SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION

Introduction to Religion, Religion Groups, Religion and Society, Religious movements and Religion and social change

Introduction 

The definition of religion:General and sociological (substantive, functional and symbolic definitions), Nature and Scope, Sociological Perspective of Religion, Sociological methods of Studying Religion, Functions of Religion, Distinction between Religion and Magic, Importance of the Study.

Introduction

Religion is one the major social institution. Religion plays a very vital role in personal as well as social life. It has close with other social institution. There are some unique functions of the religion as social institution. They are like-

• Religion gives meaning of death
• Religion answers the meaning of life
• Religion gives answers for the unknown forces in the world
• Solve many social, psychological and injustice of the society 
• Religion is the medium of all joys and sorrow with the certain things

World Religion

They are number of world Religion 

1. Christianity (Christians)
2. Judaism (Jews)
3. Islam (Muslim)
4. Hinduism (Hindus)
5. Buddhism (Buddhists)
6. Jainism (Jain)
7. Confucianism (Confucians)
8. Taoism (Taoists)
9. Shinto (Shintoists)
10. Sikhism (Sikhs)
11. Zoroastrianism (Zoroastrians) 

Definitions of Religion

a) General Definition

     Religion is a belief in one or many gods, or in supernatural beings. The best definition is "the religion is man's attempt to achieve the highest possible good by adjusting his life to the strongest and best power in the universe." This power is usually called God.

b) Sociological Definition

1. Substantive: By Edward B. Tylor, "Belief is spiritual beings". And by Emile Durkheim "A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden. Beliefs and practices which unite into a single moral community called a church, all those who adhere to them".
2. Functional: By Milton Yinger who defines "Religion can be  a system of beliefs and practices, by means of which a group of people suggests the ultimate problems of human life.
3. Symbolic: By Cliford Geertz who defines "religion is a system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive and long lasting moods and motivations in people." By formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing factual that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic."

Nature and Scope of Sociology of Religion

a) Nature

  Sociology of Religion is a science- The sociology of Religion will be called science when it is adapt the exact definition, characteristics and methods which the pure sciences uses in daily life. As we see in the science which is a systematic body of knowledge dealing with cause and effect relationship of natural phenomena and sociology deals with the social phenomena. And the science uses several characteristics which too sociology has like quantifiable, universal, predictable, verifiable, empirical, ethically neutral. However, the science too have some methods which also found in sociology in the study like problem formulation, identifying variables, framing hypothesis/hypotheses, data collection, analysis and interpretation and report writing.

b) Scope

  The Sociology of Religion has both Micro and Macro level scope which is very much relevant in the understanding of Religion in study of sociology. The Micro is an wide scope which provide many information about religion. It is to understand thoroughly and have in depth knowledge on religion as a social institution and the Macro is an interconnected web which has deep relationship with other social institutions. It is the study of sociology of religion which provide wide and has its relationship with other social institutions.

Sociological Perspective of Religion

It is nothing but the scientific perspective which focuses on the social dimension of religion and on those aspects  of religion affecting social behaviour. The sociological perspective is characterized by two fundamental principles.

• Reliance on the empirical data
• Objectivity 

Religion as Moods

Religion as a system create different moods

• Powerful moods and motivation
• Pervasive which reaches out to life
• Long lasting moods

Sociological methods of Studying Religion

1. Historical analysis
2. Cross cultural comparative analysis
3. Controlled experimentation 
4. Observational studies
5. Sample Survey
6. Content Analysis

Function of Religion

They are two function in religion

• individual function
• societal function
• meaning function
• identity function
• basic for collective identity
• enhances social stability by sacralizing the norms and values of the society
• influences the social values and morality
• acts as an agent of social change

Religion and Magic

Magic is a set of meaningless rites, based on the manipulation of the impersonal transcendent power, which occur only at critical times in order to exploit the situation, where a magician acts like a leader and whose behaviour considered to be unethical in nature and doesn't allow others to understand him and aims only for personal benefits.

Difference between Religion and Magic

1. Presence of group consciousness
2. Moral ethos or ethics
3. Nature of the rites
4. Frequency of the rites
5. Targeted functions
6. Level of participation
7. Reason or purpose to worship

Importance of sociology of religion

• It undertakes scientific studies of the religious behaviour of the people.
• It distinguishes the religious from the cultural phenomenon
• Critically analyses the existing beliefs and practices
• Gives new knowledge about the religious behaviour
• It gives better understandings of various religious and their actual role in the society
• It gives clarity of religion
• Gives better understanding of religions as a social institution.
• Helps in social control among the various religious groups
• Helps to differentiate between the sacred and the profane
• Helps in policy decisions
• Clarifies the mind and purifies the soul
• Solves many social problems

Conclusion 

Sociology of religion is the understanding of the sociological perspective of religions is vital to every sociology student. It becomes clear to know the social functions of various religious. One gets a critical outlook on the functions and problems of religions. In a secular society like India which we understand the relationship of religion with other social institutions.

RELIGIOUS GROUPS

Meaning of Religious Groups, Characteristics, Social Process in the evolution of religious (charismatic) groups, Elements of religious groups, Relevance and importance of religious groups

Introduction

No religion is born as religion rather as religious groups. Religion is born as sect one's upon a time and it slowly moved to become sect usually it doesn't remain as statics its always changes and become larger and larger and it reaches to denomination. And the denomination slowly go on increasing and become or reaches the final stage which we all called as 'Religion'.

Meaning of Religious Groups

Sect- A sect is a voluntary society, composed of strict and definite believers bound to each other by the fact that all have experiences the new birth.

Denomination- A denomination is a type of religious group which represents a midpoint in the continuous between sects and religion.

Religion/church- A church is an institution which has been endowed with grace and salvation as the result of the work of redemption. Religion is able to receive the masses and to adjust itself to the world.

Although Troeltsch had suggested a process of movement from sect to church or religion, it was Niebubr who elaborated the point and described the forces causing the change. He developed the sociological use of the term 'denomination'. According to Niebubr, the process takes the following

sect  ....... denomination.......church or religion

Cult

The sociologists use the term 'cult' in three distinct ways. They are 

1. A cult is a small religious group which has a highly committed membership, lacks a bureaucratic structure, is led by a charismatic leader, and holds some esoteric and occult ideas.
2. A cult is seen as an urban, non exclusive, loosely associated group of people who hold some esoteric beliefs. They are kindred spirits who have some common views relative to one particular aspect of reality, but such person may also belong to other more conventional, church groups. The presence of a charismatic leader is common.
3. A cult is a beginning phase of an entirely new religion. The group may be loosely structured or it may demand tremendous commitment, but it must provide a radical break from existing religious traditions.

Characteristics/ differences between sects and church or religion

1. Membership: In sects the membership is volitional (voluntary) and the membership is emphasis on adult convention are commitment. Where as religion is largely on the basis of birth which emphasis on religious education of children.
2. Policy: In sect the member become exclusive to one particular groups, in which individual doesn't belong to any other groups. Whereas in religion the member are inclusive may coincide within national citizenship or geographic boundaries.
3. Attitude towards others: In sect the attitude is particularism  where judgement passed towards those who don't accept the one true path, self image that of the faithful remnant or the select. But the religion is universal which accepted by diversity of people and emphasis on the brotherhood and sisterhood of all humanity.
4. Nature of Group: In sect the member are seen as very small faithful group. Whereas religion is large, bureaucratic organisations.
5. Salvation: In sect the salvation achieved through moral purity including ethical austerity or asceticism.Whereas in religion salvation granted by the sacraments where God as administered by church. Here sacraments and church seen as hierarchical.
6. Priesthood: In sect, priesthood of all believers, clergy emphasized or non existent and lay participation seen very high. Whereas in religion leadership is control by highly trained professional clergy,
7. Attitude towards secular society: In sect, hostile or indifferent to secular society and to the state.Whereas religion tendency to adjust to compromise with, and support exiting social values and social structures.
8. Theology: In sect the member follow fundamentalistic theology only the original revelation is an authentic expression of the faith. Where as in religion, they follow Bither Orthodox or modernist theology formulations and interpretation of the faith in later periods of history are legitimate in their own rights.
9. Types of followers: In sect, predominantly a group of lower class persons or those otherwise socially disenfranchised (worldly prestige is eschewed and spiritual or charismatic qualities been the basis of internal stratification. Where as religion membership comprise of upper and middle class people, but with professional classes controlling most leadership positions (stratification of the society is reflected within the church)
10. Worship: In sect, the worship is informal and spontaneous where as in religion the worship is formal and orderly followed.
11. Social ethics: In sect the social ethics is radical emphasizing the quality of all persons and the necessity of economic equality where as in religion the social ethics is conservative justifying the current socio-economic relationships.  

Elements of Religious Groups/Nature of Religious Groups/Elements in the analysis of Religious Groups

Theology

The comprehensive point of view theology means study of God, which means God in every aspect. Theology is a system consists of various aspect of God. Theology are different from one religion to another, there are three types of theology.

1. Reversionism
2. Orthodoxy
3. Modernism 

Reversionism: Reversionism is doctrine which stresses on the purity of the original tradition and attempts to preserve the tradition. This may also involve a literal interpretation of scripture (fundamentalism). It involves a concerted effort  to avoid contemporary modification of the world view and to revert to the original formation of the faith.

Orthodoxy: Orthodoxy is an approach which assess the truth of any contemporary doctrine in terms of its conformity to earlier doctrine, but not limited to the original formulation.

Modernism: Revelations from an earlier era are treated as important but the emphasis is on what God is saying to contemporary culture. Since earlier revelations were received in an age when many of the laws of science were not yet discovered, the world-view of that earlier groups is thought to contain less than the whole truth.This theological approach is referred to as liberalism or modernism.

Ritual

Belief and practices go hand in hand. They are two types of ritual.

1. Simple/High church
2. Dionysian/Apollonian

Simple church is characterised by a simple liturgy, a causal, unpretentious atmosphere and a lack of elaborate artwork, architecture or musical productions. High church is characterized by the ritual as the primary appeal.

Apollonian orientation stresses logical understanding. The deity is believed to communicate with persons through their minds, humans are conceived largely as rational beings. Apollonian worship tends to be cerebral, reserved and sober. Dionysian liturgy, on the other hand is based on the promise that the deity speaks to humanity primarily through emotions.

Organization

Arrangement of institution or people as a religion group or sect.

1. Ecclesiastical
2. Sectarian

Ecclesiastical has complexity of structure which is highly institutionalized, Clergy are formally trained and membership policy to ecclesiastical is restrictive.

Sectarian has complexity of structure which is small in member/group, Clergy who doesn't have anything of their which they can recite by themselves of ritual and membership policy of sectarian is open to all.

Relation with Secular society

1. Withdrawal - when people have the attitude of indifferent, for their selfish sake, can withdraw.
2. Transformation - it is the stole of modifying or transforming or changing.
3. Acceptance - it is the attitude of adjusting oneself or accepting oneself.

Realm

1. This worldly: It is the belief of heaven and earth on this world everything is available. We don't have to search anywhere which sectorian believe in.
2. Other worldly: It is the religion who believe in other worldly realm.

Piety

Piety is a element which express attachment to God or goddess. There are two types of Piety.

1. Being Piety (Passive): They always being piety by individual and themselves without doing good work to the humanity rather for their own self like meditation, prayer and mass. It also called mystic piety, pays much less attention to human effort and much more to human experience and to an individuals character.
2. Doing Piety (Active): In the name of God doing piety work to the humanity through which people benefit like serving in the hospital to the sick people. It implies that individuals are to participate in creating their own salvation and establishing the kingdom of God.

Scope of the World View

Anthropologist Clifford Geertz has suggested that religion may be studies in terms of the 'scope' of its impact on adherents  for some persons, religion is one of many concerns in life, blocked off into a separate sphere having little to do with economic behavior, political opinions, religion is a private affair which may be of profound importance to the life of an individual. However, the individual insists that it is one's responsibility as a citizen to 'render to Caesar that which is Caesar's. Clergy are not expected to mingle with politics and religion is believed to have little or nothing to do with business transaction. Such a person views reality through 'multiple , narrow range vectors'. Life is seen as many separate and distinct realms.

On the other hand, religion people consider the lens through which all other institutions one to be understood. In this case, religious norms, attitudes and motivations are expected to affect all of life. Such a world view is described as "Unitary wide range vector".

Social Process of a Charismatic Group

It is a long process which starts from the any of the religious group by protests. And this protest is led by leader who has charisma and people follow the leader as his tells to do. In the process of leading the folk of people by the charismatic leader; he starts to gather people of his believer and create one kind of sects which latter becomes denomination and then religion, if the leader is of true kind.

Meaning of Charisma

It is a special and extraordinary quality in a person whose everyone listen and follow according to his words. For example Mother Theresa  had a charisma to mobilize people and serve the poor and downtrodden people as his own child or her people.

Definition of Charisma

Charisma can be define as certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he/she is set a part from ordinary people and treated as super being. He or she endowed with super natural grace and quality which said to be called as super human at least specifically with an exceptional quality. They are such who are not accessible to the ordinary people but regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary and on the basis of the inner quality, the individual consent treated as a leader.

Charismatic leader (Cult) /Characteristics of Cult or Charismatic leader

1. Power to mobilize the followers
2. Create a sense of mission in the followers
3. Acts as anti establishments
4. Having revolutionary tendency
5. He is different from ordinary people

Stages of Religious Group

1. Steady state
2. Period of increased stress
3. Period of cultural distortions
4. Period of revitalization: a)  reformulation of the world view b) communication of the world view c)  emergence of an organisation d)  adaptation and modification of the world view          e)  cultural transformation f) routinazation
5. New steady state

Religion and Society

Introduction

No religion is born as religion rather as a religious group in different period of time, then they institutionalized. The religion is born as a sect, then slowly it moved into larger group of people and become a denomination. And this small denomination increase more and more and at the end they form religion. When it become religion it is the prior duty of the reader to form some bundle of rules and regulation which make them united and they live in unity and freedom. The institution of religion is a long process. It starts from the beginning, the initial stage the leader cult/sect.

Meaning of Institution

An institution is any structure or mechanism of social order and cooperation governing the behaviour of  a sect of individuals within a given community. May it be human or a specific animal one. Institutions are identified with a social purpose, transcending individuals and intuitions by mediating the rules that govern co-operative living behavior.

The term 'institution' is commonly applied to customs and behavior patterns important to a society, as well as to particular formal organisation of government and public services. As structures and mechanisms of social order among certain species, institutions are one of the principal objects of study in the social sciences. Institutions are also a central concern for law, the formal mechanism for political rule making and enforcement.

Meaning of Institutionalization of Religion

It is a process in which the religion is an organised collection of beliefs, cultural systems and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religion have narratives, symbols and sacred histories that are intended to explain the meaning of life and or explain the origin of life or the universe from their beliefs about the cosmos and human nature, people derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle.

Sect: A sect is a subgroup of a religious, political or philosophical beliefs system, usually an offshoot of a larger religious group. Although is past it was mostly used to refers to religious groups, it has since expanded and in modern culture can refers to any organisation that breaks away from a larger one to follow a different set of rules and principles. The term is occasionally used in malicious way to suggest the broken-off group follows a more negative path than the original.

Denomination: A religious denomination is a sub group within a religious that operates under a common name, tradition and identity. Example the term describes various christian denominations like- Eastern orthodox, Anglicanism, Protestantism, Judaism- orthodox, conservative, reform and reconstruction, Islam sunni and shia  and the Hinduism has the shaivism, shaktism, vaishnavism, smartism are the some denomination.

Religion: Religion is a belief in one or many gods or in supernatural beings, The best definitions in 'religion is man's attempt to achieve the highest possible good by adjusting his life to the strongest and best power in the universe. This power is usually called God.

Importance

The institutionalization a process in which the grass root cult begin to grow by a charismatic leader which takes form slowly and gradually denomination. And then the denomination again increases in size and followers begin to accept more and more and the denomination begin to regulate through different rules and regulation which make in written form as scripture. It is the long process in which the religious faith get institutionalization.

conclusion

Faith and beliefs are the prime factor in religious persons. It forms not in a day rather get institutionalize day by day. Followers folk towards the religious denomination and at the end the denomination become the complete religion.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF FRENCH SOCIOLOGY 1789

The actual founding of  Sociology as a distinctive discipline- specifically, to the work of four French thinkers 

• Alexis De Tocqueville
• Claude Saint-Simon
• Auguste Comte
• Emile Durkheim

ALEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE 1805-1859

He and his work were such pure products of the enlightenment ( he was strongly and directly influenced by Montensquieu) especially his "the spirit of the laws" and because his work was not part of the clear line of development in French social theory from Saint Simon and Comte to the crucially important Durkheim. Tocqueville has been seen as a political scientist, not a sociological and furthermore many have not perceived the existence of a social theory in his work, but it is one that deserves a much more significant place in the history of social theory not only in France but in the rest of the world like American democracy and French revolution.

C LAUDE SAINT-SIMON 1760-1825

Saint-Simon was older than Auguste Comte and in fact Comte, in his early years, served as Saint-simon's secretary and disciple. There is a very strong similarity between the ideas of these two thinkers, yet a bitter debate developed between them that led to their eventual split.

The most interesting aspect of Saint-Simon was his significance to the development of both conservative and radical Marxian theory. On the conservative side, Saint-Simon wanted to preserve society as it was, but did not seek a return to life as it had been in the middle ages- as did Bonald and Maistre. In addition, he was a positivist, which meant that he believed that the study of social phenomena should employ the same scientific techniques that were used in the natural sciences.

On the radical side, saint-simon saw the med for sociologist reforms, especially the centralized planning of the economic system. But saint-simon didn't go  nearly as far as Marx did later. Although he like Marx, saw the capitalists superseding (replace something less efficient) the feudal nobility, he felt it inconceivable that the working class would come to replace the capitalist, many of saint- simon ideas are found in comte's work, but comte developed them in a more systematic fashion.

AUGUSTE COMTE 1798-1857

Comte was the first to use the term sociology. He had influence on later sociological theorists especially Herbert Spencer and Emile Durkheim. He believe that the study of sociology should be scientific, just as many classical theorists did and most contemporary sociologists do.

Comte was disturbed by anarchy and thinkers who had spawned both the enlightenment and the French revolution. He developed "Positivism" or "Positive philosophy" to combat what he considered to be the negative and destructive philosophy of the enlightenment. Comte was influenced by the French counterrevolutionary Catholics especially Bonald adn Maintre. However, his work can be apart from theirs on at least two grounds-

• he didn't think it possible to return to the middle ages- advances in science and industry made that impossible
• he developed sophisticated theories than his predecessors

Comte developed "social physics" or what in 1839 he called 'sociology'. This new science ultimately become the dominant science, was to be concerned with both social statics and social dynamics. Although both involved the search for laws of social life, he felt that social dynamics was more important than social statics.This focus on change reflected his interest in social reform, particularly reform of the ills created by the French revolution and enlightenment. Comte didn't urge revolutionary change because he felt the natural evolution of society would make things better. Reforms were needed only to assist the process a bit. This leads us to the cornerstone of Comte's approach- his evolutionary theory, or the law of the three stages, The theory proposes three intellectual stages through which the would has gone throughout its history. According to Comte, not only the world go through this process but groups, societies, sciences, individuals and even mind.

1. The theological is characterized the world prior to 1300. During these period major idea system emphasized the belief in supernatural power and religious figures modeled after humankind, are at the root of everything. The social and physical world is seen as produced by God.
2. The metaphysical stage which occurred roughly between 1300 and 1800. This era was characterized by the belief that abstract forces like 'nature' rather than personalized gods explain virtually everything.
3. The positivistic stage which entered into the world 1800 and it is characterized by belief in science, people now tended to give up the search for absolute causes (god and nature) and concentrated instead on observation of the social and physical world in the search for the laws governing them.

Comte's point of view, it was intellectual change that was needed, and so there was little reason for social and political revolution. Comte emphasised the need to engage in abstract theorizing and go out and do sociological research. He urged that sociologists use observation, experimentation and comparative historical analysis. He was in the foremost of the development of positivistic sociology.

EMILE DURKHEIM 1858-1917

Durkheim has been seen as an inheritor of the enlightenment tradition because of his emphasis on science and social reformism and also of the conservative tradition. Durkheim developed an increasingly solid academic base as his career progressed. Durkheim legitimized sociology in France, and his work ultimately because a dominant force in the development of sociology in general and of sociological theory in particular like.

• social facts -material and non material
• suicide 
• religion

INTRODUCTION TO POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY

Origin and growth of political sociology, definition, nature and scope, founding fathers - Karl Marx and Max Weber their contribution

Origin and growth of political sociology

Political sociology, although a new emergence in its modern form, has a long history and there are substantial contributions made by the scholars of nineteenth century. Political sociology, as an independent discipline emerged in the middle of 19^th century. It was not born by accident. Politician, political scientists and sociologists have played a major role in the evolution of this subject. There were a few important factors that contributed to the growth of political sociology. There were many factors that were responsible for the emergence of political sociology.

•      The growing dissatisfaction with the traditional nature of political science. Political science was interested in normative prescriptions and political science had always viewed the state as its star attention.
•     The growth of political sociology was made possible by political scientists who quietly accepted the invasion of sociology into the sphere of politics without any protest. Political scientists began to look at political realities from a scientific perspective or in an empirical manner.
•       Extension of area of politics
•       Distinction between state and society.

Definition

Political sociology is the product of cross fertilization between sociology and political science. It studies the impact of society and politics on each other. Political sociology studies the interrelations between state and other social structures. In simple terms it can be called ‘study of power in a social context’.

Bendix and Lipset define political sociology as that ‘political science starts with the state and examines how it affects the state”. And Smelser N. J tells political sociology can be defined as the study of the interrelationship between society and polity between social structures and political institution. It seeks to investigate and explain the interrelationship between politics, social structures, ideologies and cultures.

Nature and Scope

Political sociology is a science like any other science. It employs systematic methods of investigation, theoretical thinking and logical assessment of arguments. Political sociology collects evidence about the selected subject matter using planned and organized methods. Explanations and conclusions are drawn on the basis of carefully collected evidences. Findings and conclusions are open to inspections, criticism and testing by other researchers. Political sociology involves systematic methods of investigation, analysis of data and the assessment of theories in the light of evidences and logical argument.

The scope of political sociology is very vast

Political sociology is concerned with the way in which political arrangements depend on social organizations and cultural values. It studies the relationship between the state and society, party system and its relations to society. Politics pervades the entire society. The scope includes the effect of social attitudes on political participations, social classes and their political attitudes, social implication of voting pattern. Political sociology studies the nature of modern democracy and their forum in different socio- political contexts. It studies the impact of social groupings upon political activity, the nature of welfare state, the effectiveness of propaganda and public opinion as means of informal political education. In short political sociology includes all political and social aspects which arise time and again in contemporary societies. Political sociology studies modern institution like bureaucracy, political parties, voting propaganda etc, which are day to day issues in the life of modern masses.

Founding fathers: Karl Marx and Max Weber

Although many have contributed to the growth and development of political sociology, karl marx and max weber are said to be the founding fathers of political sociology.

Karl Marx: he was one of the most influential thinkers in the 19^th century. He was born in Germany in 1818 and his parents were Jewish, the descendent of many generation of rabbis.

·        Historical materialism

·        Class struggle

·        Alienation

According to Marx alienated labour involves four aspects

•         Worker’s alienation from the object he produces.
•        From the process of production
•       From himself
•      From the community of his fellow

Characteristics of Bureaucracy

1.     .    A formal hierarchical structure
2.       Management by rules
3.         Organization by functional specialty
4.         An ‘up focused’ or ‘in focused’ mission
5.         Purposely impersonal
6.         Employment based on technical qualifications

Criticism of Bureaucratic organization

• o   Too much emphasis on rules and regulations
• o   No importance is given to informal groups
• o   Bureaucracy involves a lot of paper work
• o   Unnecessary delay in decision making

Karl Marx: He was one of the most influential thinkers in the 19^th century, He was born in Germany in 1818 and his parents were Jewish, the descendants of many generations of rabbis. He was a man of enormous and obvious brilliance. One contemporary described him in his mid-twenties, Imagine Rousseau vottaire, Holbach, Lessing, Heine and Hegel fused into one person and you have Marx. Marx devoted his life to the cause of socialist revolution. He and his family were, as a result, hounded and spied on by the police forces of half of Europe. They lived in miserable poverty. He is known to the world as the architect of socialism and the champion of communism. He was trained lawyer, a historian, an economist, a political thinker, a journalist, a great humanist and a philosopher. He committed himself to the cause of the exploited working class. His views and thoughts were so powerful that one third of the world’s population was under the grip of his views. In his early life he was concerned more about philosophy and was deeply influenced by George W.F Hegel.

Historical materialism

Hegel had tremendous influence on Marx and borrowed the Hegelian notion of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Historical materialism is a methodological approach to the study of society economics and history. Marx himself never used the term but referred to his approach as the materialist conception of history. Historical materialism looks for the causes of developments and changes in human society in the means by which humans collectively produce the necessities of life. The non-economic features of a society (e.g. social classes. Political structures, ideologies) are seen as being an outgrowth of its economic activity.

Hegel had tremendous influence on Marx and borrowed the Hegelian notion of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Historical materialism is a methods logical approach to the study of society economics and history. Marx himself never used the term but referred to his approach as ‘the materialist conception of history’. Historical materialism looks for the causes of developments and changes in human society in the means by which humans collectively produce the necessities of life. The non- economic features of a society are seen as being an outgrowth of its economic activity.

According to him, for human being to survive and continue existence from generation to generation, it is necessary for them to produce and reproduce the material requirements of life like food, shelter etc. Marx thus extended this premise by asserting the importance of the fact that, in order to carry out production and exchange, people have to enter into worry definite social relations, most fundamentally ‘ production relations; However, production doesn’t get carried out in the abstract, or by entering into arbitrary or random relations chosen at will. Human beings collectively work on nature but don’t do the in which people not only do different jobs, but according to Marxist theory, some people live from the work of others by owning the means of production like land, labour, capital and organization. How this is accomplished depends on the type of society. Production is carried out through very definite relations between people. And in turn, these production relations are determined by the level and character of the productive forces that are present at any given time in history for Marx, production such as the fools, instruments, technology, land, raw material and human knowledge and abilities in terms of using these means of production.

Marx identifies the production relations of society (arising on the basis of given production forces) as the economic base of society. In simple terms the economic base of the society consisted of two things;

·        Forces of production:

Forces of production consisted of labour force, tools raw materials, technological knowledge and scientific knowledge. On the other hand relations that control and organize production.

He also explained that on the foundation of the economic base there arise certain political institution, laws, customs, culture etc. and ideas, ways of thinking, morality etc., these constituted the political/ ideological superstructure of society. This superstructure not only has its origin in the economic base, but its features also ultimately correspond to the character and development of that economic base that is the way people organize society is determined by the economic base and the relations that arise from its mode of production.

·        Relations of production:-

He also explained that on the foundation of the economic base there arise certain political institutions, laws, customs, culture etc. and ideas, ways ot thinking, moralities etc.  These constituted the political/ ideological superstructure of society. This superstructure not only has its origin in the economic base, but its features also ultimately correspond to the character and development of that economic base that is the way people organize society is determined by the economic base and the relations that arise from its mode of production.

Class Struggle

Marx conceived society consisting of classes and argued that classes are the most important groups in almost all the societies. According to him different classes are antagonistic to each other. Class is a social group where members share the same relationships to the forces of production. Thus during the feudal stage there are two main classes distinguished by their relationship to land, the major forces of production. They are the feudal nobility who own the land and the landless serf who works the land, similarly in the capitalist society there these bourgeoisies or capitalists who own the forces of production and the proletariats or working class who own only their labour. Marx based his theory of class struggle on the inevitability on conflict of two opposing classes’ society. Classes are interest of the capitalist class is to pay workers as little as possible, to exploit them in order to make more profit whereas the interest of the working class is to raise wages, and eventually to abolish capitalism entirely.

Alienation

Alienation refers to the sense of powerlessness, isolation and meaninglessness experienced by human beings when they are confronted with social institutions or condition that they cannot control and consider oppressive. For Marx the social arrangements in capitalist society alienated the worker. They failed to provide him with the opportunities for a meaningful and creative existence. The worker is alienated because he neither receives satisfaction from his work nor receives the full product of his labour. Marx’s theory of alienation is the contention that under capitalist t condition workers will inevitably lose control over their work. Workers thus cease to be autonomous beings in any significant sense under pre- capitalist conditions a black smith eg or a shoemaker would own his own shop. Set his own hours, determine his own working conditions, shape his own product and have some say in how his product is bartered or sold. His relationships with the people with whom he worked and dealt had a more or less personal character. Under the conditions of modern factory production, by contrast the average worker is not much more than a replaceable cog in a gigantic and impersonal production apparatus.

Criticism on theories of Marx

1.     He was criticized for regarding the sociological factors as dependent variables rather than independent variables and subordinating them to economic interpretation of history.

2.      He also failed to anticipate the adaptive capacity of capitalism. However his general theories of economic determinism and dialectic materialism and his specific theories of class struggle class consciousness and alienation have stimulated a great amount work.

3.     Marx tried to give his theories a firm ground on the basis of evidence which he sought to examine in a systematic and rigorous manner.

Max Weber

Max Weber was a great German sociologist who has left a deep imprint in political sociology. He was one of the founders of modern sociology and began his interest in social sciences when he was 13. He was a man interested in the practical affairs of government and politics. He was born in a comparatively rich protestant family and his father was quite active in politics.

Religion and Economy

Weber wrote extensively on the subject of religion. His essay on protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism is his major contribution to sociology. He observed a close connection between religion ideas and economic forces, such as the Calvinists played a role in creating the capitalistic spirit. Weber first observes a correlation between being protestant and being involved in business, and declares his intent to explore religion as a potential cause of the modern economic conditions. Weber found that, according to protestant religious, individuals were religiously compelled to follow a secular vocation with as much enthusiasm as possible. A person living according to this worldview was more likely to accumulate money. Further, the new religious, such as Calvinism and Protestantism forbade wastefully using hard earned money and labeled the purchase of luxuries as a sin. This religion also frowned upon donating money to the poor or to charity because it was seen as promoting beggary. The way these issues were resolved, Weber argued, was to invest the money, which would give a large boost to capitalism. In other words, capitalism evolved when the protestant ethic influenced large numbers of people to engage in work in the secular world, developing their own enterprises and engaging in trade and the accumulation of wealth for investment. The protestant ethic was therefore the driving force behind the mass action that led to the development of capitalism while Marx argued that it is economy that determined the nature of religion, Weber observed that it is religious conviction and beliefs that determined the basic characteristics of the economy.

Bureaucracy

Weber’s another important contribution in his theory of bureaucracy Weber’s interest in the nature of power and authority and his realization of the inevitability of rationalization in the operation of large scale enterprises in the fields of politics, administration and in business. Bureaucracy is understood as large scale formal organizations of the modern societies with specialized functions. Bureaucratization and rationalization go hand in hand because bureaucracies are organized to rational principles.

Characteristics of Bureaucracy

•      A formal hierarchical structure: - Each level controls the level below and is controlled by the level above. A formal hierarchy is the basis of central planning and centralized decision making.
•        Management by rules: - Controlling by rules allows decisions made at high levels to be executed consistently by all lower levels.
•      Organization by functional specialty:- Work is to be done by specialists, and people are organized into units based on the type of work they do or skills they have.
•      An up-focused or in- focused mission:- If the mission is described as ‘up focused’ then the organization’s purpose is to serve the stockholders, the board, or whatever agency empowered it, if the mission is to serve the organization itself, and those within it. E.g. to produce high profits to gain market share, or to produce a cash stream, then them mission is described as ‘in focused’.
•      Purposely impersonal:- the idea is to treat all employees equally and not be influenced by individual differences.
•      Employment based on technical qualifications:- the employment is done on the basis of technical qualification.

Merits of Bureaucracy

•      Bureaucracy is not only characterized by rational authority but is also endowed with technical superiority and is therefore conducive to efficiency.
•      In bureaucracy there is greater emphasis on objectivity and impartiality. Bureaucratic decisions are based not as personal considerations but as formal rules.
•     In a context of political instability and even immaturity in developing countries bureaucracy may provide stability and efficiency in administration transcending the changing character and composition of political elements.

Criticism

•      Too much emphasis on rules and regulations. The rules and regulations are rigid and inflexible.
•      No importance is given to informal groups. Nowadays, informal groups play an important role in all business organization.
•      Bureaucracy involves a lot of paper work, this result in lot of wastage of time, effort and money.
•      There will be unnecessary delay in decision making due to formalities and rules.
•      Bureaucratic model may be suitable for government organizations. But it is not suitable for business organizations because business organizations believe in quick decision making and flexibility in procedures.
•      Too much importance is given to the technical qualifications of the employees for promotion and transfers. Dedication and commitment of the employee is not considered.
•      There is difficulty in co-ordination and communication.
•      There is limited scope for human resource.

Notion of legitimacy and authority

Another major contribution of Weber is his notion of legitimacy and authority. He classified legitimacy into three different kinds

·        Traditional authority

·        Charismatic authority

·        Legal rational authority

Conclusion

Traditionally, bureaucracy was conceived as politically, a neutral organization. Weber himself emphasized the need for rationality and objectivity bureaucracy. However, scholars are of the view that bureaucracy cannot be neutral and it tends to develop its own group identity and interests more and more bureaucracy is conceived as a social class with group solidarity of its own.

In the words of Weber bureaucracy represents expertise and rationality and as result has become an indispensable part of modern government. It is also equally true that bureaucracy is likely to develop some dysfunctional characteristics and has to be constantly pulled up by political leadership.

INTELLECTUAL FORCES AND THE RISE OF SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

Although social factors are important, the primary focus of this chapter is the intellectual forces that played a central role in shaping sociological theory. In real world, of course, intellectual factors cannot be separated from social factors. The many intellectual forces that shaped the development of social theories are discussed within the national context where their influence was primarily felt, we begin with the enlightenment and its influences on the development of sociological theory in France.

THE ENLIGHTENMENT

In the view of many observers that the enlightenment constitutes a critical development in terms of the later revolution of sociology. The enlightenment was a period of remarkable intellectual development  and change in philosophical thought. A member of long standing ideas and beliefs many of which related to social life were overthrown and replaced during the enlightenment. The most prominent thinkers associated with the enlightenment were the French philosophers Charles Montesquieu and Jean Jacques Rousseau. The influence of the enlightenment on sociological theory, however, was more indirect and negative than it was direct and positive. As Irving Zeitlin put it, "Early sociology developed as a reaction to the Enlightenment".The thinkers associated with the Enlightenment were influenced, above all, by two intellectual currents- seventeenth century philosophy and science. Overall, the enlightenment was characterized by the belief that people could comprehend and control the universe by means of reason and empirical research (field research). The theorists who were most directly and positively influenced by enlightenment thinking were Alexis De Tocqueville and Karl Marx, although the latter formed his early theoretical ideas in Germany.

THE CONSERVATIVE REACTION TO THE ENLIGHTENMENT

The most extreme form of opposition to enlightenment ideas was French Catholic Counterrevolutionary philosophy, as represented by the ideas of Louis De Bonald, Josepho De Maistre. Louis De Bonald was disturbed by the revolutionary change  and yearned for a return to the peace and harmony of the middle ages. In this view, God was the source of society, therefore reason, which was so important to the enlightenment philosophers, was seen as inferior to traditional religious beliefs, furthermore, it was believed that because God had created society, people should not temper with it and should not try to change a holy creation. 

Bonald opposed anything that undermined such traditional institutions as patriarchy, the monogamous family the monarchy and the catholic church. He represented a rather extreme form of the conservative reaction, his work constitute a useful introduction to its general premises. The conservatives turned away from what they considered the "naive" rationalism of the enlightenment. They not only recognized the irrational aspects of social life but also assigned them positive value.

Zeitlin outlined ten propositions that he sees as emerging from the conservative reaction and providing the basis for the development of classical French sociological theory. 

1. Emphasis on individual (enlightenment thinkers)
2. Society is the most important unit of analysis
3. Individual was not even considered as the most basic element within society
4. The part of society are seen as interrelated and interdependent.
5. Change was seen as a threat to the society
6. To the see large-scale components of society as useful to society and the individual.
7. Small units such as the family, religious, neighborhood as essential to the society and the individual.
8. To see various modern social changes- industrialization, urbanization, and bureaucratization -disorganizing effects.
9. Social changes were leading to rational society- conservative reaction leads to non rational factors (ritual, ceremony, worship) in social life.
10. Conservatives supported the existence of a hierarchical system in society.

The ten proposition, derived from the conservative reaction to enlightenment, should be seen as the immediate intellectual basis of the development of sociological theory in France.

SOCIAL FORCES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

An intellectual fields are profoundly shaped by their social settings. This is particularly true of sociology, which not only is derived from that setting as its subject matter. It was the utmost significance in 19th and early 20th centuries in the development of sociology.

POLITICAL REVOLUTION (FRENCH REVOLUTION)  

The French revolution in 1789 which carried over through the 19th century was the most immediate factor in the rise of sociological theorizing. The impact of this revolutions on many society was enormous and many positive changes resulted. However, what attracted the attentions of many early theorists was not the positive consequences but the negative effects of such changes, These writers were particularly disturbed especially in France. They were united in a desire to restore order to society. Some extreme thinkers and sophisticated thinkers wanted to return to the peaceful and relatively orderly days of the middle ages and recognized that social change had made such a return impossible. Thus they sought instead to find new bases of order in societies that had been overturned by the political revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries. This interest in the issue of social order was one of the major concerns of classical sociological theories especially Comte, Durkheim and Parsons.

THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION AND THE RISE OF CAPITALISM

The industrial revolution mainly happened in the nineteenth  centuries. The industrial revolution was not a single event but many interrelated developments that culminated in the transformation of the western world from a largely agricultural to an overwhelmingly industrial system. Due to industrial revolution large number of people left the farms and agricultural land and work for the industrial occupations offered in the burgeoning factories. The factories themselves were transformed by a long series  of technological improvements. Large economic bureaucracies arose to provide the many services needed by industry and emerging capitalist economic system. In this economy, the ideal was a free marketplace where the many products of an industrial system could be exchanged. within this system, a few profited greatly while the majority worked long hours for low wages. A reaction against the industrial system and capitalism in general followed and led to the labour movement as well as to various radical movements aimed at overthrowing the capitalist system. The industrial revolution, capitalism and reaction against them all involved an enormous upheaval in western society, as upheaval that affected sociologists greatly. Four major figures in the early history of sociological theory Karl Marx, Max Weber, Emile Durkheim and George Simmel were preoccupied.

THE RISE OF SOCIALISM

One set of changes aimed at coping with the excesses of the industrial system and capitalism can be combined under the heading "Socialism". Although some sociologists favored socialism as a solution to industrial problems, most were personally and intellectually opposed to it. On one side, Karl Marx was an active supporter of the overthrown of the capitalist system and its replacement by a socialist system. Marx did not develop a theory of socialism but he spent a great deal of time criticizing various aspects of capitalist society. In addition, he engaged in a variety of political activities that he hoped would help bring about the rise of socialist societies. Max Weber and Emile Durkheim were opposed to socialism- although they recognized the problems within capitalist society, They sought social reform within capitalism rather than the social revolution argued for by Marx. They feared socialism more than they did capitalism. This fear played a greater role in shaping sociological theory than did Marx's support of the socialist alternative to capitalism.

FEMINISM

In one sense there has always been a feminist perspective, wherever women are subordinated and they have been subordinated almost always and everywhere- they seem to have recognized and protested that situation in some form. While precursors can be traced to the 1630's high points of feminist activity and writing occurred in the liberationist  movements of modern western history- a first flurry of productivity in the 1780's and 1790's with the debates surrounding the American and French revolutions- a far more organised, focused effort in the 1850's as part of the mobilization against for women's suffrage (rights to vote in election) and for industrial and civic reform legislation in the progressive Era in the united states. All of this had an impact on the development of sociology, in particular on the work of a number of women in or associated with the field. Feminist concerns filtered into sociology only on the margins, in the work of marginal male theorists or of the increasingly marginalized female theorists- The men who assumed centrality (Critical role position in middle) in the profession from Spencer, through Weber and Durkheim made basically conservative responses to the feminist arguments going on around them, making issues of gender on inconsequential topic to which they responded conventionally rather than critically in what they identified and publicly promoted as sociology. They responded in this way even as women were writing a significant body of sociological theory. The history of this gender politics in the profession, which is also part of the history of male response to feminist claims, is only now being written.

URBANIZATION

Partly as a result of the industrial revolution, large members of people in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were uprooted from their rural homes and moved to urban settings. This massive migration was caused, in large part, by the jobs, created by the industrial system in the urban areas. But it presented many difficulties for those people who had to adjust to urban life. In addition, the expansion of the cities produced a seemingly endless list of urban problems, over crowding, pollution, noise, traffic and so fourth. The nature of urban life and its early sociologists, especially Max Weber and George Simmel. In fact, the first major school of American sociology, the Chicago school, was in large part defined by its concern for the city and its interest in using Chicago as a laboratory in which to study urbanization and its problems. 

RELIGIOUS CHANGE

Social changes brought on by political revolution the industrial revolution and urbanization had a profound effect on religiosity, many early sociologists came from religious backgrounds and were actively and in some cases professionally involved in religion. They brought to sociology the objectives they wished to improve people's lives, sociology was transformed into a religion. For others, their sociological theories bore an unmistakable religious imprint. Durkheim wrote one of his major works on religion, morality played a key role not only in Durkheim's sociology but also in the work of Talcott Parsons. A large portion of Weber's work also was devoted to the religions of the world. Marx too, had an interest in religiosity, but his orientation was for more critical.

THE GROWTH OF SCIENCE

As sociological theory was being developed there was an increasing emphasis on science, not only in colleges and universities but in society as a whole. The technological products of science were permeating (spread though) every sector of life, and science was acquiring enormous prestige. Those associated with the most successful sciences (Physics, biology, chemistry) were accorded honored places in society. Sociologists (Comte, Durkheim, Spencer and Mead) from the beginning were preoccupied with science, and many wanted to model sociology after the successful physical and biological sciences. However, a debate soon developed between those who wholeheartedly accepted the scientific model and those who thought that distinctive characteristics of social life made a wholesale adoption of a scientific model difficult and unwise. The issue of the relationship between sociology and science is debated to this day, although even a glace at the major journals in the field, at least in the united states, indicates the predominance of those who favor sociology as a science.