference to the social structure – these were some of the conclusions he arrived at with the help of comparative analysis. He expounded the view that though apparently society may seem to be chaotic it follows definite patterns of regularities of behaviour, institutions and laws beneath the surface.

The initiation of Sociology of Law can be traced to Montesquieu who discussed law partly in terms of ‘Natural Law’. He also described and compared the laws of different societies and related the differences to the diverse geographical and social conditions of these societies.

“His thoughts on the Causes of the Greatness of the Romans and their Decadence” (1734) argues that rise and fall of empires is due to general causes of moral and physical nature rather than blind chance; Spirit of Law (1748), his greatest work, deals with law in general and governmental forms.

Saint Simon (1760-1825):

This early French Utopian sociologist viewed society as an organic whole. Though he did not develop a distinctive Sociology he can be credited with influencing two major developments in sociology-Comtean Positivism and Marxian Socialism.

His ideas on class and property gave rise to a different style of socialism while his distinction between Critical and Organic periods of history, and his advocacy of a new moral doctrine to bind men together in the post-revolutionary industrial society proved conducive to Comte’s concern with the re- establishment of ‘social order’. However, this latter conservative stand-point of Saint-Simon which is closer to Comtean positivism is in contradiction with his concept of ‘industrial society’ and Marxism.

Like many other 19th century thinkers, Sociology, he believed, would provide the theoretical foundation for a comprehensive applied science. It could establish universal laws of social behaviour by reference to which all disputes about social policy can be solved.

Being a French aristocrat and founder of socialism in France, he held the view that progress depends on the advancement of science, the protection of the industrial class and the maintenance of industrial organisation.

‘Social Physics’ and ‘Social Physiology’; ‘Industrial Society’ were his major concepts. His Plan of the Scientific Works Necessary for the Reorganisation of Society (1822) was written in collaboration with Comte and gives a clear formulation of the purpose of sociology and states the law of three stages of social development.

Other Social Thinkers:

Auguste Comte (1798-1857). Comte wanted to reorganize society on new lines. He felt that the momentous changes taking place in Europe, especially France, will have to be accompanied by new principles. These new principles will have to integrate and balance the different aspects of human life. Thus, for him, the discoveries of social laws which explain these principles of change in society were very important.

Comte talked about Sociology as a Science of Society but also believed that it must be used for reorganising society. Comte wanted to develop a naturalistic science of society. This science would be able to explain the past development of mankind as well as, predict its future course. In doing so, Comte attempted to discover the successive stages in which human race has evolved.

In terms of the scope of study, Comte divided social life into two:

1. Static

2. Dynamic

The idea of this division is borrowed from Biology which is in keeping with his notions of a hierarchy of sciences.

The static sociology studies the conditions of the existence of society, while the dynamic sociology studies the continuous movement or laws of the succession of individual stages in society. One can also say that static studies the social order and dynamic studies the social change or progress in societies.

Comte was on the view that development of human mind passes through three stages in all the societies, which he termed as ‘the law of the three stages’. These are:

1. Theological stage – human mind at this level supposes that all phenomena are produced by the immediate action of supernatural beings

2. Metaphysical stage-human beings pursue meaning and explanation of the world in terms of ‘essences’, ‘ideas’; focuses, in other words, on a conception of some ultimate reality such as ‘God’.

3. Positive stage – human being seeks to establish laws which link facts and which govern social life.