Systems of Sociology Theory based in the French Revolution era when Napoleon was defeated and the Burbons returned to the throne.

Authors Avatar

CHAPTER 6

Compte

Systems of Sociology Theory based in the French Revolution era when Napoleon was defeated and the Burbons returned to the throne.

Theory based in the fact that the society had evolved to a stage where neither the monarchy, military or church had the societal clout it once had.

  • he saw this change in society to be as a result of a change in collective thought of the people; that is their “stages in the search for understanding”.

Law of 3 Stages : Theological, Metaphysical, Positive Society(pg.122)

In each stage, the typical forms of organization of society and social institutions can be reflected in the people’s development of distinctive types of knowledge and beliefs. For example, if people believe that having sex outside of making babies (for pleasure ☺) is a sin, then the church will have maximum influence over people.

Theological Stage: think (Mayas, Incas, Inuit)

  • dominated by primitive religious thought
  • explain phenomena via the supernatural (gods and spirits)
  • society based on intuition, sentiment and feelings (must appease the gods to avoid disaster)
  • ruled by priests and military (general or war lord)
  • moral structure centered around blood ties

Metaphysical Stage: think (Victorian English society or French Aristocratic society)

  • move from primitive religious thought to a limited development of CRITICAL THOUGHT
  • belief in 1 God or single diety (montheism) and a search for ultimate reality
  • explain phenomena in terms of abstract forces not spirits (fate and destiny)
  • here you get a more unified concept of SOCIETY because people now share a common belief system
  • society organized based on the idea of the state (as opposed to the individual) and its defense or protection from others

Positive Society: think (Industrial Society)

  • all thought is critical and open to analysis, i.e. based on SCIENTIFIC EMPIRICISM
  • rejects religion and abstraction as the sole means of explaining phenomena. To do this, one must rely on observation and scientific testing or experimentation. Results = facts (scientific and social)
  • scientists now the intellectual and/or spiritual leaders

*to bring us back to the original idea: change in patterns of thought can be seen in the change in social structure.  e.g. Wealth being derived from: military loot and plunder ==> industry and technology via science.

*To complete the transition to Positive Society would be a science geared toward the study of society (SOCIOLOGY) using empirical research to arrive at social facts and law like relations between observable phenomena. That is Positivism as an approach to studying society.

Problems with Compte:

  • does not explain the mechanisms that cause a change in society
  • does not show why reason or why society would change  in the direction it has
  • vague about what is or isn’t observable and what is or isn’t empirical

 

Spencer

He tries to pick up the slack in Compte’s theory. He tries to study the mechanisms behind the progress(ion) of society. His biggest contribution= likeningsociety to a biological organism (structural functionalism).

His theory of evolution incorporates all aspects of the universe (animate/inanimate, biological/social). For him, all matter moves from disorganized flux ➔order and stability.

Through DIFFERENTIATION (breakdown of simple and unspecialized structures into many specialized parts) and INTEGRATION (development of a specialized function, organ or bond preserving unity among differentiated parts) working simultaneously simple forms and structures evolve into more complex ones i.e. as matter moves from flux to stability.

Society evolves to greater institutional complexity:

Differentiation based on greater specialization of tasks of devision of labour

Integration based on a central coordinating agency e.g. modern state will arise to keep things going smoothely.

“Survival of the fittest” – Spencer not Darwin = mechanisms governing change in all systems is a competitive struggle which breeds more complex and specialized forms to emerge out of simpler ones. In effect, to increase chances for survival in a competitive environment one must strive to develop ways to stay ahead. For example developing digital cell phones to replace analog ones; or chameleons evolving with the ability to blend into their background as a defense mechanism; some species of frogs that are asexual and can become females to reproduce if the population becomes too low.

Function: concept derived to test whether an adaptation is successful. It is tested in terms of its relation to the necessary conditions or functions that must be met for the social system to survive. Three (3) functions for system survival = 1. a Sustaining System function 2. a Distribution system function 3. a Regulatory System function. See pg. 123

Join now!

Problem with Spencer:

- Not all societies follow his sequence of development

- Not all societies have the same pre-history

- Colonialism and its exploitative nature may be responsible for the regression in some        societies not poor adaptation mechanisms.

DURKEHEIM’S THEORY OF MORALITY AND COHESION

To understand his work, one must understand the mental state if the man, so read his background pg.124-125.

His contributions to sociology stem from his work exploring the origins and nature of MORALITY as the expression of the relationship between individuals and society.

*look @ how D treats social facts pg.125

His ...

This is a preview of the whole essay