Sociology

Assignment (3^rd Semester) 2014-15

A.  Answer the following questions within 50 words.

2×4 =8

Q 1: Define Social Statics.

Ans: Social statics are concerned with the ways in which the parts of social systems interact with one another, as well as the functional relationships between the parts and to the social system as a whole. In other words, Social Statics is the study of laws of action and reaction of the various parts of social order. It deals with the major institutions of society like family, religion, language, and the division of labor etc. It examines how the parts of societies are interrelated and finds the possibilities of co-existence of social phenomena.

Q 2: What is a Compound Society?

Ans: The large number of primitive societies which are without any complexities consisting of several families are combined to make a society called compound society or clan society. These societies are based on settled agricultural habitation and general and local division of labor. They are tied to a territory and movement is confined among villages of a defined territory. They had hierarchy of chiefs and varieties of ranked lieutenants.

Q 3: What is Organic Solidarity?

Ans: Organic solidarity is social unity based on a division of labor that results in people depending on each other. It contrasts with mechanical solidarity. Emile Durkheim propounded the concept of organic solidarity which explains that organic solidarity has emerged due to increasing population in the industrial societies. It is termed as “organic” because it is very similarly related to parts of the living body which are interrelated and work in coordination. 

Q 4: Define Mode of Production.

Ans: The two concepts forwarded by Karl Marx on materialism namely “Relation of Production” and “Forces of Production” constitute a economic system which Marx called Mode of Production. Mode of production refers to the varied ways that human beings collectively produce the means of subsistence in order to survive and enhance social being. The main modes of production which Marx identified are- 1) Primitive communism, 2) ancient or slave 3) feudal 4) capitalist. These modes of production also reflect the social stages.

B. Answer the following questions within 75 words. 3×4=12

Q 1: Distinguish between Historical causality and Sociological causality.

Ans: To understand the appropriate sociological methodology Max Weber some concepts. Causation or casual linkage is one of them. Weber described two types of casual inquiry or casual linkage- Historical causality and sociological causality. Historical causality determines the special situations that give rise to an event. It explains how a set of historical or social situation resulted in  a particular event. For eg. causes of first world war would be the quest for historical reality. On the other hand, sociological causality is the relationship between two phenomenon. It establishes the connection between the set of events.    

Q 2: Differentiate between Class in itself and Class for itself.

Ans: “Class in itself” is the category of people having a common relation to the means of production. Marx explains that “class in itself” is the immediate result of oppressive capitalism and offer the possibility for class revolution.

When individual people create a class for their personal interest then such class is called “class for itself”. This group can be comprised by the exploited people who realize that they are exploited and they want to oppose the exploitation by working together. They want to break through the dominant cultural construction of the exploiting class.

Q 3: Discuss in brief the analogy between an Organism and a Society as given by Spencer.

Ans: Spencer established the hypothesis that society is like a biological organism. He observed some similarities between biological organism and society. As per him the biologists are concerned about the evolution of body while the sociologists are concerned about the evolution of social structure. He highlighted following similarities-

·      Both society and organisms grow in size and this growth is accomplished by increasing complexity of structure

·      Both systems make adjustment with the environmental factors.

·      In the organism and in society there is an interdependence of parts.

·      In both, the differentiation of structure is followed by a similar differentiation of function.

Q 4: Discuss Auguste Comte's view on the issue of gender.

Ans: Comte on the issue of gender had restrained views. According to him, sociology signifies that there cannot be equality of sex and social existence at the same time. He thinks that from very beginning of the civilization and development of society women have played the role better within family. He thought Family is the place where the fundamental principle natural subordination of women was demonstrated. He believed women are unfit for mental labor because of the weakness of their reasoning ability. He thought women were quite clearly unfit for political power. He thought the public life is confined to men.

However, he believed that women are superior to man in the expansion of sympathy and sociability, and inferior to men in understanding and reason.

C. Answer the following questions within 150 words. 5×2=10

Q 1: 'Social facts are to be treated as Things'. Discuss.

Ans: In Durkheim's view, social facts should be considered as things - they are things means that they are peculiar in their characteristics. They are the effect or creation of human activities, actions or agency but they are not intended; they are not the product of conscious intentions - they are the unanticipated consequence of human behavior or agency.

Social facts are things because they are outside us, they are not a product or creation of the present generation; they are a given, pre-existing condition for human agency and they cannot be known by introspection, by reflection.

The human agency that produced the social facts we confront is not ours; it was exercised in the past, by collective agents pursuing collective, not individual goals.

According to Durkheim, “Social facts by their very nature tend to form outside the consciousnesses of individuals, since they dominate them. To recognize them in their capacity as things it is therefore not necessary to engage in an original distortion”.

As the social facts are independent of any individual, they can only be explained in terms of other social facts, not in terms of state of individual consciousness or in terms of biological and mental characteristics of the individual.

Q 2: Illustrate Weber's approach to understand Society.

Ans: Weber considered human action to be an important feature of social structure and social change. Weber argued that sociologists can develop an understanding of actions of individuals and groups, and thereby of historical processes. Weber described this as verstehen or understanding, whereby the sociologist becomes empathetic with the individual, developing an understanding of the meaning that individuals attach to various courses of action. Understanding and meaning (verstehen) are key elements of Weber's approach. Weber distinguished two types of verstehen:

Direct Observational Understanding: From facial expressions and gestures we can often have direct observational understanding of an angry outburst of a person.

Explanatory Understanding is achieved when we understand what prompted the outburst at that precise time and place.

Verstehen makes possible the scientific study of social behaviour in two ways:

>   It facilitates direct observational understanding of the subjective meaning of human actions and

>   It facilitates understanding of the underlying motive.

Weber argued that verstehen gives the sociologist an advantage over the natural scientist – an ability to understand social phenomenon. In Weber's words, “We can accomplish something which is never attainable in the natural sciences, namely the subjective understanding of the action of the component individuals”.

D. Answer the following questions within 300 words.10×2=20

Q 1: 'The Perspectives in Indian Sociology are different from that of the West'. Elaborate the Statement.

Ans: Due to caste system, diverse cultures, social conditions and hierarchal set ups Indian sociology is quite different from the western sociology. Studies done by Indian sociologists, over a period, seem to get liberation from colonial sociology. Difference in perspectives of Indian Sociology to European Sociology can be understood by various perspectives of the Indian Sociologist-

1) Indological perspective: Following sociologist used Indological perspective to study of Indian society.

G.S. Ghurye is considered as founder of institutionalized Sociology in India. His perspective helped in the systemizing the study of Indian Sociology. Ghurye studied on modern, medieval and ancient India and kept himself away from the western style of sociology.

Louis Dumont, a French sociologist, who studies on India talks of hierarchy, separation and division of labour in the structure of Indian society. There is a need of decolonization of thoughts or deconstruction of western approaches.

2) Structural-functional perspective: To study sociology some of the Indian sociologists used structural functional approach whose central idea is that society is a complex unit, made up of interrelated parts. It is basically derived from western sociology which Indian sociologists blended in Indian sociology. M.N. Srinivas: His work on religion, caste, village, vertical ties and social change led him to develop new perspectives on India, including the persistence and transformation of caste as both a social system.SC Dubey applied structural-functional perspective to make his study based on changing Indian villages community.

3)Marxist Perspective: Marxism aims at providing a scientific study of society from a class angle. The Marxist thinkers in India believe that the emergence of Indian society and its unique institutions could be best examined from the Marxian perspective than any other approach.  Two noted Indian sociologists D.P. Mukherjee and A.R. Desai used this perspective to study sociology. They emphasized that Marxist approach helps to understand the social reality through the means of production, division of labour and social relations of production.

4) Civilization perspective: Civilizational perspective refers to understand a society from its civilization. N.K. Bose and Surajit Sinha, use civilizational perspective in the understanding of Indian society. They have tried to explore the historicity, continuity and inter linkage of various structures in India.

5) Subaltern perspective: The word ‘subaltern’ refers to the general attribute of subordination, which is expressed in terms of a caste, class, age, gender etc. It also includes the characteristics of defiance and submission. The major scholars of the perspectives in India are David Hardiman, B.R. Ambedkar etc.

Q 2:'Conflict and revolution paves the way for Social change'. Discuss this statement in the light of Marx's arguments

Ans: Marx made class conflict and revolution the central fact of social change or social evolution.  According to him, “The history of all hitherto existing human society is the history of class struggles.” For Karl Marx the most important aspect of human beings social life is the material basis of that life. In this approach society where private property is the source of material production there exist a basis of social conflict, which in turn will lead to social change.

Karl Marx saw society as fragmented into groups that compete for social and economic resources. Social order is maintained by domination, with power in the hands of those with the greatest political, economic, and social resources. He sees society evolving through stages. He focuses on dialectical class conflict to control the means of production as the driving force behind social change.

According to Marx, society evolves through different modes of production in which the bourgeoisie (owner class) controls the means of production and the proletariat (working class) is forced to provide labor. In Marx's dialectic, the class conflict in each stage necessarily leads to the development of the next stage for example, feudalism leads to capitalism. Marx was especially critical of capitalism and foresaw a communist revolution.

According to the Marxist perspective, class conflict and revolution are inevitable in capitalist societies because the interests of workers and capitalists are fundamentally at odds with each other. Capitalists accumulate wealth by exploiting workers while workers maintain or advance their own well-being only by resisting capitalist exploitation. The result is conflict and revolution, which is reflected in all aspects of social life.

Karl Marx gives example of Russian revolution as the example of social change. The Russian Revolution was a revolution against economic oppression. The subject class was extremely oppressed by the ruling class under the Czars. The people of Russia were horribly oppressed, poor, starving, cold, and without any real direction or hope. During pre world war era inflation occurred and prices rose, so hunger became endemic. In the cities, workers found themselves unable to afford the high prices, and any attempt to agitate for better wages, usually in the form of strikes. This later led to Russian revolution.

However the theory of conflict and revolution as path of social change was strongly criticized by the contemporary philosophers.

Please Share it! :)