CHAPTER 1
Social Theory
Social Thought
Social thought is any of the human
thought developed to solve social problems. Social thought is an idea of
mankind, his group, his problems, social relations and interactions. Whatever
thoughts were born in the mind of man regarding social problems in his social
context or situation can be called as social thought. Social thoughts are aimed
at making human behaviors ideal and according to certain code of conduct. In
other words, we can say that a social thought is the future guidelines for
human behaviors.
Mankind has been facing various
problems in his society since the beginning of human society. Men used to think
about social behaviors and problems in their own way. The most sensitive people
out of them who had logical mind tried to answer the questions like what is
life? How can we live a happy and blissful life? What is the root causes of
human problems? How can we remove or reduce them? etc. As a result of such thinking,
various thinkers developed different thoughts in different times of history.
These thoughts may be called social thoughts.
Definitions of
Social Thought
E.S. Bogardus
Social
thought is thinking about social problems by one or few persons, here and there
in human history or at the present.
Rolling Chambliss
Social
thought is concerned with human being in their relation with their fellows.
R.N. Mukharjee
Social
thought is that branch of human thought which is primarily concerned with human
relations and interactions in their socio-historical settings.
Nature and
Characteristics of Social Thought
(1.) Social thought is primarily
concerned with societal issues and matters.
(2.) Social thought is concerned with
common problems and challenges which the people are facing collectively.
(3.) Social thoughts are different
according to time, place, environment and context.
(4.) Social thought is based on social
experience.
(5.) Social thoughts attempt to solve
the problems in practical way.
(6.) Social thoughts are influenced by
the growth of culture and civilization.
(7.) Social thought is the indicator of
the progressive attitude of mankind.
(8.) Social thought is the outcome of
the critical and analytical thinking of a few scholars, rationalists,
scientists and philosophers who have special mental capacity.
Importance of Social
Thought
(1.) A person who is facing various
problems may get clues to understand his problems and to face or solve them
effectively by means of social thought.
(2.) Social thoughts may be helpful to
the administrators, social leaders, reformers, plan makers and statesmen to
decide their policies and programmes to address the different problems of the
people.
(3.) Ordinary people who like to
understand their society, their surrounding environment and their life can get
assistance from the social thoughts.
(4.) Social thought has provided background
and basis for the development of various social sciences.
(5.) Social thoughts help us to avoid
mistakes and blunders which our forefathers had committed in their life in the
past.
(6.) Social thoughts are the sources of
inspiration for those who have sensitive and inquisitive mind.
Types of Social
Thought
E. S. Bogardus has divided the
social thoughts into the following three types:
(1.) Individual Social Thought
(2.) Collective Social
Thought
(3.) Scientific Social
Thought
(1.) Individual
Social Thought
The social thought which gives more
importance to the benefit of individuals rather than the welfare of the
majority of the people is called as individual social thought. This thought is
aimed at the self-development of a few numbers of persons.
(2.)
Collective Social Thought
The social thought which is oriented
towards the welfare of all the people of society, which is against injustice
and exploitation and which attempts to establish judicial rights of the people
in society, is called as collective social thought.
(3.) Scientific
Social Thought
Scientific social thought is based
on the cause and effect reasoning and analysis of each facts, behaviors,
processes and problems in the society. In this thought, the analysis and
reasoning is neutral and free from any norms and values of any society. There
are following types of scientific social thought:
(a.) Religious Thought
(b.) Philosophical Thought
(c.) Psychological Thought
(d.) Physical Thought
(e.) Social Thought
Religious Thought
This is the first stage of scientific thought.
People think that there are unseen authority of souls and supernatural souls
which govern the living and non-living matters of the world. In this stage, man
developed the concept of God and religion.
Philosophical
Thought
This is the second stage of scientific
thought. People thought about the relationship between apparent world and
unseen world. This thought insisted on the consciousness of the people.
Psychological
Thought
This is the third stage of scientific thought.
Man began to think about his own inner-self, sentiments and motivations.
Physical Thought
This is the fourth stage of scientific social
thought. Through this thought man was able to exploit the energy hidden in
nature for the comfort and benefit of mankind. Industrial revolution created
drastic changes in Western world.
Social Thought
This is the fifth and the last stage of
scientific thought. Under this thought, man thought over social relationship,
rights and duties, social progress and development, social welfare, social
reform etc.
Social Thought and
Sociological Thought
Social thought and sociological
thought are not one and the same. Social thought is wider in perspective
whereas sociological thought is narrower and limited to the discipline of
sociology only. It is very difficult to draw a line of demarcation between
social thought and sociological thought. The following are some of the points
that show the differences between the two:
(1.) Social thought has a longer
history than sociological thought. From the time of the beginning of human
society or from the primitive time of ancient history, people have been
thinking over human and social problems and trying to find out the ways of
solving them. This attempt has always given birth to various social thoughts.
However, sociological thoughts appeared and developed in the nineteenth century
only when the separate discipline of sociology was emerged and developed.
(2.) Sociological thoughts are
concerned with the single discipline of sociology only whereas social thoughts
cover wide ranges of disciplines like politics, economics, physics, psychology,
religion, population science, civics, ethics, moral sciences, anthropology,
history, culture etc. Hence the scope of sociological thought is narrower
whereas that of social thought is wider. Sociological thoughts can cover the
social facts, social relation and social interactions occurring in human
society. It does not include the facts or processes which does not affect
social behavior and social life of the human beings.
(3.) Social thoughts are concerned with
social problems and the ways to get rid of them or face them effectively.
However, sociological thoughts are not concerned with human problems in society
only. Sociological thoughts may include the analysis and interpretations of
religion, culture, norms, values, human behaviors, social change socialization
etc.
(4.) Social thoughts attempt to put the
social behaviors and facts within some norms. But sociological thought
interpret the social facts, customs and processes with independent and neutral
reasoning. It does not explain which one is right or wrong, appropriate or
inappropriate, moral or immoral etc. Sociological thoughts describe only what
it is and how it is. They try to explain everything with cause and effect
relationships. They do not recommend or suggest or predict anything.
(5.) Examples of social thoughts may be
taken as the ancient philosophical ideas of Hindu, Egyptian, Greek or Christian
beliefs. Similarly the contributions of Manu, Chanakya, Aristotle, Socrates,
Plato, Cicero, Confucius, Gautam Buddha, Adam Smith, Montesquieu, Russo and
other philosophers and thinkers may be taken as social thoughts. Examples of
sociological thought are, positive philosophy and the three stages of social
development of Auguste Compte, Herbert Spencer’s analogy of society with
organism, Durkheim’s concepts of mechanical and organic solidarity, Max Weber’s
views on protestant religion and the development of capitalism etc.
Theory and Social
Theory
Theory is said to be the heart of
science. A theory is a verified or established conclusion or generalization.
Theory is conclusion or generalization verified logically and scientifically by
analyzing the relationships of two or more events, facts or elements, whether
it is natural or social.
Definitions of
Theory
Goode
and Hatt
Theory refers to the relationships
between facts or the ordering of them in some meaningful way.
Talcott
Parsons
A theory is a group of closely
interrelated concepts used for interpretation of some experience.
Abraham
Francis
Theory is a conceptual scheme
designed to explain observed regularities or relationship between two or more
variables.
Robert
Merton
A theory is a conceptual scheme
which attempts to explain the relationship between two or more variables.
Functions and Use of
Social Theory
1.) The theory guides research.
2.) Theory predicts facts.
3.) Theory points gaps in our
knowledge.
4.) Theory classifies data or facts.
5.) Theory summarizes existing
information or knowledge.
Difference between
Social Thought and Social Theory
2.) Social thought is an old concept
whereas social theory is a new concept.
3.) Social theory is systematic and
logical whereas social thought is not.
4.) Social thought is explanatory
whereas social theory is analytical.
5.) Social thought is influenced by
time, place and the surroundings whereas social theory is not influenced by
such things.
6.) Social thought is influenced by
the growth and development of culture and civilizations but social theory is
not influenced by such things.
7.) Social thought is not experimented
with hypothesis but social theory is experimented with hypothesis.
8.) Social thought is based on norms,
values and philosophy whereas social theory is based on experiment and
verification.
9.) Social thought cannot be verified
by facts and proofs again and again but social theory can be verified as many
times as desired.
10.)
Social
thought is based on experience whereas social theory is based on facts,
experiments and verifications.
11.)
Social
thought may be obtained accidentally or suddenly at any instant but social
theory cannot be obtained in such a way.
Historical
Development of Sociological Theories
The historical development of
sociological theories may be summarized as the contributions of the following
sociologists:
(1.) August
Compte
The beginning of
social theory may be traced form the father of modern sociology Auguste Compte
(1798-1857). He is traditionally considered as the father of sociology because
he invented the term sociology. He was the first man to distinguish the
subject-matter of sociology from all the other social sciences. Compte was also
the originator of positivism. He initiated the use of scientific method in the
field of sociology. He introduced the word sociology for the first time in his
famous book Positive Philosophy in
1838. He gave maximum importance to the scientific methods. He criticized the
attitude of the armchair social philosophers and stressed the need to follow
the method of science. He contributed the law of three stages in the field of
scientific or positive. According to Compte society is not an individual organism
but a collective organism. It is based on universal conscience. Compte
presented the theory of the necessary and continuous movement of mankind.
(2.) Herbert
Spencer
The theories of
Compte were improved by the British sociologist Herbert Spencer (1820-1902). He
very strongly supported the views of Compte who insisted on the need to
establish a separate science of society. He contributed a great deal to the
establishment of sociology as a systematic discipline. Herbert Spencer gave a
new direction to sociological theory in 19th century. His most significant
contribution to sociological theory is the law of evolution. According to him
social evolution occurs when the society passes from indefinite incoherent
homogeneity to a definite coherent heterogeneity. This concept of society is
bio-organismic. Society has several similarities with organism. Thus Herbert
Spencer presented structural functionalism as the theory of change in society.
In Principles of Psychology he wrote
that all organic matter originates in a unified state and that individual
characteristics gradually develop through evolution. The evolutionary
progression from simple to more complex and diverse states was an important
theme in most of Spencer’s later works.
(3.) Lester
F. Ward
Up to the middle of
19th century sociology was sufficiently popularized in America
(4.) W.G.
Sumner
As pioneer of
individualistic sociological theories, the name of William G. Sumner
(1840-1910), is notable. He was the first among the university level teachers
of sociology in America
(5.) Gabriel
Tarde
Gabriel Tarde
(1843-1904) has the credit of providing psychological basis to sociological
theories. He explained imitation as the law of social life in his famous work
Law of Imitation. According to his theory society is concrete imitation which
spreads from higher to lower, inner to outer in geometrical progression.
(6.) Emile
Durkheim
Emile Durkheim
(1858-1917) deserves a pre-eminent place in the history of sociological theory.
He made a significant contribution to sociological theory in 
(7.) Karl
Marx
After Herbert Spencer
and E.D. Sumner, the most influential name in the field of sociological theory,
was that of the pioneer of conflict theory Karl Marx (1818-1883). He was one of
the most important thinkers of the 19th century. He never called himself as a
sociologist, but his work is very rich in sociological insights. He believed
that the task of the social scientist was not merely to describe the world, it
was to change it. His most significant contributions were theory of dialectical
materialism and the theory of class struggle. According to him society is
always divided into the exploiters and the exploited classes in constant
conflict. Every new age is born out of this constant conflict between
expropriators and expropriated. He considered that the key to history is the
class struggle. Karl Marx presented conflict theories of social change.
(8.) C.H.
Cooley
The credit of
introducing social psychological theories in the fields of sociology in 20th
century goes to Charles Horton Cooley (1864-1929). In his famous theory of
socialization he introduced two important concepts: primary groups and looking
glass self. His sociological theories may be found in his famous works: Human
Nature and the Social Order; Social Organization and Social Process.
(9.) Thorstein
Veblen
Thorstein Veblen
(1857-1929), American economist and social scientist, is notable for his
historical investigation of the economic structure of society and for his
analysis of the contemporary economic system. His first book The Theory of the
Leisure Class made a significant contribution to the field of sociological
theory. Veblen described society as divided into a "predator", or
"leisure", class, which owns business enterprises, and an
"industrious" class, which produces goods. He criticized business
owners for what he considered their "pecuniary" values. In his most
famous work, The Theory of the Leisure Class, he characterized the leisure
class as parasitic and therefore harmful to the economy. In this work, he
introduced the phrase 'conspicuous consumption', later used to describe the
competition for social status among Americans.
(10.)
Vilfredo Pareto
In the history of the
development of sociological theory, the Italian social thinker Vilfredo Pareto
(1848-1923) has an honorable place. He explored the nature of individual and
social action. He was widely known for his controversial theory concerning the
superiority of an elite class, and his theories were generally associated with
the development of fascism in Italy
(11.)
Max Weber
An important name in
the history of sociological theory is that of the German politico-economic
sociologist Max Weber (1865-1920). For him the individual is the basic unit of
society. He devoted much of his efforts
to expound a special method called the method of understanding for the study of
social phenomena. He developed a new branch of sociology known as sociology of
religion in his deep work The Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism. He
showed a deep insight in his theory of the relationship between religious
conduct and economic system in his studies of the six world religions. His
significant contribution to sociological theory is Social Action Theory.
(12.)
W.I. Thomas
In 1917 the
development of sociological theory was given a new direction by William Isaac
Thomas (1863-1947). He published his famous work, The Polish Peasant in Europe
and America
(13.)
Pitirim Sorokin
(14.)
Parson, Hyman and Merton
Talcott Parsons,
Hyman and Robert K. Merton are the other sociologists whose contributions are
considered significant to sociological theory.
Historical
Development of Anthropological Theories
Anthropology is a science that
deals with the biological and cultural aspects of man. Although systematic
study of man was begun only after 1835, its history dates back to the ancient
Greek and Roman philosophers. T.K. Penniman, in his book Hundred Years of
Anthropology, has divided the history of anthropology into the following four
periods:
(1.) Formulatory Period (before 1835)
(2.) Convergent Period (1835-1859)
(3.) Constructive Period (1859-1900)
(4.) Critical Period (1900 onwards)
(1.) Formulatory
Period (before
1835)
In this period Herodotus,
Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and other social thinkers and philosophers studied
about different facts relating to anthropology. Herodotus is considered as the
father of history. He traveled various places of Greece
Socrates (470-399
B.C.) had also talked about social morality, social rules and social norms and
had opined that each society is guided by universal values. Aristotle is the
first Greek philosopher who said himself as anthropologist. He emphasized on
empirical method to study the society. This is similar to the methods used by
modern anthropologists.
Other philosophers in
nineteenth century also attempted to analyze the development and growth of
social and cultural processes of society. This helped to emerge anthropology as
a separate discipline.
(2.) Convergent
Period
(1835-1859)
Karl Marx, Perthes,
Charles Lyell and Charles Darwin are the main scientists and philosophers of
this period. Marx used dialectical method to study human society. French
archeologist Perthes comparatively studied the stone had axes found in the
riversides. Charles Darwin published his Origin
of Species in 1859. In this book he described about the biological growth
and development of man from vertebrates and mammals to Homosapiens. The
contemporary popes and priests refuted his concept. This is because Darwin Darwin
(3.) Constructive
Period
(1859-1900)
In this period
anthropology became an independent discipline of study and research.
Anthropology was begun to be taught in Oxford
University in 1884 and in Cambridge University
Cultural
evolutionists and researchers like Tylor, James Frazer and Morgan published
their books which played significant role in recognizing anthropology
worldwide. Frazer explained that society is developed through the stages of
magic, religion and science. Tylor and
Morgan talked about the savagery, barbarism and finally civilization stages of
social development.
(4.) Critical
Period (1900
onwards)
When Penniman
published his book, he considered the period between 1900 and 1935 as the
constructive period. The researches and studies in this period were analytical
and critical. Malinowski and Radcliffe Brown were the major contributors of this
period. In this period teaching of anthropology were started all over the
world. Department of teaching anthropology was established in the Liverpool University Calcutta University
TU Questions
1.)
Distinguish
between social thought and sociological thought. Give examples. (2055)
2.)
Define
social theory. What is the difference between social theory and social thought?
(2055)
3.)
Give
a historical account of the development and convergence in the discipline of
anthropology. (2056)
4.)
Explain
the relation between theory and social research with sufficient examples.
(2057)
5.)
Discuss
the importance of the study of Anthropology and Sociology in modern life.
(2057)
6.)
Differentiate
between Sociology and Anthropology with examples. (2057)
7.)
What
is Social Anthropology? Discuss its relation with Sociology and History. (2058)
8.)
Distinguish
between social thought and social theory. (2058)
9.)
Give
historical development of anthropology as a distinct discipline of study in the
contemporary world. (2059)
10.)
Differentiate
between Sociology and Anthropology as two distinct disciplines of study and
research. (2059)
11.)
What
is social theory? Discuss theory in relation to observer and participants’
point of view. (2060)
12.)
What
is social theory? Discuss every social theory regard the research process to be
the same? Use examples to support your arguments? (2061)
13.)
Define
social theory and discuss the context for the development of theories in
anthropology and sociology during the 19th century in general.
(2062)
14.)
Write
short notes on:
a. Social theory in relation to
observer, participant and data(2062)
b. Participant observation (2058)
c. Institution (2056)
CHAPTER TWO (A)
Evolutionism
Meaning
The
term ‘evolution’ has been derived from the Latin word ‘evolvere’. ‘Evolvere’ in
Latin combines ‘E’ which means ‘out’
and ‘volvere’ which means ‘unfold’ or
‘devolve’. Hence ‘evolution’ means to bring something out. Evolution can be put
into a formulae that is Evolution = continuous changes + definite direction +
differences in quality + differences in action. Evolutionism is based on
assumption that societies gradually change from simple beginnings to complex
forms later on. Every society of the world begins with a simple and homogenous
society to a more complex and heterogeneous society gradually and continuously
and they pass through certain stages of developments.
Definitions
Evolution is a continued and
progressive process of opening out or developing from earlier simpler forms to
more complicated and sophisticated forms.
Ogburn
and Nimkoff
Evolution is merely change in a
direction.
MacIver
and Page
When there is not only the
continuity of change, but direction of change, we mean evolution.
Karl
Popper
Evolution is nothing itself, but
the evolution of life on earth or human society is a unique process.
Herbert
Spencer
Evolution is a process applicable
in organic and inorganic field. It is the integration of matter and concomitant
dissipation of motion during which matter passes from indefinite coherent
homogeneity to a definite coherent heterogeneity.
Context of
Evolutionism
A social theory cannot evolve
suddenly at a moment. It is developed under certain circumstances, ideological
background and context. The following are the contexts which led to the
emergence and development of evolutionism:
(1.) Traditional Thought about Social and Biological Evolution
Traditional thought that the human
society was previously similar to the modern society or even better was
prevalent before the emergence of evolutionary theory. People used to think and
believe that the God had created human society which was better, more civilized
and more blissful but the people were not able to endure that society. Mankind
fell due to their sin. Some of the social thinkers denied accepting this
traditional theory which led to the invention or emergence of modern theory.
(2.) Emergence of Biological Evolutionism
In 1809, Lamarck published his Theory of Acquired Characters which
remarked that the development of the species of animals was due to the gradual
change of the structure and organism of their body which was according to their
environmental surroundings and adaptation. Similarly Charles Darwin published
his famous book Origin of Species in 1859. In his book it was said that the
origin and development of animals is due the gradual process of evolution. Darwin
(3.) Comparative Study between Organism and Society
Those who were fascinated and
influenced by Darwin
(4.) Comte’s Laws of Three Stages
Law of three stages propounded by
Auguste Compte also played a role in the emergence of evolutionary theory. He
argued that each branch of our knowledge passes successively through three
different stages: the theological or fictitious stage, the metaphysical or
abstract stage, and lastly the scientific of positive stage. This he wrote in
his book Course of Positive Philosophy. He also argued about social dynamics.
His thought also led to the emergence of evolutionary theory.
(5.) Role of Travelers, Christian Missionaries and Businessmen
Marco polo, Vasco de Gama, Huen
Tsan etc. traveled all over the world and collected a lot of information about
the societies and cultures of the different parts of the world. Similarly
Christian missionaries and businessmen also traveled different parts of the
world. Gathering of information of the various societies and cultures of the
world led the social scientists to study and search about the relative history
of different cultures. This led to the emergence of evolutionary theory.
(6.) Influence of Science
Social sciences such a political
science, economics, history etc. and natural sciences such as physics,
chemistry, biology etc. made a great development during the course of social
progress. After the development of science, every actions of the world are
analyzed scientifically with cause and effect relationships. When the sciences
analyzed the differential structure and characteristics of human physiology, it
led to the new thought about the development of human body which challenged the
traditional thought about it. This led to the emergence of evolutionary theory.
(7.) Intellectual Enlightenment
Nineteenth century may be regarded
as the age of intellectual enlightenment. In this age, men are too much
influenced by the social and scientific analysis, study, discourse and
awareness. Intellectuals refused old traditional and religious theories and
replaced them with new theories which were based on scientific research and
analysis. Proofs, verifications and logical explanations were sought in every
incidents, concepts and theories. This ultimately led to the refusal of the
world as a gift from God. Evolutionary theory was propounded to explain the
historical development of the world.
The above mentioned points proves
that the emergence and development of evolutionary theory is not a sudden
invention but based on various intellectual backgrounds.
Key Assumptions of
Evolutionism
(1.) Evolution
is the Universal Process
The process of evolution applies
to all the societies of the world. Since the process of gradual and continuous
change from a simple, homogeneous society to a complex, heterogeneous society
applies to all the societies of the world, the evolutionary theory is not
confined to any specific or particular society in the world. Evolutionist
Herbert Spencer argued that the law of evolution is not only seen in societies
but also in geography and climates.
(2.) Culture
and Society Develops from Simple to Complex
The main assumption of
evolutionism is that societies change from simple and homogeneous societies to
complex and heterogeneous societies. Any organism is a unicellular in the
beginning. But it gains its different organs in its body later on and it
develops into complex animals and human beings. Human society which is
analogous to an organism also passes through the different stages of
development.
(3.) Every
Society and Culture Passes through Certain Stages of Development
According to classical
evolutionists, each societies of the world necessarily pass from certain stages
gradual development from the primitive uncivilized stage to the civilized one.
Each society in the beginning was hunter and gatherer society. Later it became
pastoral, agricultural and even later it became a machine and factory user’s
society. They argue that a society never returns to its precious stage. Edward
Tylor argued that a society passes through savagery, barbarism and civilization
stage necessarily and independently.
(4.) Evolution
is a Differentiation Process
A seed of a plant is very simple
and homogeneous in the beginning. On the later stages of development and
growth, it is divided clearly into roots, branches, stem, leaves, flowers and
fruits. In the same way the simple and homogeneous society and culture in the
beginning also is differentiated into complex and heterogeneous society. Thus
evolution can be said to the process of differentiation from simple to complex.
(5.) Emphasis
on Psychic Unity of Mankind, Parallel Invention and Cultural Parallel
Another assumption of evolutionism
is that the mental capacity of all the people of the world is almost equal.
That is why all the people discover various tools in the same way. The cultures
at various places of the world are also similarly developed due to this
concept. In similar environment and surrounding circumstances, all the people
of the world can invent parallelly. Their cultural growth is also similar and
equal.
(6.) Each
Institutions Evolves Independently on the Settings of Local Culture
Social institutions such as
marriage, festivals, kinship, religion, belief etc. of each society are
different and they are based on their local cultures. Needs and problems of
each societies are also different which makes their methods of solving such
problems are also different. Each society has its own characteristics, ways of
life, procedures, aims and problems and they are based on their local cultural
settings.
(7.) Evolution
is the Causes of Internal Growth
A change in any matter which is
due to external elements is not said evolution. For evolution, it should be
grown or developed spontaneously and internally without any external
intervention. Darwin
(8.) Evolution
Takes Place Continuously and Gradually
Another assumption of evolutionism
is the process of evolution takes place continuously and gradually. It does not
occur all of a sudden.
(9.) Evolution
Necessarily Involves Progress
Another important assumption of
evolutionism is that evolution necessarily involves progress. Each society and
culture always develops or grows towards better, civilized, complex form and it
never goes back to its preliminary stages. Each later stage is more advanced,
more developed and more standardized than before. Evolutionists have termed
this kind of growth as unilinear growth.
Unilinear
Evolutionary Theory
Lewis Henry Morgan
(1818-1881)
Lewis Henry Morgan was an American
anthropologist. He is a unilinear and classical evolutionist. He studied about
Iroquois Indians in detail. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels were also influenced
by Morgan’s Ancient Society.
Morgan’s
View on Evolution of Society
In his famous book Ancient Society, published in 1877,
Morgan has put forward the following three stages of the development of human society:
1.) Savagery Stage
2.) Barbarian Stage
3.) Civilization Stage
1.)
Savagery Stage
In the first stage of human
development, men lived in the forests. This stage ranges from the beginning of
human life to the invention of art of pottery. Morgan has subdivided this stage
into the following three sub-stages:
a.) Lower (Older) Savagery
b.) Middle Savagery
c.) Upper (Later) Savagery
a.) Lower (Older) Savagery Stage
In this stage, men
lived on fruits, roots and wild animals. Men used to live in den and under the
trees. There were no social institutions. Sex was totally free. In this stage,
men learned to make sounds and speech.
b.) Middle Savagery Stage
Men invented fire and
started eating burnt fleshes. They also learnt to fish. They were gathered in
small groups to live commonly. With such collective subsistence they were able
to kill large animals and were safe against their enemies. Morgan claimed that
the Australian and Polynesian tribes represented this stage of human
development.
In this stage, men learned to make
sounds and speech.
c.) Upper (Later) Savagery Stage
In this stage, men
invented bow and arrow and they also made pottery of simple types. Their
nomadic life became a little stable. They also learnt to make family, although
sex was still free. They fought with other groups collectively and not
individually.
2.)
Barbarian Stage
According to Morgan, this is the
second stage of the development of human society. Pottery, taming of wild
animals, stable life, agriculture and improved metal tools are the main
characteristics of this stage. Morgan further dub-divided this stage into the
following three stages:
a.) Lower (Older) Barbarism
b.) Middle Barbarism
c.) Upper (Later) Barbarism
a.) Lower (Older) Barbarism
The art of pottery
was developed in this stage. Men started to keep individual property and this
led to the social stratification among them. Men began agriculture and hence
stable life was also appeared. Family life began, but sex was still free and
marriage system was not existent.
b.) Middle Barbarism
The main feature of
this stage is irrigation of plants and making of bricks and tiles. Nomadic life
ended and stable life clearly appeared. Maize was cultivated. Men learnt to
exchange goods with each other. Sexual relationships were systematized.
c.) Upper (Later) Barbarism
This stage is also
known as metal age. This is because men learnt the smelting process of iron ore
and hence was able to make metal pots, and trolley with metal wheels. Small
republics were formed. Division of labor differentiated between men and women.
Women were thought as asset of men. Men invented the art of making oil,
spinning wheel, timber boat, making houses, small towns and forts for fighting
etc.
3.)
Civilization Stage
Invention of phonetic alphabet is
the main feature of the civilization stage. Haphazard sexual activities were
controlled and it was limited on married couples only. State was formed and
laws were made for social control. By virtue of the development of science,
industrialization and urbanization fostered. Materialistic thought influenced
the society. Capitalism and democratic system evolved.
Period
|
Conditions
|
Older
Savagery
|
Subsistence
on fruits and roots, invention of speech etc.
|
Middle
Savagery
|
Fishing
and use of fire
|
Later
Savagery
|
Bow
and arrow developed
|
Older
Barbarism
|
Art
of pottery developed
|
Middle
Barbarism
|
Domestication
of animals, irrigation of plants, cultivation of maize, making of brick and
tile etc.
|
Later
Barbarism
|
Invention
of the process of smelting iron ore, use of iron tools etc.
|
Civilization
|
Invention
of phonetic alphabet and writing
|
Source: An
Introduction to Anthropological Thought by Makhan Jha
Morgan’s
View on Evolution of Family
Morgan has also explained about
the evolution of family from primitive families with no boundaries of sexual
relationships to the modern monogamous families. He has divided the family into
the following five stages of development:
1.) Consanguinal Family
2.) Punaluwa Family
3.) Syndesmian Family
4.) Patrilocal Family
5.) Monogamous Family
1.)
Consanguinal Family
According to Morgan, in the
primitive stage there was no institution to control and check sexual relation
and free sex was prevailed. Even the sexual relations between siblings of the
same family were also not controlled by anyone. Morgan claimed that this kind
of relation still existed in Polynesian tribes. He confirmed it by showing the
fact that they used the same word for fathers and uncles and also for mothers
and aunts.
2.)
Punaluwan Family
In this stage all the brothers of
a family married with all the sisters of another family. All the brothers were
the common husbands of all women and similarly all the sisters were the common
wives of all men of that family. The brothers called each other by saying
‘Punaluwa’, which meant ‘associate’. This stage was the beginning of the
control of sexual relations between close relatives.
3.)
Syndesmian Family
In this stage one man married one
woman but the sex relationship of the women married into the family were not
defined and certain. Both the men and women allowed to have free sex with
anybody else.
4.)
Patriarchal Family
In this stage, man dominated the
family. He could marry as many wives as liked and had sexual relationship with
them but no women were allowed to have it with any others. Women were thought
as the property of men.
5.)
Monogamous Family
This stage is the final and
civilized stage of family. In this family one man married with a single woman
at a time and similarly one woman married with a single man at a time. The
father of a child is fixed beyond doubt. Handover of property to the child is
also easy because of this. Sexual relationship is confined to the married
couple only.
Review of Contributions by Edward
Burnett Tylor (1832- 1917)
Edward Burnett Tylor was a classical
unilinear evolutionist. He is a British anthropologist. He traveled Mexico in 1856 and investigated Perigord cave in
Mexico Oxford University
1)
First
Scientific Concept of Culture
2)
Evolutionary
Idea
3)
Concept
of Continuity of History
4)
Study
of Primitive Religion
5)
Matriarchal
Form of Society and Couvade
1)
First Scientific Notion of Culture
Culture is the focal subject
matter of anthropology and Tylor is the first person to define it in a
scientific manner. His definition of culture is even popular and satisfactory
till nowadays. In the first page of his famous book Primitive Culture he wrote:
"Culture or civilization is that complex whole which includes knowledge,
belief, art, morals, and habits acquired by man as a member of society."
In his definition he puts
emphasis on the term 'acquired'. This means that culture is acquired or learnt
by man after his birth. Culture is something that is acquired by man as a
member of society. This can not be a private property of a person. Culture is a
common heritage of society. A single person cannot have culture. It must be
owned by a society. Culture is not something that a person achieves in his
birth. Culture is transmitted from a person to another, one generation to
another and one society to another. Culture is not transmitted genetically but
it is learnt from society. According to Tylor culture is a historical process
and hence its study should be done in historical point of view. His definition
of culture is popular even today. Since he defined culture in a scientific
manner, he is also sometimes called as culturologist.
2) Evolutionary Idea of Tylor
Tylor argued that the culture
gradually develops from simplicity to complexity. He put forward the following
three stages of human development.
a)
Savagery
stage
b)
Barbarism
c)
Civilization
a)
Savagery Stage
Savagery stage was the primitive
stage of human development. In this stage men were nomadic and they resided
collectively. Their main means of livelihood was hunting wild animals and
collecting roots of plants. They also learnt fishing and use of fire in this
stage. Men used symbolic language to communicate each other. Men were totally
dependent on nature and hence their intellectual thought was very little.
b)
Barbarism
In this stage, men learnt to
protect their group from other groups and to attack other groups. Stable
settlement was started. Men learnt pottery, animal husbandry, agriculture and
the use of iron tools.
c) Civilization
This is the highest, civilized and
developed stage of human development. In this stage, men invented language,
script, and art of writing. They set up political institutions and the
government to organize there. They started the investigation, study and logical
system of analyzing things and actions.
3) Concept of Continuity of
History
Tylor believed that culture is a
historical process. He was influenced by positivism of Auguste Compte and also
by the laws of natural history of mankind. Tylor believed in the continuity of
cultural history. He argued that mankind must have passed from a primitive
prehistoric stage, a middle stage, and finally to the more advanced civilized
stage. In his book 'Anthropology' published in 1881, he tied to describe these
three stages briefly. He thought that these three stages are empirical
generalizations of history.
4) Study of Primitive
Religion
Tylor studied primitive religion
and tried to explain its types and process of development. He attempted to
verify evolution in religious perspective. He thought that religion is the
universal form of culture. One should learn religion to understand the culture.
We can divide the following three forms of religion put forward by Tylor.
a)
Animism
b)
Polytheism
c)
Monotheism
a) Animism
Animism was the primitive stage of
religion. In savage stage, men thought that every matter in the world contains
a living soul in it. They believed the existence of the God in the form of
living soul. That is why they worshiped stone, soul, plants, water, nature and
their ancestors as God. They worshiped soul to protect themselves from the
calamities of nature.
b)
Polytheism
In the second stage of development,
men thought that there are many Gods and Goddesses and they should worship them
all to satisfy them. This stage was more logical and thoughtful than animism.
Polytheism was prevalent in ancient Roman, Greek, Persian and Hindu religion.
c) Monotheism
In the last stage of the
development of religion, men believed that there is only one God instead of
several Gods and Goddesses. They tried to satisfy the single God.
5) Matriarchal form
of society and Couvade
Tylor argued that matriarchal
form of society is the earliest form of society. He was of opinion that a
society has passed through matriarchal to patriarchal. He collected data from
262 societies and analyzed it statistically. This made him to conclude that
matrilineality and matrilocality had preceded patrilineality and patrilocality.
He also studied about the tradition of couvades, in which men imitate the
habits of women especially during pregnancy and labor pains. Nearly 20
societies in the intermediate patri- matrilineality stage adopted the custom of
couvade.
Criticism if Edward
Tylor
1) Armchair
Anthropologist
Tylor has been criticized as an armchair
anthropologist as he made his theories just sitting in a room and not going to
the field. It is alleged that he made conclusion by referring to the books and
studies made primarily by others.
2) Ignorance
of the Social Aspects of Religion
Religion is the belief in
Supernatural beings. It is based on such beliefs which are invisible,
imaginated and fictitious and which cannot be verified by science. But the
belief in such beings plays a great role in social control and social
organization. Tylor studied about the evolution and development of religion but
he did not mention about the social aspects of religion.
3) No
Distinction between Evolution and progress of Culture
Tylor made no distinction between
evolution of culture and its progress, but they are quite different from each
other.
Critique of
Evolutionism
1) The evolutionists are armchair
anthropologists. They never went to the field to study but made theories based
on the studies already made by others. Field work is the main basis of
anthropological studies.
2) Evolutionists argue that each
societies of the world must pass through certain stages of historical
development. This is wrong. A society in hunting gathering stage can directly
go to the industrial stage without passing through agricultural stage.
3) It is not compulsory that each
society should pass through lower stage to higher stage and uncivilized stage
to a civilized one. A civilized culture may be degraded in course of time.
4) Evolutionists did not mention any
role of culture diffusion. A culture may be transmitted from a society to
another through migration, communication, trade, travel or marital relations.
5) Evolution is just a historical
description of society and culture, but it is not a theory. This is only a
point of view towards culture and not any logical generalization.
6) There cannot be a single law or
rule to describe the development of culture in different societies. There may
be political, social, natural, economic, religious and other aspects of
cultural development. This makes the cultures of different societies different
from each other.
7) Evolutionists do not mention about
the conflicts occurring in a society. The conflict also plays a major role in
the change and development of culture.
Implications of
Evolutionism
Though evolutionism
has been criticized severely in the twentieth century, one can not
underestimate its role and importance in studying culture. Its implications may
be summarized as follows:
1.) Helpful in Reconstruction of History of Human Culture and Society
Evolutionism deals with the
origin and development of culture from its beginning to the modern
civilization. This helps in understanding the culture in scientific manner and
reconstructing the concept of culture in different societies.
2.)
Effect on other Theories about Culture
Growth
Further study and research were
carried out based on this theory. Anthropologists tried to remove the
shortcomings of evolutionism and redefine it. This led to the development of
new theories such as diffusionism, functionalism etc. Evolution has a great
role in evolving the later theories.
1.) Role
in Reducing the Racial Concept
Evolution made comparative and historical
study of the different cultures of the world which helped to reduce the racial
concept to some extent.
2.) Helpful
to know the Real Meaning of Culture
Culture cannot be understood well
in the present content only. Historical and evolutionary study will help to
understand and define culture in proper way. Evolutionism tries to peer into
the past to know the culture.
TU Questions
1.) Describe the main stages of human
evolution. (2055)
2.) What is social/ cultural
evolutionism? Discuss the context and critique of evolutionism with suitable
examples. (2056)
3.) What is culture? Discuss the
contributions of culture concept by E.B. Tylor. (2056)
4.) Discuss the importance of culture
for (a) individual and (b) the group. (2057)
5.) Discuss the contribution of E.B.
Tylor. (2057)
6.) Discuss the concept of culture as
given by E.B. Tylor. Point out major characteristics of culture. (2059)
7.) What is social / cultural
evolutionism? Discuss the variants and critique of evolutionism with suitable
examples. (2059)
8.) What is evolutionism? Discuss the
critique and implications of evolutionism. (2060)
9.) Evaluate the contribution of E.B.
Tylor to anthropology. (2061)
10.)
Compare
and contrast evolutionism and diffusionism in terms of the methods proposed by
them for understanding the human societies and cultures. (2061)
11.)
What
is multiliniar evolutionism? How does Steward use this idea to propose his
theory of cultural ecology? (2062)
CHAPTER TWO (B)
Diffusionism
Introduction
Diffusionist theory was evolved in
the beginning years of the twentieth century. This theory was emerged as the
conscious revolt against the unilinear evolutionism. Diffusion is a process of
spreading and transmitting the social values, traditions, norms, lifestyles and
culture from one place to another. That is why diffusion refers to the process
of spreading the cultural traits from a group, community, state or city to
other group, community etc.
Diffusionism is an anthropological
theory which believes that culture evolves in a definite time by a definite
human group and which spreads to other places or other continents by means of
migration, travel, transactions, contact, trade, communication, language,
marriage etc. and due to which the growth of culture occurs. This theory gives emphasis
on diffusion in human society and cultural growth. The growth and change in
human society and culture continuously takes place. Emergence and spreading of
culture is the main basis of this theory.
It is the diffusion due to which
the culture developed in Nile
River Tibet
or China came to the
northern parts of Nepal and
similarly the culture from India
has come to the southern parts of Nepal Nepal has been
spread out to China , Japan , Thailand
Context of
Diffusionism
1.)
Failure of Evolutionism
Evolutionism was not able to
satisfy the inquiries why there are the variations and similarities among
different cultures of the world. Later researches disproved some of the
assumptions made by evolutionism. In this way evolutionism was severely
criticized which led to the development of diffusionism.
2.)
Role of Christian Missionaries,
Traders and Travelers
The Christian missionaries,
traders and travelers traveled different parts of the world during their work
of own interest. In this process they collected experiences and information
about different cultures of the world. These information and knowledge
encouraged the intellectuals to compare the different cultural growths. This
led them to propound the diffusionist theory.
3.)
Contemporary Situation
Industrial revolution,
intellectual enlightenment and freedom of expression provided such an
environment in Europe and America
Key Assumptions of
Diffusionism
1.)
Culture
is not invented parallel in all parts of the world. In fact it grows in a
particular place and spreads all around.
2.)
The
mental capacity of all the people is not equal but different and limited.
3.)
Whatever
cultures have been developed and existed in the world, the basic element for
their growth and development is diffusion, not evolution.
4.)
Men
do not like to invest new things but they rather like to imitate others. This
tendency is the basic element of diffusion process.
5.)
The
means or agents of diffusion are communication, travel, migration, mutual
contact, exchange, trade, marriage etc.
6.)
The
cultural traits of a group are accepted by the other only if it is acceptable
to the later.
7.)
Generally
the diffusion of culture takes place from a civilized, developed and higher
society to the uncivilized, undeveloped and lower one.
8.)
Because
of diffusion of culture the social and cultural change takes place in the
receiving group.
9.)
Lack
of communication and transportation, existence of ocean, hills, mountains etc.
are the hindrances to the diffusion of culture.
American diffusionists were
influenced and motivated from German diffusionists. American diffusionism is
also known as Culture Area Theory. This theory was influenced by German Museum
Methodology. Franz Boas, who was considered as the father of American
diffusionism, was born and educated in Germany Germany he went to America
and worked in Clark
University
Franz Boas
(1858-1942)
Franz Boas was born in Germany and hence he received education in Germany America Columbia
University North America into various culture areas and studied
about food, language, religion, social organization, building construction, art
etc. of those areas and also studied how diffusion of these takes place from
one culture area to another. He emphasized on the importance of fieldwork. He
studied extensively about American tribes like Kawakuiti Indian and Central
Eskimos. He put forward Cultural Relativism against the concept of
ethnocentrism which was developed in the nineteenth century. According to Boas,
every culture has its specific meaning, value and importance. It is wrong to
divide them as higher and lower culture. He suggested using historical method
to study various cultures in place of comparative method. Boas is also a well-known
folklorist. He published many folksongs and fables of American tribes. He also
studied about the relationship between mind and physical development of men. He
took physical measurement of 19 thousands American boys and girls of ages
between 13 and 19. According to Boas diffusion and internal development both
takes place in a culture. The people of one place do not imitate and accept all
the cultural traits of another place. How much they accept depends on their
relative advantages, disadvantages, adaptation and favorability.
Criticism of
American Diffusionism
1.)
The
concept of Culture Area put forward by American diffusionists is static and
does not meet the depth of historical processes.
2.)
American
diffusionists have explained the cultural similarities and differences
according to their material cultures only and neglected other aspects of it.
3.)
According
to German diffusionists, culture area concept was too narrow in scope and it
neglected to take into account worldwide similarities.
4.)
Culture
area concept was considered as method of classification and not actual theory
of diffusion.
5.)
American
diffusionists divided the cultures on territorial basis only and they neglected
the changes occurred in course of time.
British diffusionist believed that
Egypt Egypt Egypt Egypt William
Hales Rivers
Grafton Elliot Smith
(1871-1937)
Grafton Elliot Smith was an
Australian surgeon and he worked in Cambridge
University Egypt England
he compared these Egyptian artifacts with the monuments of England England were the imitations of England England Egypt
1.)
Invention
takes place in a favorable condition and that condition was existed in ancient Egypt
2.)
Men’s
attitude is generally more in imitation of others than to invent by own.
3.)
Civilization
while spreading outside the centre becomes diluted gradually.
Smith divided the human society
into two types:
1.) Civilized society
2.) Natural or Wild Society
According
to Smith, ancient Egypt
Criticism of British
Diffusionism
1.)
British
diffusionists did not mention about the complex forms of diffusion.
2.)
They
did not mention about the different kinds of diffusion like done by German and
American diffusionists.
3.)
British
diffusionists entirely depended on the archeological findings and they ignored
other aspects of diffusion.
4.)
It
is true that some aspects of culture and civilization were originated in Egypt Egypt
5.)
Lowie
has said that they were the last to come and the first to disappear.
6.)
It
is wrong to say those who follow Egyptian culture as civilsed culture and who
do not follow that as uncivilized culture.
7.)
Grafton
Elliot Smith, main profounder of this school was too much influenced by
Egyptian civilization when he had gone there. If he had gone anywhere else, he
would have influenced by that another civilization and he would have said that
that place was the cultural cradle of the world instead of Egypt
Critique of
Diffusionism
1.) Diffusionism is focused mainly on
the historical study of culture. It is not interested in what kind of structure
is existing in society and culture at present and how it is being operated.
2.) This theory is focused on the
material aspect of culture and it is not able to include the immaterial aspect
in its study.
3.) Diffusionism is not able to answer
satisfactorily why diffusion takes place in culture.
4.) It is too much wrong and
ethnocentric view of the British diffusionists that one particular place in the
world is the centre of the emergence of the cultures of the whole world and that
those cultures that follow them are civilized and those that do not follow them
are uncivilized.
Implications of
Diffusionism
1.) This theory has explained about
the emergence and growth of culture more satisfactorily than evolutionism and
has explained about it something more to meet the shortcomings of evolutionism.
2.) The theory has encouraged and
guided further researches and studies about when, where and how various
cultures of the world appeared and developed.
3.) Support and criticism of this
theory has indirectly contributed to discover other theories about society and
culture.
4.) This theory has helped to
understand and analyze the similarities and differences between different
cultures. This kind of comparison is helpful to understand the cultural
development.
5.) The study of similarities and
differences among various culture helps to reduce ethnocentric views.
6.) This theory has clarified what
kind of relationship exists between culture and environment.
TU Questions
1.) Examine briefly the part played by
diffusion in the growth of culture. (2055)
2.) What is diffusionism? Discuss its key assumptions and implications.
(2057)
3.) Explain how culture contact leas
to diffusion, acculturation and integration concepts. (2058)
4.) Discuss the approach of the
Pan-Egyptian school of diffusion with regard to explaining humans and their
cultures. What are the main criticisms against this theory? (2061)
5.) Compare and contrast evolutionism
and diffusionism in terms of the methods proposed by them for understanding the
human societies and cultures. (2061)
6.) What are the key premises of
diffusionism? Critically discuss the American
School
7.) Write short notes on:
a. German school of
CHAPTER THREE
Structural /Functionalism
Introduction
The
word ‘function’ has been used
differently in various situations. Any public programme or ceremony is called a
function. In mathematics, the word ‘function’ is used to denote the
relationship between variables. However, the term ‘function’ has a different
specific meaning in sociology and anthropology.
A
watch has its various parts and each part performs its specific work. During
their work, they are related to one another. The work done by a part to run the
watch properly in relation to each other may be called its function. In order
to understand the working process of a watch, studying about the history of the
development of watch is not sufficient, so we need to understand the structure
of a watch, functions of each of its parts and their functional relationships.
In the same way studying of history, growth, development and diffusion of
culture and society is not sufficient to understand it well. It needs to study
the structure of a social system and functions of each part of it. We should
understand how the functional relationships of different parts of a social
system are working to make the society and culture run well. This kind of
thinking or theory is known as functionalism.
Function
is the role played by the different parts of a social system to make the social
system to make the social system continuously maintained. In the words of A.R.
Radcliffe Brown, “Function of a particular social usage is the contribution it
makes to the social life as the functioning of a social system.” All the parts
or factors of a society and culture are functionally interrelated and
interdependent with one another. Function is the set of activities done by a
unit of a social system with relation to another unit for enduring the whole
system in order and without any conflict. If any defect or change takes place
in single unit of a social system, it will affect the whole system.
A
society has its different components such as values, norms, tradition,
religion, political institutions, economic institutions, family, kinship,
marriage etc. which are all contributing from their own part to make the
society alive in order. There is organization, unity and interdependence among
these components. In this way, if any change or defect occurs in a component of
society, it will affect the whole system. Theory based on this assumption is
known as functionalism.
Context of
Functionalism
No
theory of the world emerges from void. It needs some backgrounds to emerge and
develop. The following are the backgrounds from which the theory of
functionalism developed:
1.)
The
theory of functionalism states that society and culture cannot be understood
just by studies based on the reconstruction of history, but it needs to study
how it is being operated at present. In this why, functionalism stood against
evolutionism and diffusionism. The existence of functionalism is based on the
criticism of evolutionism and diffusionism.
2.)
Lamarck
and Darwin developed a biological view to explain the origin and development of
organism. Based on their biological explanations, Herbert Spencer made a
comparison of society with organism. The different organs of an organism need
to accomplish their function to make the organism live and active. In the same
way the different units of a society need to have their functions accomplished
to make the satiety maintain its order and existence. This analogy led to the
emergence of functionalism.
3.)
The
supporters of evolutionism and diffusionism were not able to explain satisfactorily
about the integrative elements of culture. This made the anthropologists and
sociologists to search a new theory to explain it.
4.)
In
the later years of nineteenth century and the beginning years of the twentieth
century, there occurred developments of many philosophical theories. There was
a competition to develop different new theories. This led to the development of
functionalism.
5.)
The
problems created by the First World War were the challenges to the governments
of different countries. With an attempt to solve the problems, it necessitated
to study how the societies are functioning. This led to the emergence of
functionalism.
6.)
The
period between 1890 and 1920 was full of crisis for America
7.)
The
economic depression of 1930s all over the world created many problems in
society. Methods and ways to solve this economic crisis also led to the
emergence of functionalism.
Key Assumptions of
Functionalism
1.)
Society is an integrated system of
different parts
The main assumption of functionalism is that a
social system consists of a number of units or parts which are intimately
related and interdependent with one another. They are unified together to make
an integrated whole.
2.)
Various organs of an organism are
functionally related like an organism
Different parts of an organism
perform their biological function to make the organism alive and active. In the
same way different parts of a social system such as institution, values, norms,
culture, etc. perform their sociological functions. The various parts are
functionally interrelated with one another. If any organ is cut out from an
organism, it may be disabled or even died. In the same way if a part of a
social system is removed, it will create imbalance, instability and disorder in
society.
3.)
All units of a society are
indispensable and indivisible
According
to functionalism, each part of a society is indispensable and cannot be
separated from the rest for the existence of each other. Each another part
needs for one to keep it alive. No part of society can exist with separation
from others. If the whole system is not alive, none of its parts can exist.
4.)
Society always tends to be an
integrated, organized, stable and balanced system
According to functionalism, the
units of a society always tend to make it balanced and in order. If any
challenges to this arise, the social system immediately makes readjustments. In
this why there is always stability, order and unity maintained in society.
5.)
Functionalism regards change and
disintegration as abnormal process
Functionalism
is against the processes like change, collapse, imbalance etc. All the units of
a society have a positive role and changes and integration are not regarded
well. This theory is against revolution, upheaval, imbalance and disorder in
any society.
Talcott Parsons
(1902- 1979)
Talcott Parsons is a best known
American sociologist of the twentieth century. He worked at the faculty of Harvard University
1)
The
Structure of Social Action
2)
The
Social System
3)
Structure
and process in Modern Societies
4)
Sociological
Theory and Modern society
5)
Politics
and Social Structure
He described the following four
systems which contribute to the construction of society:
1)
Personality
System
2)
Cultural
System
3)
Social
System
4)
Biological
System
Parsons has said that the society
is the systematic and functional combination of the above four systems.
According to him a society can be in balance and order only if its different
units played their respective roles properly. If they did not, the society will
go disorder and imbalance. He mentions that institutionalization and
differentiation are the chief two elements which help the social functions to
perform.
Parsons has spoken of four
processes which act for maintaining social mechanism active:
1)
Adaptation
2)
Integration
3)
Goal
Orientation
4)
Latency
The first of these is adaptation,
adaptation to the physical and social environment. The second is integration,
the coordination of the society or group as a cohesive whole. The third is goal
attainment, which is the need to define primary goals and enlist individuals to
strive to attain these goals. The last is latency, maintaining the motivation
of individuals to perform their roles according to social expectations.
Emile Durkheim
(1858-1917)
Emile Durkheim was born in France
1.) The Division of Labor In Society
2.) The Rules of Sociological Method
3.) Suicide
4.) Elementary Forms of Religious Life
To analyze Durkheim as a
functionalist, we will have better to analyze his major books on division of
labor, he has mentioned about the following two types of solidarities:
1.) Organic Solidarity
2.) Mechanical Solidarity
According to him, the modern
society has organic solidarity where there is specialization in division of
labor. Mechanical solidarity is related with primitive society where there was
similarity and unity in division of labor. The social unity of that society was
strong due to the combination of social units like social values, norms,
customs nationality, glory etc. Durkheim emphasized on social and moral functions
in division of labor.
In finding out the causal
relationship between social facts, Durkheim laid the foundation for the
functional method. He stressed that social facts are to be studied in terms of
their usefulness in meeting human desires. The task sociology is to know the
cause as well as the function of social facts. Thus, sociology must inquire
into the functions of social institutions and other social phenomenon that
contribute to the maintenance of social whole.
In his book about suicide, Durkheim
has stated suicide is an individual phenomenon whose causes are essentially
social. There are social forces running through society whose origin is not the
individual but the collectivity. These are the forces that are real and
determining causes of suicide. The social forces that are the causes of suicide
vary from one society from another; Durkheim's study about suicide delves into
the sources of social order and disorder that are at the root of suicide. He
has spoken of three kinds of suicide: egoistic, anomic and altruistic.
Durkheim's book about religion
seems to be the last of his major works. In this book he brings his analysis of
collective or group forces to the study of religion. The central thesis of his
theory of religion is that throughout history men have never worshiped any
other reality than the collective social reality transfigured by faith.
According to him, the essence of religion is a division of the world into two
kinds of phenomena, the sacred and the profane. The sacred refers to things
human beings set apart, including religious beliefs, rites, deities, or
anything socially defined as requiring special religious treatment. The profane
is the reverse of the sacred. Beliefs and practices unite people in a social
community by relating them to sacred things.
Durkheim was of the opinion that
all the individual activities are performed to fulfill the social needs and
whatever people make functions, they are not individual but social function.
That is why his analysis is often called as societal functionalism.
Bronislow Kaspar
Malinowski (1884-1942)
Bronislow Kaspar Malinowski was
born in Germany Germany England
1.) Australian aboriginal family
2.) Sex and recreation in savage society
3.) Crime and custom in savage society
4.) A scientific theory of culture
5.) Magic, science and religion
6.) The dynamics of cultural change
7.) Gardens and their magic
Malinowski took his field work of
Papua community at Tobriand Island in New Guinea
According to him each cultural
unit has its own function and a functionless cultural unit cannot exist. One
trait of culture is integrated with another and thus, if one trait is
disturbed, it paralyses the other. According to him, cultural traits are
functioning to satisfy basic needs of individual and that is why Malisnowski is
also called individualistic functionalist.
According to Malinowski, culture
is that means from which man is able to endure his physical, mental and
intellectual existence. Man develops culture to satisfy his various needs.
Malinowski has spoken about the following seven basic needs of man for which
culture was developed:
1.) Metabolism
2.) Reproduction
3.) Bodily Comfort
4.) Safety
5.) Movement
6.) Growth
7.) Health
Malinowski explains that each
cultural trait fulfills the above needs of man. He was of opinion that an essential
characteristic of human social life is that habit becomes transmitted into
custom, parental care into the deliberate training of the rising generation,
and impulses into values. He demonstrated his scheme of function through a
Charter, i.e. the aim or purpose of the society. The first aim if every
society, according to Malinowski, is its survival. Thus, according to the
charter, in every society, there are personnel, who have Norms or a set of
Values. Thus, according to Malinowski these norms or values inspire the
personnel for material apparatus which crates activities and activities,
according to Malinowski, lead to function. This may also be shown below:
CHARTER
Personnel Norms
Material Apparatus
 |
Activities
 |
Functions
Source: An
Introduction to Anthropological Thought by Makhan Jha
For
Malinowski culture was adaptive, and without the satisfaction of basic
biological needs neither man nor culture itself could survive. Many activities
are related to or associated with the satisfaction of biological needs, which
he called derived needs. In order to understand these dimensions of culture,
according to Malinowski, one should apply the theory of function. In other
words, Malinowski devised a very scientific framework for the study of the
dynamics of culture through the theory of function.
Criticism of
Malinowski's Theory of Functionalism
1.)
Malinowski
emphasized on the function of cultural traits only but he was not able to give
sufficient attention to their structure.
2.)
Modern,
complex and changing society can not be studied in an integrative way through
his functionalist approach.
3.)
It
is not true that all the units of society and culture play positive role and
hence some of the units may play negative role to the society.
4.)
It can not be said true that each and every
units of society and culture are functioning their role properly.
5.)
Malinowski
described man as a mere collection of needs and interests only.
6.)
David
Bidney has said that hi to be a controversial figure.
7.)
The
growth and development of culture may take place even without man's need.
A.R. Radcliffe Brown
(1881- 1955)
A.R. Radcliffe Brown was a British
anthropologist. In his studies he put more emphasis on social structure. His
major contribution is the analysis of the relationship and influence of social
structure in culture. He taught anthropology in well known universities of the
world like Sydney , Cape Town ,
Chicago and Oxford
1) The Methods of Ethnology and
Social Anthropology
2) The present position of
Anthropological Studies
3) Meaning and Scope of Social
Anthropology
Radcliffe Brown went to his fieldwork in Andman Island
i.
Process
ii.
Function
iii.
Structure
Here, social process indicates a unit of
social activities. By activity we should understand the synchronic processes
related with the present only. Function is the contributions done by the
activities or processes for the sake of social structure. This concept is taken
from physiology. In physiology function is the relationship between life and
physical structure. Brown made an analogy of the functions of the organs in
physiology with that in social science.
According to Brown, structure is the
integrated installation of structural part. Individuals are the smallest parts
of social structure. Individuals have gained certain status in social
structure, according to which they are playing their roles. They are guided by
social rules. Their activities contribute to the society, which is called
function. Function is done for the continuation of social structure. According
to Brown, social facts or events are not the outcomes of individual activities
but are activities of social structure.
Criticism of
Radcliffe Brown’s Structural Functionalism
1) This theory has its roots on the
society in a balanced and stable condition only and hence it is not able to
explain the changes occurring in the social structure in its historical
process.
2) This theory is not a scientific
theory and it is only a speculative theory because the roles played by the
different component parts of a whole social system can not be tested and
verified.
3) This theory has exaggerated about
the uniformity, solidarity, stability, coordination and integration of society.
4) This theory emphasizes on the
norms and values of a society and gives little attention towards the activities
deviated by such norms and values.
5) A theory is related to define what
it is but this theory is related to define what it should be. Hence this theory
is said to be teleological.
6) He has ignored to use the term
‘culture’ in social anthropology but according to other anthropologists,
culture is the central subject of anthropology.
7) In his writings he writes ‘Men Are
Always Absent’ which shows that he is far away from men. But man is the main
subject of study in anthropology.
Critique of Functionalism
1.)
It Favors the Elite Class
Functionalist theory argues in
favor of the continuity of the present social system. It says that all the
parts of a social system should continue to accomplish their respective
functions and there should not be any changes to these systems. This should not
be any changes to this system. This assumption advocates to the continuity of
the present class differentiation of the society and it is in favor of the rich
class of the society.
2.)
It is Not Able to Explain the
Social Change Process
Social change is a major and an
important process occurring in society. Functionalism has so little spoken
about this process that some criticizers have even said that this theory has
neglected or ignored the social change process.
3.)
Status Quo Theory
This theory advocates the
continuity of present social structure and hence hinders the notion of progress
and development. This theory considers the process of change and revolution as
unwanted and deviation from the social norms as unnecessary.
4.)
Unscientific and Non-Verifiable
Functionalist theory is like an
imaginative or fictitious theory since it cannot be tested and verified.
5.)
Ignorance to the Social Conflict
Social conflict is almost
indispensable in most of the societies. It is responsible for many social facts
and incidents. Functionalism has insisted on the interrelationship among
various units of society but it has neglected the important process of social
conflict.
6.) Analogy
of Society with Organism Irrelevant
The organs of a living organism
cannot exist separately. All the organs of a living body is regulated by mind.
Although man is interrelated and interdependent upon his society, he has his
individual and separate existence also. He has a sense, conscience and
self-decision power. Thus analogy of human society with organism cannot be
relevant and rational.
Implications of
Functionalism
1.) This theory helps to understand
the circumstances of social disorganization.
2.) More than 80% of social researches
done in sociology nowadays are based on this theory.
3.) On the basis of functionalist
theory, we can study and analyze the mutual relationships among various units
of society.
4.) The concept of culture can better
be understood with functionalism.
5.) Functionalism makes easy to
understand the nature of any society.
6.) This method is found to be
successful in studying jail, medical institutions and trade organizations.
7.) Since this theory puts emphasis on
field work study, it is very much suitable to anthropology.
8.) This theory has turned the
attention of sociologists towards the detailed study of empirical problems in
society.
9.) This theory was proved effective
in the study of societies after the Second World War and had helped to the
process of social reconstruction.
10.)
Since
the theories prior to functionalism such as evolutionism and diffusionism were
silent towards the structure and integration of society, this theory is more
scientific and improved than those prior theories.
TU Questions
1.)
Write
a critical essay on Functionalism of Emile Durkheim. (2055)
2.)
Discuss the relationship between social
structure and social function. (2055)
3.)
Discuss
the theory of Functionalism and role of institutions with suitable examples.
(2056)
4.)
Critically
evaluate the theory of Functionalism you have studied. (2056)
5.)
Compare
the contributions of Radcliffe Brown and Durkheim. (2056)
6.)
Explain
the basic contributions of Malinowski to anthropology. (2056)
7.)
Discuss
Functionalism of Malinowski. Point out its criticism. (2057)
8.)
Write
a brief essay on Functionalism of Radcliffe Brown. (2058)
9.)
Explain
the concept of functionalism as defined by Emile Durkheim. (2058)
10.)
Discuss
the theory of functionalism in the specific context of contributions as made by
Emile Durkheim. (2059)
11.)
What
is the meaning or function and functionalism? Distinguish between function and
dysfunction. (2059)
12.)
Examine
the functionalism as propounded by Malinowski and Radcliffe Brown. (2060)
13.)
Distinguish
between functionalism and conflict theories. (2060)
14.)
What
are key assumptions of structural–functionalism? Critically assess Radcliffe
Brown's scheme for analyzing the society. Use illustrations where necessary.
(2061)
15.)
Writ
short essay on Durkheim's contribution to functionalist perspective. Remember
to cite his relevant works and concepts in your essay. (2061)
16.)
Write
short essay on Malinowski's contribution to anthropological theory. (2061)
17.)
What
are the fundamental assumptions of functionalism? Critically examine the
contributions of Durkheim in this field. (2062)
18.)
Write
short note on Radcliffe-A.R. Radcliffe Brown’s contribution to theory in anthropology.
(2062)
19.)
One
variant of functionalism argues that cultures satisfy the needs of individuals.
Identify the proponent of this approach and critically assess the fundamental
assumptions of his theory. (2062)
20.)
Write
short notes on:
a. Functions and Dysfunctions (2057)
b. Radcliffe-Brown's Contributions
(2057)
c. Manifest and latent functions
(2058)
d. Function and Dysfunction (2059)
e. Use of organic analogy in
sociology and anthropology (2061)
CHAPTER FOUR
Cultural Ecology
Introduction
Cultural
ecology is the theory which explains and analyses the interactions and
interrelationships between cultural knowledge, information and technology
created and developed by man for the protection of his life and the surrounding
physical and biological environments around him. In short this theory studies
and analyses the interrelationships between environment and culture in a human
society.
The
term ‘ecology’ is related with biology. This word is the combination of two
Latin words ‘oikos’ and ‘logos’ which mean ‘household’ and ‘study
of science’ respectively. In biology, ecology means the study of the
relationship of an organism with its surrounding physical and biological
environment. In the field of anthropology, the concept of cultural ecology is
originated and developed in the decade of 1950s.
The
proponents of this theory have defined culture as the adaptation process
developed by man to adjust and adapt with the changing environments. Cultural
ecology attempts to explain the cultural diversity in the context of man’s
diverse adaptation attempts with the different environments. In other words,
they argue that the difference in culture is due to the different physical and
biological environments and the different processes of adjustment and
adaptation with those environments.
It
is clear that the physical and biological environment surrounding different
societies of the world in different time segment of history never remained the
same and similar and hence there were different cultures developed by man. Old
cultures were discarded and the new ones developed and adopted to cope with the
new environmental challenges. The first person to insist on the importance of
studying cultural ecology is Julian Steward. After he published ‘The Theory of
Cultural Change’ in 1955, the discipline of cultural ecology is gradually
developed as a separate theory in anthropology.
Ecosystem
is divided into two types: Natural Ecosystem and Socio-cultural Ecosystem.
Under Natural Ecosystem there are two components: Biotic and Abiotic which
affects the existence of life. Socio-cultural ecosystem is also known as
artificial or man-made ecosystem.
Context of Cultural
Ecology
(1.) Historical
Context
From the time of Greek philosopher
Aristotle and eighteenth century philosopher Montesquieu these philosophers had
been talking about the relationship between culture and environment. Natural
science, which studies about environment and ecosystem, had been gaining
momentum. Montesquieu opined that weakness and coward ness can be found in warm
climates. The concept of Environmental Possibilism stood against the previous
concept of Environmental Determinism. Since these theories and concepts were
not sufficient to satisfy the need of clarifying the concept of culture and
environment, it was felt in the midst of twentieth century to create a new
theory to explain the relationship of cultural system with geographical
ecosystem.
(2.) Social Context
Intellectual freedom, human rights
and individual rights which were begun in the eighteenth century were
encouraged further in the nineteenth century. Due to the excessive development
of industries and factories, problems of environmental pollution were appeared.
The emerging new technologies provided facilities to the man and at the same
time created many problems in environment and culture. In this context,
anthropologists tried to redefine the relationship between culture in human
society and environment. This led to the emergence of the theory of cultural
ecology.
(3.) Other Context
Regarding the development of
culture, many theories aroused such as evolutionism and diffusionism which
tried to explain how various cultures of the world evolved, developed and
became different in different parts of the world. Anthropologists and
sociologists tried to overcome the shortcomings and drawbacks of these theories
and hence this led to the concept of interaction of culture and environment.
Key Assumptions of
Cultural Ecology
(1) Cultural ecology studies the
interaction and interrelationship between the man-made cultural means and the
natural environment around him.
(2) There is an intimate and mutual
relationship between culture and environment.
(3) Adaptation is the basic process of
cultural change and the process of adaptation is dynamic.
(4) Culture and nature are the
indispensable and indivisible parts of the whole cultural system.
(5) Environmental diversity causes
cultural diversity in human societies.
(6) Culture is developed in course of
human adaptation to the ecosystem.
(7) In the places of the world where
there is similar natural environment, people use similar technologies, and
hence they have similar social, cultural, political structure, norms and values
also.
(8) Culture is the compromise of the
man with the environment.
(9) Culture is changed and developed
when men develop technologies to exploit the natural resources as much as
possible.
Roy A. Rappaport (1926- 1997)
Roy A. Rappaport was born in New York City Columbia University
He established his reputation with
his first book, "Pigs for the Ancestors". This
particular book was based on his work with the Tsembaga people of New Guinea
Rappaport was a cultural
materialist. He explained cultural phenomenon in terms of material factors
among people and the surrounding natural environment. He also analyzed the
relationship between religion and environment. The following are his major
books:
(1.) Pigs for the Ancestors (co-writing)
(2.) Ritual, Sanity and Cybernetics
(3.) Ecology, Meaning and Religion
(4.) Ecosystem, Populations and People
(5.) Holiness and Humanity
One of his famous books, "Pigs
for the Ancestors", was an example of his cultural materialistic
approach. This book describes the role of a religious ceremony among Tsembaga, a community of horticulturists
in New Guinea
In addition to describing Tsembaga's point of view, Rappaport
calculated caloric exchanges among the community, the natural environment, and
neighboring populations. As a result of this calculation, Rappaport found that
the kaiko ritual was articulated with
the ecological relationship among people, pigs, local food supplies, and
warfare. Warfare and succeeding kaiko
ritual occurred every couple of years and this cycle corresponds with the
increasing pig population. In other words, the ritual kept the number of pigs
within the capacity of the natural environment and prevented land degradation.
At the same time, the kaiko ceremony
distributed surplus wealth in the form of pork and facilitated trade among
people.
Rappaport's analysis on kaiko ritual is typical of cultural
materialist point of view. In general, religious ceremonies are cultural and
can be explained in terms of values and other non-material concepts. However
Rappaport revealed how the kaiko ritual is interrelated with material aspects
of the Tsenbaga society and their
surrounding natural environment.
Julian Steward (1902-1972)
Julian Steward was born in 1902 in
Washington D.C.
Steward began his ethnographic
career among the Shoshone, a Native American tribe in the Great Basin in the
West of the United States
Although Steward did not believe
in one universal path of cultural evolution, he argued that different societies
can independently develop parallel features. By applying cultural ecology, he
identified several common features of cultural evolution which are seen in
different societies in similar environments. He avoided sweeping statements
about culture in general; instead, he dealt with parallels in limited numbers
of cultures and gave specific explanations for the causes of such parallels.
Steward’s evolutionary theory is called multilinear evolution because the
theory is based on the idea that there are several different patterns of
progress toward cultural complexity. In other words, Steward did not assume
universal evolutionary stages that apply to all societies. For example, he
traced the evolutionary similarities in five ancient civilizations: Mesopotamia , Egypt ,
China , Mesoamerica, and the Andes . These cultures shared parallels in development of
form and function because all of them developed in arid and semi-arid
environments where the economic basis was irrigation and flood-water
agriculture. He argued that these similarities stem not from universal stages
of cultural development or from the diffusion of civilization between these
regions, but from the similar natural environments.
Julian Steward talked about
cultural ecology for the first time when he wrote a book, “Theory of Cultural Change”
in 1955. The following are his major works:
(1.) Theory of Cultural Change
(2.) The People of Puerto
Rico
(3.) Native People of South Africa
(4.) Irrigation Civilization
Julian Steward is also known as a
neo-evolutionist. He criticized the Universal
Energetic Evolutionary Theory of Leslie White. The main principle of Julian
Steward is the interactional analysis of environment and culture. Steward is
the first person who divided evolutionism into the following parts:
(1.) Unilinear
Evolutionism
This is the classical evolutionary
theories of nineteenth century. They believe that all the cultures of the world
must pass through certain universal stages of development. Tylor, Morgan, Marx
etc. are the main proponents of this theory.
(2.) Universal
Evolutionism
The theories of White and Childe
fall under this theory. They believe that culture is developed according to the
extent of energy utilization and the development of technology.
(3.) Multilinear
Evolutionism
According to this theory, the
development of culture does not occur in a single predefined way, but in
different ways in different parts of the world. Julian Steward is the main
proponent of this theory. In this context, he explained about cultural ecology.
He explained culture as the adaptation process of man with the changing
environment. Culture is developed and changed to cope with the environmental
challenges.
The
cultural ecology of Julian Steward can be summarized as following three points:
(1.) The interrelationship of
exploitative or productive technology and environment must be analyzed.
(2.) The behavior patterns involved in
the exploitation of particular area by means of particular technology must be
analyzed.
(3.) The procedure is to ascertain the
extent to which those behavior patterns is entailed in exploiting the
environment affect other section of culture.
Criticism of Julian
Steward
(1.) It Seems
Inadequate
His cultural ecological analysis
is not able to include aspects other than technology and environment. He is not
able to explain how covariance can exist between cultural traits and
environment and how they can be mutually interrelated. Therefore, his views are
inadequate.
(2.) Ignorance of
Other Aspects of Culture Other than Technology
Steward has explained technology
as culture core. He has not given sufficient attention to other aspects of
social structure that directly affect the environment. Festivals, religion,
rituals, belief, philosophy etc. play important role to change the whole
cultural form in environment. He has ignored this aspect.
(3.) Ignorance of
Existence of Other Organism
Steward has ignored the existence
and effect of microorganisms of the environment like virus, bacteria etc. he
has ignored the physical capacity of mankind to adapt against the environment.
He has also neglected the diseases occurring in human society.
(4.) Exclusion of
Effect of Neighboring Culture
Steward has explained the origin
and growth of a cultural trait with relation to a particular geographical
surrounding only. However its contact with neighboring group also plays a
significant role in its culture and plays a major role in its cultural change.
The cultural system of a geographical area is affected by its contact with its
neighboring human society.
(5.) Ignorance of
Unnatural Technology
Man tries to exploit the nature
for his benefit by means of various technologies. Some technologies are created
and developed by him which is not based on nature or environment. Steward has
ignored the role of such unnatural technology.
(6.) It Directs its
Efforts Only to Isolated Primitive Community
Steward’s cultural ecology theory
is applicable only to the ancient and isolated community. Ancient and primitive
community is more affected by natural and physical environment. This theory is
not able to explain and analyze the cultural change process in modern advanced
societies.
(7.) Ignorance of
Political Forces
This theory argues that cultural
change of a society is due to the technology developed to exploit the
environment. However, the environment is also controlled and governed by
political power, form of the government, law, etc. Political factor also caused
the destruction and protection of the natural energy resources. Steward’s
theory ignores the role of political system to the natural environment and
culture.
Critique of Cultural
Ecology
(1.)
This
theory has made its basis on primitive society with stable environment. Hence
it is very difficult to apply in the context of modern complex societies.
(2.)
This
theory makes its assumption that social and cultural changes are determined
solely by natural factors. But in actual practice, we can see that the social
and cultural systems are also changed by economic, political, religious and
historical factors.
(3.)
Cultural
ecology has attempted to explain the culture and environment in the context of
technology only but different studies and researches have shown that religious
and philosophical factors have also interaction with the environment and
culture.
Implications of
Cultural Ecology
(1.) This theory helps to understand
what kind of cultural structure has been developed in societies that are based
on the ecological background.
(2.)
With
ecological anthropology the anthropologists are able to gain the knowledge of
ideal relationship between man and the environment since they insisted on the
study of traditional human communities. This knowledge may be helpful and
applicable to the progress and stability of the modern human societies.
(3.)
This
theory helps to understand the minute interrelationship between artificial
human surrounding and natural surrounding.
(4.)
This
theory has provided encouragement to other theories to analyze the causal
relationship of culture and environment.
(5.)
This
theory has provided satisfactory explanation of ecosystem.
(6.)
This
theory has provided effective explanation of the adaptation of culture with the
environment.
TU
Questions
1.)
Discuss
the strength and weaknesses of cultural ecology as an anthropological
theory. (2055)
2.)
Who
was the contributor in the development of the approach of “cultural ecology”?
Discuss the key assumptions and variants of “cultural ecology”. (2056)
3.)
Discuss
the approach developed by Julian Steward. What are the fundamental assumptions
of cultural ecology? (2057)
4.)
Define,
‘Culture Core’. How the cultural core can be differentiated from other aspects
of culture? (2058)
CHAPTER Five
Conflict Theory
Introduction
Conflict is such a process in
which an individual or group uses force to dominate or sometimes even destroy
the other individual or group and attempts to gain its goal or interests.
Elements like hatred, anger, violence and cruelty ate also associated with the
process of conflict. Conflict is a natural or usual concept since even an
organism makes its struggle against the nature and against his competitors to
live and continue its existence and survival.
Conflict in society is a
deliberate and conscious process. In this process, a group attempts to destroy
or defeat another group in competition. Conflict also occurs between nations,
between peoples of different religion or race, between riches and poor and
between rulers and ruled.
The theory which considers the
process of conflict indispensable and usual in society and regard conflict as
an important and basic element for social change is called conflict theory. In
other words, conflict theory is the theory which gives more emphasis on
conflict in society.
Characteristics of
Conflict
(1.)
Conscious Action
Conflict is a
conscious and deliberate action. In conflict, the competitors try to defeat
each other consciously. One group in a conflict knows well the capacity and
means of another group. Conflict is not a spontaneous action.
(2.) Personal
Activity
Conflict is waged to
defeat the antagonist and not to achieve any particular goal. The chief aim of
conflict is to cause harm or severe loss to the antagonist.
(3.) Intermittent
Action
Conflict is not a
continuous action. It lacks continuity or it occurs intermittently. After the
occurrence of a conflict, either one defeats the other or the two make
accommodation or compromise with each other. No society can sustain itself in a
state of continuous conflict.
(4.) Universal
Conflict is found in
each and every part of the human society. Conflict or clash of interests is
universal in nature. In some societies conflict may be very acute and vigorous
while in some others it may be very mild. But it is present in almost all the
societies.
Context of Conflict
Theory
(1.)
Intellectual Context
Although conflict is
systematically analyzed and studied later, it's concept dates back to the
ancient time. The philosophers like Socrates, Plato, Kautilya, Hobbs ,
Hegel and Darwin
(2.) Historical Context
The historical series
of war and battles in the world persuaded the thinkers and scholars to think
that the process of conflict is usual, natural and unavoidable process in human
society. They attempted to understand, interpret and analyze this process which
led to the development of conflict theory.
(3.)
Social Context
Industrial
Revolution, rise and development of capitalism, miserable condition of the
workers, exploitation and inequality in the society created such a situation
that struggle was necessary to get rid of such situation. Exploitation and
domination necessitated conflict. A theory to define conflict was considered
necessary at that time.
(4.)
Contribution of Charles Darwin
Charles Darwin
published his book Origin of Species
in 1859. He explained about the natural process of struggle for existence and
selection of the fittest. An organism which defeats its competitors can survive
and the one which can not defeat others cannot survive. Herbert Spencer was
influenced by this theory of natural selection. He made an analogy of human
society with an organism. He also said that only those people can survive in
society who can defeat others. Hence Darwin
(5.) Weakness
in Functionalism
The functionalist
theory has explained the society with only the functions of its elements and
has emphasized only on the stability of society. It has ignored the
indispensable process of conflict in society. The criticism of functionalism
played an important role in giving birth to conflict theory.
(6.)
Feurabach’s Theory
Feurabach was a
materialist thinker. He said that God did not create the Man but the Man
created the God. This concept of him changed the contemporary belief of people
regarding the God. Materialist analysis was spread at that time’s society. This
also helped in the emergence of conflict theory.
(7.)
Influence of Positivism
Positivism is a
doctrine formulated by Auguste Compte. This doctrine asserts that the only true
knowledge is scientific knowledge. This doctrine was in favor of positive
knowledge based on systematic observation and experiment. Compte’s positivism
has also influenced to grow the theories of conflict.
Key Assumptions of
Conflict Theory
(1.) Society
is Not a System of Equilibrium
The main assumption
of this theory is that the society is never in a state of stability or
equilibrium. Social conflict is the inherent process of social structure. A
social system is composed of various antagonistic parts. The continuous
conflict between these parts makes the social system dynamic.
(2.) Society
is a Stage Populated with Living, Struggling and Competing Actors
A social system is an
interrelationship of the individuals with various interests, desires and goals.
Each and every individual there are waging struggle against their competitors
for their existence and dominance over others. Hence, according to this theory,
society is a stage of conflict where different antagonistic roles with their
own interests are played.
(3.) Conflict is Essential Law for Social Development
There is an incessant conflict
between the antagonistic elements within a society which is responsible and
essential for the social change. Conflict theorists believe in incessant change
as against the functionalists according to whom, change is a deviation form the
normal condition of society. Therefore conflict theory seeks to explain factors
involved in the perpetual process of social change.
(4.) Conflict Cannot be Abolished
Dehrendorf stresses
the underlying assumption that conflict can be temporarily suppressed,
regulated, channeled , and controlled but that neither a philosopher, king nor
a modern dictator can abolish it once or for all. He rejects the notion of
conflict resolution on the ground that it deals with causes rather than
expressions of social conflict.
(5.) Social
Conflict May be Both Latent or Manifest
Conflict is occurring continuously
in a social system and it appears manifest sometimes or remains latent
sometimes. Social conflict is not always violent. It is inherent in the social
structure. It may be manifest or controlled or uncontrolled, violent or
non-violent, disintegrative or integrative, explicit or implicit, such
different types of conflicts are always happening between interest groups in a
social structure.
(6.) Conflict
is Rooted in Social Structure
The conflict theorists maintain that
conflict is as much rooted in social structure as consensus. A society is
dynamic due to the conflict among its structural parts. Welfare and interests
are rooted to the each individuals groups of a society. They are always making
conflict to satisfy their own interests.
(7.) Conflict
is Not a Continuous Process
Conflict never takes
place continuously. It takes place occasionally and intermittently. No society
can sustain itself in a state of continuous conflict. Conflict needs some
causes which may not always appear in a society.
Karl Marx (1818-1883)
Introduction
Karl Marx was an
economist, a philosopher and a revolutionary thinker of the nineteenth century.
He was born in Trier city of Germany Bonn
and Berlin London London
Major
Works
(1.) The German Ideology
(2.) The Communist Manifesto
(3.) Capital
(4.) The Poverty of Philosophy
(5.) Contribution to the Critique of
Political Economy
(6.) The Gotha
Historical
Materialism
Historical
materialism is an important principle of Marx to interpret the society and the
history. With this theory Marx has explained and analyzed the historic, social
and economic changes in an objective way. He argued that the historical
incidents and changes should not be interpreted in idealistic explanations but
they should be interpreted by the explanations of the natural characteristics
of matter and production process.
A man needs food, shelter
and clothes and other physical materials for his existence and survival. To
gain these needs, a man always remains active and working. He uses his labor
upon the resources available from nature to produce these goods. In the process
of production, he obtains production experiences and labor skills. He can not
produce and consume these goods alone and hence makes relationship of one or
other type with other people. This relationship based on mutual co-operation
and interdependence maintains production relation with other people. This
production relationship also determines the form of production.
With the continuous
progress of labor and production, there occur changes in production technology
and production relationships. The change in production relationship creates the
great impact on the whole social system, political system, thought and
philosophy and political institutions. The great upheaval in the form of
production determines the changing way of history. Hence, according to Marx,
the actual history of the world is not the history of the kings and lords, but
the history of the serial changes occurred in the forms of the production. The
creators of the historical changes are not the kings and lords, but the working
class people. He argued that the bases of historical changes should be sought
in materialistic interpretation of labor and production efforts and not in the
idealistic way of human thought. He attempted to find the general rules of the
historical changes occurred and occurring all over the world in a materialistic
way.
According to Marx,
production of goods is the basic, primary and crucial process which determines
the historical epochs. Hence the creation of history is always in the hands of
general working class people. Marx's historical materialism has divided the
whole history of human society into the following six stages:
(1.) Primitive Communism
(2.) Slavery Society
(3.) Feudal Society
(4.) Capitalistic Society
(5.) Socialist Society
(6.) Communist Society
(1.) Primitive
Communism
This is the first human society in
history. In this stage all the means of production are under the control of the
community. They worked collectively and jointly upon these collective means of
production. There was no system of private ownership of society. The society
was classless and there was no exploitation.
(2.) Slavery
Society
The private ownership system
replaced the system of collective ownership in this stage. There were two
classes- slaves and lords- appeared for the first time in human history. The
lords owned all the means of production and lands and even all the slaves.
Agriculture, animal farming and the use of metals were the basic production
processes in this society. The two antagonistic classes- slaves and lords- were
always in conflict in this society.
(3.) Feudal
Society
The class struggle between lords
and slaves gave rise to the establishments of feudal society in which there
were two classes- serf and feudal. The feudal owned most of the lands to be
used for farming. The serfs were free as compared to the slaves but they had to
work hard in the farms owned by feudal. In this society again, the two classes-
serfs and feudal- are always in class struggles.
(4.) Capitalistic
Society
The capitalistic society is the
outcome of the class struggle between serfs and feudal. Great factories and
industries were developed in this stage. In this stage, there were two classes
of people- proletariat, who used their labor for their livelihood and
bourgeoisie, who owned the means of production. The bourgeoisie uses the labor
of the proletarians to produce goods. This society provides more freedom to the
people as compared to the feudal society. The bourgeois become richer day by
day and proletarians become poorer and poorer. This condition creates a great
class struggle between the two classes.
(5.) Socialist
Society
Due to the development of class
consciousness in the proletarians, they are ready to topple the regime of the
capitalists and after this class war they establish a socialist society. In
this society, all the means of production are owned collectively by the working
class themselves. They establish the dictatorship of proletariats. This stage
is the transition between a capitalistic society and a communist society.
(6.) Communist
Society
This society is the last stage of
world history. This stage is classless and stateless. The means of production
are owned by the society. Distributions of goods are according to the need of
the people.
In
this way Marx argued that human history is created by the changes in the form
of production. This is the historical materialism or the materialistic
interpretation of history of Karl Marx. In his explanation, matter is the basic
thing to determine everything rather than thought or idea.
Dialectical
Materialism
Dialectical materialism is the
main philosophy of Marxism. This theory considers that matter is the main basis
of this world. Due to its internal characteristics the matter changes into
various forms. This process of development is continuous and universal. This
theory of Marx explains that changes and development process of matter in
nature.
Marx asserted that between matter
and mind the matter is primary and the mind or idea is the secondary. Mind or
idea is just the reflection of the matter. According to Marx, matter is not a
product of mind; on the contrary mind is simply the most advanced product of
the matter. It is possible to separate the thought from the reality of the
matter. Mind or idea cannot create matter since the idea is born in mind and
mind itself is the product of matter.
The following three are the laws
of Marx’s dialectical materialism:
(1.) The Law of the Unity and Struggle
of Opposites
(2.) The Law of the Passage of
Quantitative into Qualitative Changes
(3.) The Law of the Negation of the
Negation
(1.)
The Law of the Unity and Struggle
of Opposite
According
to this law, there are always two opposite elements inside a matter which are
in unity as well as in conflict. Hence, it is right to be two opposite
antagonistic forces in society, state, economy and everything else in the
world. A conflict is always occurring between the two, which keeps the whole
alive and active.
(2.)
The Law of the Passage of
Quantitative into Qualitative Changes
As
a result of the continuous struggle between two opposite forces within a matter
or society, there always takes place quantitative changes. After passing
sufficient quantitative changes it leaps into a qualitative change. We may give
an example of boiling water starts, heating from 0˚ Celsius, its temperature
goes on increasing. This is a quantitative change. When the temperature of
water reaches 100˚ Celsius, the water changes into vapor. This is a qualitative
change. This kind of changes where qualitative changes take place after a long
series of quantitative changes is the second law of dialectical materialism.
(3.)
The Law of the Negation of the
Negation
After
the qualitative change, the new stage of development is always better, higher
and more advanced than the previous stage. The new stage replaces the old one.
Slavery stage was replaced by feudal society. Feudal stage was also replaced
the capitalistic society. This each new and qualitatively higher and developed
stage always replaces the previous older stage of matter and society. This is
the law of the negation of the negation. This process takes place for ever
without any interruption and returning back. For example, when a seed is
planted in soil, it changes into a bud. This bud grows to a tree. Thee tree
gives fruits. The tree one day wilts. This is a process of negation of
negation.
In this way Marx put forward a
generalized natural law for explaining the change process occurring in nature
through his dialectical materialism. Marx had taken the dialectical concept
from Hegel. According to Hegel, there are three levels of any logical process:
thesis, antithesis and synthesis. According to him, any idea or concept gives
birth to its opposite idea and there takes place contradiction these ideals. As
a result of this contradiction, a new idea is created with proper adjustment of
these two ideas. According to Hegel, change and development take place because
of idea, spirit and universal spirit. He gave more importance to idea rather
than matter. Marx refuted to this concept of Hegel and developed the theory of
dialectical materialism. Marx used the dialectics of Hegel and materialism of
Feurbach to propound his dialectical materialism. Hegel’s dialectics was
without materialism and Feurabach’s materialism was without dialectics. Marx’s
new theory caused a great change in the spiritual thought of that time.
Theory of class
struggle
According to Marx,
there are always two antagonistic classes in a society- the exploited class and
the exploiter class. When the exploitation becomes intolerable to the exploited
people there always occur class struggle between the two. In Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels
have written:
The
history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggle. Freeman
and slave, patrician and plebian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman,
in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one
another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that
each time ended, either in a revolutionary re-constitution of society at large,
or in the common ruin of the contending classes.
Marx has divided the
class struggle in different stages. In the first there was a primitive
communism where there were no classes and neither was there any class struggle.
All the means of production were owned collectively and there was equality in
distribution. The second society was the
slavery stage. In this stage the masters of the slaves were the exploiters and
the slaves were the exploited. There was class struggle of these two classes
which led to the transformation into feudal society. In feudal society, the
means of production was owned by the feudal. They belonged to the exploiter
class and the agricultural laborers were the exploited class. There was also
class struggle between these two classes. This class struggle made the society
to transform into capitalistic society. The capitalistic society is also not
free from conflict. There are two antagonistic classes: the bourgeoisie and the
proletariats. The bourgeoisies are the exploited or the ruler class and the
proletariats are the exploited or the ruled class. In this society all the
means of production are owned by the capitalists and they also have the right
over the goods produced. The proletariats of the workers are impelled to live
on their labor. They own nothing except their labor. There occurs contradiction
between these two classes and this creates a class struggle. According to Marx,
the bourgeois class is ultimately defeated by the proletariat class and the
proletarians gain their right over the means of production.
According to Marx,
the main basis to identify a society is the form of holding property. All the
behaviors of any individual are determined by his relationship with the
property. Classes are determined according to the relationship of a person with
the means of production. The line of demarcating class difference lies in the
ownership of property. The class consciousness and the clashes in the
distribution system give birth to the class struggle. In this way the
continuously occurring conflict between two antagonistic classes is called as
class struggle.
Criticism of Marxism
(2.) According to Marx, polarization of the two
antagonistic classes-proletariat and bourgeois- takes place in capitalism and a
vigorous class struggle always occurs there. However, he ignored the existence
of strong, middle class which is responsible for enduring capitalist system.
(3.) According to Marx, the change in social
structure always takes place through a violent struggle. However, in modern
capitalist societies the organized labor is able to bring changes to the power
balance to their favor without such struggle.
(4.) The theory of surplus value is also full of
errors and weaknesses. If the surplus value is only the source of profit, there
is no way to get rid of the exploitation and profit collection in the world.
Even the socialist countries are also making profit from their industries and
factories.
(5.) Marx has given importance to the economic
basis more than required and ignored any other sources of power.
(6.) Marx's prediction of the demolition of the
capitalist system has been proved to be wrong since there are no any sign of
future class struggle in modern capitalist countries.
(7.) Not only struggle and conflict always take
place in capitalist societies. Cooperation, accommodation, assistance, love,
unity etc. are also taking place there. Marx has ignored these aspects.
(8.) Class is formed not only on the economic basis
but also on racial, regional, political, religious and other differences.
Struggle also takes place in these classes. Marx has totally ignored this part
of society.
(9.) It was wrong prediction of Marx that the
proletariat class ultimately wins in the class struggle against the bourgeois
class.
(10.)
The capitalism explained by Marx is that he
had seen throughout his life time only. His explanation about capitalism does
not fit the modern world. There is no such exploitation and severe condition of
the workers in modern capitalist societies as had been explained by Marx.
(11.)
According
to the prediction of Marx, the socialist societies should have leapt forward
towards communism but in reality they are found to go back to capitalist
societies instead.
(12.)
The
society is not just the reflection of the ownership of property and economic
organization.
(13.)
It
is wrong to predict that the individuals with common interests necessarily
polarize in a class.
(14.)
The
power struggle in society is not always aimed by the ownership of property.
Importance or
Implications of Marxism
(1.) Marxism has provided an objective
and a scientific tool to study, research and explain the universe, world,
nature and society in place of old spiritual, idealistic concept.
(2.) Marxism provides revolutionary
guidance to the salvation from exploitation in society.
(3.) It helps to remove harassment and
status quo thought and provides clear concept for change, development and
progress.
(4.) It helps to understand the class
structure and the root causes of the problems of any society.
(5.) It helps to check the potential
revolution or struggle in a society so that reformative measures can be
implemented to satisfy the downtrodden class.
Critique of Conflict
Theory
We have already discussed most of
the critiques of this theory in the criticism of Marxism. We can add the
following to them:
(2.) The conflict theorists consider
the conflict as the main basis for progress but the main basis of progress is
co-operation, not conflict.
(3.) Not all the classes in society are
antagonistic to each other. They may be cooperative and helpful to each other
as well.
(4.) Conflict theorists think that
conflict is the only means for social change but thee are also other means of
social change.
(5.) Not always the outcomes of
conflict are beneficial but in most cases they are harmful or destructive to
the society also.
(6.) Studies made in conflict theory
are based on historical data only and they lack empirical data.
Implications of
Conflict Theory
(1.) With the help of conflict theory,
it is easy to study the dynamic aspect of society and to explain the process of
social change.
(2.) It helps to fond out the root
cause of the potential or existing conflict in society and also helps in
conflict management.
(3.) This theory encourages the
downtrodden and exploited people to be conglomerated for struggle.
(4.) This theory has clarified that the
carriers of the change in social structure are the exploited peoples
themselves.
(5.) This theory has shown the way of
removing injustice, tyranny and exploitation through the process of planned
struggle.
(6.) This theory is effective in
criticizing the exploitation and other ill aspects of capitalistic society.
TU Questions
1.) Discuss the Marxian theory of
class conflict. (2055)
2.) Discuss the historical materialism
of Karl Marx. (2055)
3.) Discuss the contributions made by
Karl Marx in sociology. (2056)
4.) Write an essay on dialectical materialism of
Karl Marx. (2058)
5.) Critically evaluate the merits and
demerits of Marxism. (2058)
6.) What do you understand by
historical materialism? (2060)
7.) Distinguish between functionalism
and conflict theories. (2060)
8.) What do you understand conflict
theory in sociology? Identify the key assumptions and variants of this theory.
(2061)
9.) Critically assess Karl Marx’s
contributions to sociological theory? (2062)
10.)
Write
short notes on:
a. Variants of conflict theory (2062)
CHAPTER SIX
Conflict Theory
Introduction
Each members of a society have their own
and separate interests. They are trying to satisfy their separate individual
interests. In this process, social conflicts are appeared. Conflict arises due
to the limited and scarce availability of resources, means or opportunities. As
long as the history of cooperation and accommodation in human society is, so
long is the history of tussle, war or conflicts. Marx has said even that the
history of hitherto existing society is the history of class struggle.
Conflict is such a process in which an
individual or group uses force to dominate or sometimes even destroy the other
individual or group and attempts to gain its goal or interests. Elements like
hatred, anger, violence and cruelty ate also associated with the process of
conflict. Conflict is a natural or usual concept since even an organism makes
its struggle against the nature and against his competitors to live and
continue its existence and survival.
Conflict in society is a deliberate and
conscious process. In this process, a group attempts to destroy or defeat
another group in competition. Conflict also occurs between nations, between
peoples of different religion or race, between riches and poor and between
rulers and ruled.
The theory which considers the process
of conflict indispensable and usual in society and regard conflict as an
important and basic element for social change is called conflict theory. In
other words, conflict theory is the theory which gives more emphasis on
conflict in society.
Characteristics of Conflict
(1.) Conscious Action
Conflict is a conscious and deliberate
action. In conflict, the competitors try to defeat each other consciously. One
group in a conflict knows well the capacity and means of another group.
Conflict is not a spontaneous action.
(2.) Personal Activity
Conflict is waged to defeat the
antagonist and not to achieve any particular goal. The chief aim of conflict is
to cause harm or severe loss to the antagonist.
(3.) Intermittent Action
Conflict is not a continuous action. It
lacks continuity or it occurs intermittently. After the occurrence of a
conflict, either one defeats the other or the two make accommodation or
compromise with each other. No society can sustain itself in a state of continuous
conflict.
(4.) Universal
Conflict is found in each and every part
of the human society. Conflict or clash of interests is universal in nature. In
some societies conflict may be very acute and vigorous while in some others it
may be very mild. But it is present in almost all the societies.
Context of Conflict Theory
(1.) Intellectual Context
Although conflict is systematically
analyzed and studied later, it's concept dates back to the ancient time. The
philosophers like Socrates, Plato, Kautilya, Hobbs Darwin
(2.)
Historical Context
The historical series of war and battles
in the world persuaded the thinkers and scholars to think that the process of
conflict is usual, natural and unavoidable process in human society. They
attempted to understand, interpret and analyze this process which led to the
development of conflict theory.
(3.) Social Context
Industrial Revolution, rise and
development of capitalism, miserable condition of the workers, exploitation and
inequality in the society created such a situation that struggle was necessary
to get rid of such situation. Exploitation and domination necessitated
conflict. A theory to define conflict was considered necessary at that time.
(4.) Contribution of Charles Darwin
Charles Darwin published his book Origin of Species in 1859. He explained
about the natural process of struggle for existence and selection of the
fittest. An organism which defeats its competitors can survive and the one
which can not defeat others cannot survive. Herbert Spencer was influenced by
this theory of natural selection. He made an analogy of human society with an
organism. He also said that only those people can survive in society who can
defeat others. Hence Darwin
(5.) Weakness in Functionalism
The functionalist theory has explained
the society with only the functions of its elements and has emphasized only on the
stability of society. It has ignored the indispensable process of conflict in
society. The criticism of functionalism played an important role in giving
birth to conflict theory.
(6.) Feurabach’s Theory
Feurabach was a materialist thinker. He
said that God did not create the Man but the Man created the God. This concept
of him changed the contemporary belief of people regarding the God. Materialist
analysis was spread at that time’s society. This also helped in the emergence
of conflict theory.
(7.) Influence of Positivism
Positivism is a doctrine formulated by
Auguste Compte. This doctrine asserts that the only true knowledge is
scientific knowledge. This doctrine was in favor of positive knowledge based on
systematic observation and experiment. Compte’s positivism has also influenced
to grow the theories of conflict.
Key Assumptions of Conflict Theory
(1.) Society is Not a System of Equilibrium
The main assumption of this theory is
that the society is never in a state of stability or equilibrium. Social conflict
is the inherent process of social structure. A social system is composed of
various antagonistic parts. The continuous conflict between these parts makes
the social system dynamic.
(2.) Society is a Stage Populated with Living,
Struggling and Competing Actors
A social system is an interrelationship
of the individuals with various interests, desires and goals. Each and every
individual there are waging struggle against their competitors for their
existence and dominance over others. Hence, according to this theory, society
is a stage of conflict where different antagonistic roles with their own
interests are played.
(3.) Conflict is Essential Law for Social
Development
There is an incessant conflict between the antagonistic elements within
a society which is responsible and essential for the social change. Conflict
theorists believe in incessant change as against the functionalists according
to whom, change is a deviation form the normal condition of society. Therefore
conflict theory seeks to explain factors involved in the perpetual process of
social change.
(4.) Conflict Cannot be Abolished
Dehrendorf stresses the underlying
assumption that conflict can be temporarily suppressed, regulated, channeled ,
and controlled but that neither a philosopher, king nor a modern dictator can
abolish it once or for all. He rejects the notion of conflict resolution on the
ground that it deals with causes rather than expressions of social conflict.
(5.) Social
Conflict May be Both Latent or Manifest
Conflict is occurring continuously in a social system and it appears
manifest sometimes or remains latent sometimes. Social conflict is not always
violent. It is inherent in the social structure. It may be manifest or
controlled or uncontrolled, violent or non-violent, disintegrative or
integrative, explicit or implicit, such different types of conflicts are always
happening between interest groups in a social structure.
(6.) Conflict
is Rooted in Social Structure
The conflict theorists maintain that conflict is as much rooted in
social structure as consensus. A society is dynamic due to the conflict among
its structural parts. Welfare and interests are rooted to the each individuals
groups of a society. They are always making conflict to satisfy their own
interests.
(7.) Conflict
is Not a Continuous Process
Conflict never takes place continuously.
It takes place occasionally and intermittently. No society can sustain itself
in a state of continuous conflict. Conflict needs some causes which may not
always appear in a society.
Variants of Conflict Theory
While talking about conflict theory one
immediately cites Karl Marx as its
major proponent but there are other sociologists
also who opined about the role of constructive conflict in society. The
following are such schools of conflict theories:
(1.) The Frankfurt School
(2.) The New or Radical Sociology
(3.) Dehrendorf and Dialectic Sociology
(4.) Conflict Functionalism of Coser
(5.) Analytical Conflict Theory
(6.) Formal Conflict Theory
Karl Marx (1818-1883)
Introduction
Karl Marx was an economist, a philosopher
and a revolutionary thinker of the nineteenth century. He was born in Trier Germany June 5, 1818 . He studied
philosophy and law in the universities of Bonn Berlin London London
Major
Works
(1.) The German Ideology
(2.) The Communist Manifesto
(3.) Capital
(4.) The Poverty of Philosophy
(5.) Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy
(6.) The Gotha
Historical
Materialism
Historical materialism is an important
principle of Marx to interpret the society and the history. With this theory
Marx has explained and analyzed the historic, social and economic changes in an
objective way. He argued that the historical incidents and changes should not
be interpreted in idealistic explanations but they should be interpreted by the
explanations of the natural characteristics of matter and production process.
A man needs food, shelter and clothes and
other physical materials for his existence and survival. To gain these needs, a
man always remains active and working. He uses his labor upon the resources
available from nature to produce these goods. In the process of production, he
obtains production experiences and labor skills. He can not produce and consume
these goods alone and hence makes relationship of one or other type with other
people. This relationship based on mutual co-operation and interdependence
maintains production relation with other people. This production relationship
also determines the form of production.
With the continuous progress of labor and
production, there occur changes in production technology and production
relationships. The change in production relationship creates the great impact
on the whole social system, political system, thought and philosophy and
political institutions. The great upheaval in the form of production determines
the changing way of history. Hence, according to Marx, the actual history of
the world is not the history of the kings and lords, but the history of the
serial changes occurred in the forms of the production. The creators of the
historical changes are not the kings and lords, but the working class people.
He argued that the bases of historical changes should be sought in materialistic
interpretation of labor and production efforts and not in the idealistic way of
human thought. He attempted to find the general rules of the historical changes
occurred and occurring all over the world in a materialistic way.
According to Marx, production of goods is
the basic, primary and crucial process which determines the historical epochs.
Hence the creation of history is always in the hands of general working class
people. Marx's historical materialism has divided the whole history of human society
into the following six stages:
(1.) Primitive Communism
(2.) Slavery Society
(3.) Feudal Society
(4.) Capitalistic Society
(5.) Socialist Society
(6.) Communist Society
(1.)
Primitive Communism
This is the first human society in history. In this
stage all the means of production are under the control of the community. They
worked collectively and jointly upon these collective means of production.
There was no system of private ownership of society. The society was classless
and there was no exploitation.
(2.)
Slavery Society
The private ownership system replaced the system of
collective ownership in this stage. There were two classes- slaves and lords-
appeared for the first time in human history. The lords owned all the means of
production and lands and even all the slaves. Agriculture, animal farming and
the use of metals were the basic production processes in this society. The two
antagonistic classes- slaves and lords- were always in conflict in this
society.
(3.)
Feudal Society
The class struggle between lords and slaves gave rise
to the establishments of feudal society in which there were two classes- serf
and feudal. The feudal owned most of the lands to be used for farming. The
serfs were free as compared to the slaves but they had to work hard in the
farms owned by feudal. In this society again, the two classes- serfs and
feudal- are always in class struggles.
(4.)
Capitalistic Society
The capitalistic society is the outcome of the class
struggle between serfs and feudal. Great factories and industries were
developed in this stage. In this stage, there were two classes of people-
proletariat, who used their labor for their livelihood and bourgeoisie, who
owned the means of production. The bourgeoisie uses the labor of the
proletarians to produce goods. This society provides more freedom to the people
as compared to the feudal society. The bourgeois become richer day by day and
proletarians become poorer and poorer. This condition creates a great class
struggle between the two classes.
(5.)
Socialist Society
Due to the development of class consciousness in the
proletarians, they are ready to topple the regime of the capitalists and after
this class war they establish a socialist society. In this society, all the
means of production are owned collectively by the working class themselves.
They establish the dictatorship of proletariats. This stage is the transition
between a capitalistic society and a communist society.
(6.)
Communist Society
This society is the last stage of world history. This
stage is classless and stateless. The means of production are owned by the
society. Distributions of goods are according to the need of the people.
In this way Marx
argued that human history is created by the changes in the form of production.
This is the historical materialism or the materialistic interpretation of history
of Karl Marx. In his explanation, matter is the basic thing to determine
everything rather than thought or idea.
Dialectical
Materialism
Dialectical materialism is the main philosophy of
Marxism. This theory considers that matter is the main basis of this world. Due
to its internal characteristics the matter changes into various forms. This
process of development is continuous and universal. This theory of Marx
explains that changes and development process of matter in nature.
Marx asserted that between matter and mind the matter
is primary and the mind or idea is the secondary. Mind or idea is just the
reflection of the matter. According to Marx, matter is not a product of mind;
on the contrary mind is simply the most advanced product of the matter. It is
possible to separate the thought from the reality of the matter. Mind or idea
cannot create matter since the idea is born in mind and mind itself is the
product of matter.
The following three are the laws of Marx’s dialectical
materialism:
(1.) The Law of the Unity and Struggle of Opposites
(2.) The Law of the Passage of Quantitative into
Qualitative Changes
(3.) The Law of the Negation of the Negation
(1.)
The Law of
the Unity and Struggle of Opposite
According
to this law, there are always two opposite elements inside a matter which are
in unity as well as in conflict. Hence, it is right to be two opposite
antagonistic forces in society, state, economy and everything else in the
world. A conflict is always occurring between the two, which keeps the whole
alive and active.
(2.)
The Law of
the Passage of Quantitative into Qualitative Changes
As
a result of the continuous struggle between two opposite forces within a matter
or society, there always takes place quantitative changes. After passing
sufficient quantitative changes it leaps into a qualitative change. We may give
an example of boiling water starts, heating from 0˚ Celsius, its temperature
goes on increasing. This is a quantitative change. When the temperature of
water reaches 100˚ Celsius, the water changes into vapor. This is a qualitative
change. This kind of changes where qualitative changes take place after a long
series of quantitative changes is the second law of dialectical materialism.
(3.)
The Law of
the Negation of the Negation
After
the qualitative change, the new stage of development is always better, higher
and more advanced than the previous stage. The new stage replaces the old one.
Slavery stage was replaced by feudal society. Feudal stage was also replaced
the capitalistic society. This each new and qualitatively higher and developed
stage always replaces the previous older stage of matter and society. This is
the law of the negation of the negation. This process takes place for ever
without any interruption and returning back. For example, when a seed is
planted in soil, it changes into a bud. This bud grows to a tree. Thee tree
gives fruits. The tree one day wilts. This is a process of negation of
negation.
In this way Marx put forward a
generalized natural law for explaining the change process occurring in nature
through his dialectical materialism. Marx had taken the dialectical concept
from Hegel. According to Hegel, there are three levels of any logical process:
thesis, antithesis and synthesis. According to him, any idea or concept gives
birth to its opposite idea and there takes place contradiction these ideals. As
a result of this contradiction, a new idea is created with proper adjustment of
these two ideas. According to Hegel, change and development take place because
of idea, spirit and universal spirit. He gave more importance to idea rather
than matter. Marx refuted to this concept of Hegel and developed the theory of
dialectical materialism. Marx used the dialectics of Hegel and materialism of
Feurbach to propound his dialectical materialism. Hegel’s dialectics was
without materialism and Feurabach’s materialism was without dialectics. Marx’s
new theory caused a great change in the spiritual thought of that time.
Theory of class struggle
According to Marx, there are always two
antagonistic classes in a society- the exploited class and the exploiter class.
When the exploitation becomes intolerable to the exploited people there always
occur class struggle between the two. In Communist
Manifesto, Marx and Engels have written:
The history of all hitherto
existing society is the history of class struggle. Freeman and slave, patrician
and plebian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor
and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an
uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either
in a revolutionary re-constitution of society at large, or in the common ruin
of the contending classes.
Marx has divided the class struggle in
different stages. In the first there was a primitive communism where there were
no classes and neither was there any class struggle. All the means of
production were owned collectively and there was equality in distribution. The second society was the slavery stage. In
this stage the masters of the slaves were the exploiters and the slaves were
the exploited. There was class struggle of these two classes which led to the
transformation into feudal society. In feudal society, the means of production
was owned by the feudal. They belonged to the exploiter class and the
agricultural laborers were the exploited class. There was also class struggle
between these two classes. This class struggle made the society to transform
into capitalistic society. The capitalistic society is also not free from
conflict. There are two antagonistic classes: the bourgeoisie and the proletariats.
The bourgeoisies are the exploited or the ruler class and the proletariats are
the exploited or the ruled class. In this society all the means of production
are owned by the capitalists and they also have the right over the goods
produced. The proletariats of the workers are impelled to live on their labor.
They own nothing except their labor. There occurs contradiction between these
two classes and this creates a class struggle. According to Marx, the bourgeois
class is ultimately defeated by the proletariat class and the proletarians gain
their right over the means of production.
According to Marx, the main basis to
identify a society is the form of holding property. All the behaviors of any
individual are determined by his relationship with the property. Classes are
determined according to the relationship of a person with the means of
production. The line of demarcating class difference lies in the ownership of
property. The class consciousness and the clashes in the distribution system
give birth to the class struggle. In this way the continuously occurring
conflict between two antagonistic classes is called as class struggle.
Criticism of Marxism
(2.) According to
Marx, polarization of the two antagonistic classes-proletariat and bourgeois-
takes place in capitalism and a vigorous class struggle always occurs there.
However, he ignored the existence of strong, middle class which is responsible
for enduring capitalist system.
(3.) According to
Marx, the change in social structure always takes place through a violent
struggle. However, in modern capitalist societies the organized labor is able
to bring changes to the power balance to their favor without such struggle.
(4.) The theory of
surplus value is also full of errors and weaknesses. If the surplus value is
only the source of profit, there is no way to get rid of the exploitation and
profit collection in the world. Even the socialist countries are also making
profit from their industries and factories.
(5.) Marx has given
importance to the economic basis more than required and ignored any other
sources of power.
(6.) Marx's
prediction of the demolition of the capitalist system has been proved to be
wrong since there are no any sign of future class struggle in modern capitalist
countries.
(7.) Not only
struggle and conflict always take place in capitalist societies. Cooperation,
accommodation, assistance, love, unity etc. are also taking place there. Marx
has ignored these aspects.
(8.) Class is formed
not only on the economic basis but also on racial, regional, political,
religious and other differences. Struggle also takes place in these classes.
Marx has totally ignored this part of society.
(9.) It was wrong
prediction of Marx that the proletariat class ultimately wins in the class
struggle against the bourgeois class.
(10.) The capitalism
explained by Marx is that he had seen throughout his life time only. His
explanation about capitalism does not fit the modern world. There is no such
exploitation and severe condition of the workers in modern capitalist societies
as had been explained by Marx.
(11.) According to the prediction of Marx, the socialist
societies should have leapt forward towards communism but in reality they are
found to go back to capitalist societies instead.
(12.) The society is not just the reflection of the
ownership of property and economic organization.
(13.) It is wrong to predict that the individuals with
common interests necessarily polarize in a class.
(14.) The power struggle in society is not always aimed by
the ownership of property.
Importance or Implications of Marxism
(1.) Marxism has provided an objective and a scientific
tool to study, research and explain the universe, world, nature and society in
place of old spiritual, idealistic concept.
(2.) Marxism provides revolutionary guidance to the
salvation from exploitation in society.
(3.) It helps to remove harassment and status quo thought
and provides clear concept for change, development and progress.
(4.) It helps to understand the class structure and the
root causes of the problems of any society.
(5.) It helps to check the potential revolution or struggle
in a society so that reformative measures can be implemented to satisfy the
downtrodden class.
Critique of Conflict Theory
We have already discussed most of the critiques of
this theory in the criticism of Marxism. We can add the following to them:
(2.) The conflict theorists consider the conflict as the
main basis for progress but the main basis of progress is co-operation, not
conflict.
(3.) Not all the classes in society are antagonistic to
each other. They may be cooperative and helpful to each other as well.
(4.) Conflict theorists think that conflict is the only
means for social change but thee are also other means of social change.
(5.) Not always the outcomes of conflict are beneficial but
in most cases they are harmful or destructive to the society also.
(6.) Studies made in conflict theory are based on
historical data only and they lack empirical data.
Implications of Conflict Theory
(1.) With the help of conflict theory, it is easy to study
the dynamic aspect of society and to explain the process of social change.
(2.) It helps to fond out the root cause of the potential
or existing conflict in society and also helps in conflict management.
(3.) This theory encourages the downtrodden and exploited
people to be conglomerated for struggle.
(4.) This theory has clarified that the carriers of the
change in social structure are the exploited peoples themselves.
(5.) This theory has shown the way of removing injustice,
tyranny and exploitation through the process of planned struggle.
(6.) This theory is effective in criticizing the
exploitation and other ill aspects of capitalistic society.
TU Questions
1.) Discuss the Marxian theory of class
conflict. (2055)
2.)Discuss the historical materialism of
Karl Marx. (2055)
3.)Discuss the contributions made by Karl
Marx in sociology. (2056)
4.) Write an essay on dialectical materialism of
Karl Marx. (2058)
5.) Critically evaluate the merits and
demerits of Marxism. (2058)
6.) What do you understand by historical
materialism? (2060)
7.) Distinguish between functionalism and
conflict theories. (2060)
8.) What do you understand conflict theory
in sociology? Identify the key assumptions and variants of this theory. (2061)
9.) Critically assess Karl Marx’s
contributions to sociological theory? (2062)
10.)
Write
short notes on:
a. Variants of conflict theory (2062)
CHAPTER SEVEN
Some Miscellaneous Topics
Acculturation
Acculturation is the process in which cultural change
takes place due to the long and continuous contact between two societies. Due
to acculturation process, some of the cultural traits of a society are lost and
at the same time some of the cultural traits of another society are received by
the former society. We may take some examples of acculturation in our society
such as Brahmins begin to drink liquor and to eat chicken meat. People of Rai
and Limboo tribes perform Sathyanarayan Pooja in their home. If two societies
are in direct contact for a long time, acculturation takes place.
Definitions
(1.) Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia
Acculturation is the process by which continuous
contact between two or more distinct societies causes cultural change.
(2.) Columbia
Acculturation is culture changes resulting from
contact among various societies over time.
(3.) John Lewis
Acculturation is the process by which culture is
transmitted through contact of group with different culture usually one having
a more highly developed civilization.
Characteristics of Acculturation
(1.) Acculturation
is a process of receiving or leaving culture by a group from another group.
(2.) A continuous and long contact between two societies
is required to occur acculturation.
(3.) The culture of the receiver society does not
totally vanish due to acculturation but a little or more of it changes.
(4.) Acculturation may take place voluntarily or by
pressure. The Nepalese communities in Bhutan
(5.) Acculturation is the process of culture
diffusion.
(6.) Acculturation takes place only when the cultural
traits of the second group are acceptable by the first one. Hindu people do not
accept beef however long they may have contact with Islam of Christian
societies.
Cultural Lag
Cultural lag is a problem created when different parts
of a culture have different rates of change and one part with slower pace is not
able to catch up with the one with faster rate. The concept of cultural lag was
first used and explained by William Fielding Ogburn. Later other sociologists
like Sumner, Muller, Lyer, Wallas and Spencer also wrote about it. The concept
of cultural lag suggests that there is a gap between the technical development
of a society and its moral and legal institutions to keep pace with the
technical development may create social conflict and problems. Cultural lag is
created when the social institutions fail to keep pace with technological
change.
The various parts of modern culture are not changing
at the same rate. Some parts are changing more rapidly whereas some others are
fallen behind in such change. The rapid change in one part requires
readjustments to other changes since the various parts of a culture are
interrelated and interdependent to each other.
Ogburn has made distinction between material and
non-material culture. Material culture includes man-made things like tools,
utensils, machines, dwellings, transportation and other goods of human
consumption. By non-material culture Ogburn means religion, family, government
and education. According to him, the non-material culture is slower to keep up
with the rapid inventions and innovations of material culture. When
mom-material culture is not able to adjust itself readily to the material
changes it falls behind the material culture. As a result a lag between the two
is appeared, which is called cultural lag.
Material cultures make rapid changes due to modern
technological inventions, whereas ideological system, old beliefs and social
organization remain the same or have slower changes. This is the main reason
for creating cultural lag. One example of cultural lag in our society is the
relation of health facilities and family planning. In the past people had to
fight against natural disasters and diseases and less people were able to
survive. The nature kept the population in balance. However, due to the
inventions and availability of medical treatments, the more people are able to
survive and there occurred the problem of increased population in society. At
the same time, the people of old ideological belief are not able to follow
family planning. This has been creating a cultural lag in our society.
Democratic system of government was formed in our
country and even the democratic constitution was made. But the feudal and
autocratic culture in society and in the political leaders remained unchanged.
In spite of industrialization and urbanization in some parts, the old joint
family system which was suited to agriculture-based economy has not been
changed instantly. People have changed their methods of cultivating the soil,
but not the methods of owning the land.
According to Bidya Bhushan and Sachdeva, the cause of
cultural lag is that the various elements of culture possess varying degrees of
changeability. The material culture changes ore rapidly than non-material
culture. But cultural lag is also due to man’s psychological dogmation. Man is
given to traditions. He is wedded to certain ideologies regarding sex,
education and religion. On account of his dogmation and ideologies he is not
prepared to change his institutions. The failure to adapt the social
institutions to the changes in the material culture leads to cultural lag.
Ogburn introduced the term cultural lag noting that an
invention directly affecting one aspect of culture may require adjustments in
other cultural areas. He used this term to describe the delays in adjustment to
invention. Although lags are generally imperceptible over long periods of
history, they may be so acute at a given moment as to threaten the complete
disintegration of society. For example, a major innovation in industrial
processes may disrupt economics, government, and the social philosophy of a
nation. In time, a new equilibrium will be established out of these
disruptions.
Culture Core
Julian Steward defines the culture core as the
features of a society that are the most closely related to subsistence
activities and economic arrangements. Furthermore, the core includes political,
religious, and social patterns that are connected to (or in relationship with)
such arrangements.
Julian Steward has opined that the technologies used
by man for his subsistence or livelihood are always suitable and adaptable to
his surrounding environment. In other words, the use of technology varies with
the ecosystem. Hence culture core should be analyzed for analyzing cultural
relationships of man. According to Steward the culture core is linked with the
economic aspect of man. Those cultural traits which are closely related with
subsistence and economic arrangements are culture cores. Political, religious
and social aspects are also included in culture core.
Those cultural features which are not directly related
with culture core undergo more changes. Steward has names these features as
secondary features. These secondary features are determined by historical and
cultural activities. These kinds of features can be invented suddenly or
obtained from diffusion. These secondary features determine the external
features of any culture. That is why cultures look different from outside even
though their cores are similar and same.
Another cultural ecologist who used the term culture
core is James N. Anderson. According to him each community and human group has
basic cultural features which are closely interrelated with economic activity
and subsistence of that locality. This kind of culture is mostly related with
nature. This culture core gives birth to the secondary features like religion,
knowledge, belief, tradition, values and norms. Each culture has it own core
feature. This gives the cultural identification of that society.
In a nutshell, we can conclude that those cultural
features of a society which are closely and directly related with the
technology of subsistence and economic arrangements are called culture core.
Other cultural features beyond the culture core are called secondary features
of that culture. Culture core represents the permanent and long lasting
features of any culture.
Difference between Anthropology and Sociology
In the modern age, anthropology and sociology have
developed so much that to know their differences is more necessary to know
relations. They differ from each other in certain respects. The main
differences between these two sciences can be summarized as given below:
(1.)
Difference in
Scope
The scope of sociology and social anthropology is
different. Sociology studies the modern, civilized and complex societies
whereas anthropology concerns itself with the simple, uncivilized and
non-literate societies. Social anthropology studies all the social, economic,
political and cultural sides. Sociology studies the social relations and social
interactions. In this way, the study of sociology is more particular and that
of anthropology more general.
(2.)
Difference in
Object
Sociologist also suggests means for improvement along
with his study. But anthropologists are more neutral and they do not offer any
suggestions. Sociologists study small as well as large societies.
Anthropologists usually concentrate on small societies such as Sherpa, Jirel,
Raute, Bankaria etc.
(3.)
Difference in
Methods of Study
The methods of
study of sociology and social anthropology are different. Social anthropology specially
uses applied method. One method of this kind is participant observation
according to which, anthropologist himself goes to live in that society which
has to study. On the other hand, the chief methods of sociology depend on
survey and statistics. They use observation, interview, social survey,
questionnaires and other methods and techniques in its studies.
(4.)
Difference in
Viewpoints
Sociological viewpoint is different from
anthropological viewpoint. One is particular and the other is general. One is
the viewpoint of a specialist and the other viewpoint is of scientist. One is
actuated by a desire to improve and the other is neutral.
(5.)
Nature of Study
Sociologists usually study parts of a society and
generally specialize in institutions like family, marriage, social change etc
of that society. Anthropologists attempt to study their aspects as wholes. They
concentrate their studies in a given culture area.
Sociology and social anthropology and their decisions
can be of important help for the human well being. For example, they help
uprooting the dangerous elements like racialism and color discriminations. They
can create a sense of tolerance towards the members of other societies,
institutions and cultures and they can also help in understanding and solving
social, economic and political problems. For example, anthropological study
will be of great help in finding out means for the welfare of different tribes
and primitive societies in Nepal
Environmental Determinism
Environmental determinism is the view that the
physical environment, rather than social conditions, determines culture. Those
who believe this theory say that environment plays an important role in
determining the origin, progress, change and development of culture. According
to this concept, the physical environment plays a role of prime mover in human
activities. This concept has defined personality, morality, politics, religion,
material culture, physique etc. all according to the environmental factors. Any
cultures need the assistance of physical environment for its existence and
survival. Environment also plays major role in determining and constructing the
structure of human and social activities. Environment is everything that
determines the fate of culture and hence is considered as on the driver’s seat.
According to this concept, specific characteristics in
a society are grown due to the local environment. The main proponents of this
theory are Thomas Griffith Taylor and Ellsworth Huntington. The human juice
theory of Hippocrates was still popular until the 19th century,
according to which there are yellow bile, black bile, phlegm and blood in human
body. The content and proportion of these four elements determine the physical
and hygienic condition of man and his personality. The environment determines
the content of the four elements. According to him, for this reason, the people
in hot climate region are lustful, violent, short aged, tall and light in
weight.
Similarly Plato and Aristotle opined that the form of
government also depends upon the environment of a locality. According to them,
the countries in moderate climate have democratic, in hot climate have
autocratic and in cold climate have unstable form of government.
The eighteenth century philosopher Montesquieu claimed
that the religion of a society also depends upon the environment. According to
him, regions with hot climate have peaceful religion like Buddhism, with cold
climate have active religion lie Christianity.
Charles Darwin also reinforced the concept of
environmental determinism in his famous book Origin of Species. According to him, the tradition which is
favorable and adaptable to the environment is selected by the nature and the
nature itself destroys the unfavorable and non-adjustable tradition.
However the implication of this concept has been found
to be outdated after the 19th and 20th century because
these concepts are not able to be verified entirely. Modern scholars have
largely dismissed this view as racist and overly simplistic. The new concept of
environmental possibilism displaced this concept in the 1930s.
Ethnocentrism
Meaning
Ethnocentrism can be defined as making false
assumptions about ways based on one’s own limited experience. It is the way of
thinking one’s own group’s ways are superior to other’s or judging other groups
as inferior to one’s own. ‘Ethnic’
refers to cultural heritage and ‘centrism’
refers to the central starting point. In this way ethnocentrism refers to the
central starting point. In this way ethnocentrism basically refers to judging other
groups from one’s own cultural point of view.
Ethnocentrism is the tendency to judge the customs of
other societies by the standards of one’s own ethnographic present. This term
is first coined by William Graham Sumner. Some examples of ethnocentrism are
Afrocentrism, Americentrism, Anglocentrism, Germanocentrism, Eurocentrism etc.
British drivers say that someone is driving on the
wrong side when one is driving on left hand side. They would have said it
opposite side or left hand side in spite of ‘wrong’ side. It is their
ethnocentric view.
In this way, ethnocentrism means mostly two things:
(1.) Thinking that one’s group is superior to other’s, and
(2.) Judging other group’s behavior by one’s values and
norms.
Definitions
(1.) Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary
Ethnocentrism is the assumption based on the ideas and
beliefs of one particular culture and using these to judge other cultures.
(2.) Columbia
Ethnocentrism is the feeling that one’s group has a
mode of living, values, and patterns of adaptation that are superior to those
other groups.
(3.) Microsoft Encarta Dictionary
Ethnocentrism is a belief in or assumption of the
superiority of one’s own social or cultural group.
(4.) Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ethnocentrism is the viewpoint that one’s ethnic group
is the centre of everything, against which all other groups are judged.
(5.) Makhan Jha
Ethnocentrism refers to the tendency to use the norms
and values of one’s own culture or subculture as a basis for judging others.
The concept of ethnocentrism is often contrasted with that of cultural
relativism- the perception that norms and values of each culture have their own
validity and cannot be used as a standard for evaluating other cultures.
Characteristic of Ethnocentrism
(1.) It is a Way of Judging Others
Ethnocentrism is the way one judges the behavior of
other groups based on one's own limited experience and values. Ethnocentrism
leads to misunderstanding others. We falsely distort what is meaningful and
functional to other peoples through our own tinted glass.
(2.) It is Unconsciously Made
Ethnocentrism is not made consciously. Everyone says
that he is not ethnocentric, he is liberal to other groups, he is judging
others rightly, but we do not understand. We are not aware that they have
different experience about life and our experiences are not sufficient to understand them.
(3.) It Causes Hatred towards Others
Ethnocentrism causes hatred or contempt towards other
groups. It creates contempt for members of other groups. Ethnocentrism makes
one think superior to others and it creates hostility with them. Violence,
discrimination, procetelysing, and verbal aggressiveness are other means
whereby ethnocentrism may be expressed. There are extreme forms of
ethnocentrism that pose serious problems such as racism, colonialism, and
ethnic cleansing. These views are generally condemned by the world community,
but we regularly see such cases in the news.
(1.) It Cannot Be Avoided Completely
By the development of communication and education,
ethnocentric views are being reduced in the present world. Everyone is learning
the customs and traditions of other groups also. However, we cannot be
completely free from ethnocentrism at a time, because we cannot gain the life
experience of all the groups of the world at a single time. Our experiences are
always less and limited in the global context.
(2.) It is Based on One’s Experience
Ethnocentrism is based on the life experiment of one’s
own group. By ethnocentrism we see others ways in terms of our own life
experience, not their context. We do not understand that their ways have their
own meanings and functions in life, just our ways have for us.
Exchange Theory
In social exchange theory social relationships are
primarily viewed as exchanges of goods and services among persons. I this
theory people are considered to be hedonistic and they try to maximize rewards
and minimize costs. This theory assumes freedom of choice and situations that
require decision making. This theory is a social psychological perspective. It
explains social change and stability as a process of negotiated exchanges
between parties. Social exchange theory considers that all human relationships
are formed by the use of a subjective cost-benefit analysis and the comparison
of alternatives. For example, when a person considers the costs of relationship
as outweighing the perceived benefits, then the theory predicts that the person
will choose to leave the relationship.
This theory assumes that individuals are always
seeking to maximize rewards from their interactions with others. This theory
views society as an open market of social interactions where people have
choices to get more profit with less cost. The following are the four basic
postulates or concepts of this theory:
(1.) Reward
(2.) Cost
(3.) Outcome
(4.) Comparison Level
(1.) Reward
Reward is happiness, peace, satisfaction and benefit.
Material benefit and mental satisfaction both are included in this term. Reward
means such an activity which a person achieves with the other.
(2.) Cost
Cost means labor, tiredness, fear or loss etc. It is
basically a punishment. Such action or behavior which causes tiredness of worry
as a punishment is cost. When a person thinks that he has more reward and less
cost then he is attracted to do such behavior. On the other hand, if he thinks
the cost is more than the reward, he is not attracted to perform such action.
(3.) Outcome
If the cost is deducted from the reward, whatever
obtained is called as outcome. If the reward is comparatively more than the
cost, the outcome is called positive outcome. If the reward is comparatively
less than the cost, the outcome is called negative outcome.
(4.) Comparison Level
Comparison level is the level of expectations of
benefit from an individual with the interaction with the other. In general, an
individual is attracted to perform an action when there is a positive outcome.
But it is not always right. The attraction also depends upon individual’s
choice.
The following are the variants of exchange theory:
(3.) George Homans : exchange behaviouralism
(4.) Peter Blau : structural exchange theory
(5.) Michael Hechter : rational choice theory
The critiques of exchange theory say that this theory
is not able to explain deep and romantic passionate love in which the cost is
more than the reward. This theory considers the cost-benefit analysis of the
first individual or party only but it is not able to explain the other
individual or party’s preference and choice. Hence this theory is considered to
be one sided.
Functions and Dysfunctions
The
concepts of social functions and dysfunctions are essentially related to the
functional theory. Robert K. Merton has drawn our attention to the fact that
not all elements in the social system are functional at all limes. On occasion
some element may actually disrupt the social equilibrium and may therefore be
dysfunctional.
Harry
M. Johnson has explained,” Any partial structure- a type of sub-group, or a
role, or a social norm or a cultural value- is said to have a function if it
contributes to the fulfillment of one or more of the social needs of a social
system;- any partial structure is said to have a dysfunction if it hinders the
fulfillment of one or more of these needs.
According
to Collin’s Dictionary of Sociology "a dysfunction or disfunction is any
social activity seen as making a negative contribution to the maintenance or
effective working of a functioning social system".
According
to Merton dysfunctions are those observed consequences which lessen the
adaptation or adjustment of the system.
The
elements of social system advance in various directions. In the fist place
their action creates such results which strengthen the social system and make
it more adjustable to other elements. This activity is known as function.
On
the other hand if the activity of the elements creates a situation which leads
to disintegration of the social system and regards the possibilities of
adjustments it is known as dysfunction.
According
to some scholars functions are those activities which help in maintaining
social organization while those activities which lead to social disorganization
are known as dysfunctions. Functions are those activities which help in the
maintenance of system and organization is society. On the other hand
dysfunctions are those activities which are injurious to social system and
organization. Functions fulfill general needs and aims whereas dysfunctions are
injurious to general social interests. Functions represent those activities
which are sanctioned by society. Dysfunctions are those activities which are
anti-social and rejected by the society.
Sometimes,
an element, in the social order can be functional in one respect and
dysfunctional in another. Any industry in modern society, for example, has the
manifest function of providing the goods on which the way of life of the people
depends. But it has also the latent function of polluting the environment and
is therefore, dysfunctional in the sense. Thus every system has some function
as well as function.
Institution
Institution is the socially organized and accepted set
of procedures to fulfill men's basic needs. In general, people use the word
Institution as association or organization of a group of people assembled to do
certain work. In sociology, institution has a different and a more precise
meaning.
Marriage, religion and education are social institutions.
There is difference between association and institution. Institution is the
method of doing something which is socially accepted. When people form an
organization to fulfill certain objectives, they also make rules and methods to
run such organization. This way, rules and methods are called institution.
Definitions
(1.) Bogardus
A social institution is a structure of society that is
organized to meet the need of people chiefly through well established
procedures.
(2.) Ross
Social institutions are sets of organized human
relationships established or sanctioned by common will.
(2.) Horton and Hunt
An institution is an organized system of relationships
which embodies certain common rules and procedures and meets certain basic
needs of the society.
Characteristics of Institution
(1.) Social institutions are universal. Social
institutions are indispensable for the smooth functioning of a society.
(2.) Social institution is means to control individuals.
Family and school are social institutions as these teach individuals to control
their behavior.
(3.) Social institutions are relatively permanent. The
methods of marriage may change, marriage never ceases to exist.
(4.) Social institutions help to satisfy primary needs. The
primary needs of people such as childhood, biological needs etc. are fulfilled
through family and marriage life.
(5.) Social institutions have a certain symbol. For
example, vermillion and red clothes of married Hindu women, Trisool of Hindu temples, symbol of
Islamic mosque etc. certificates are symbols of universities. Cheques and
tokens are also symbols given by banks.
(6.) Social institutions have certain traditions or rules
which may be written or unwritten.
Latent and Manifest Functions
Robert K. Merton has made a distinction between
manifest functions and latent functions. According to Merton, manifest
functions are those that are intended and recognized; whereas latent functions
are unrecognized and unintended.
Manifest Functions
These are intended and recognized functions. These are
functions which people assume and expect the institutions to fulfill. Manifest
functions are those objective consequences, contributing to the adjustment or
adaptation of the system which are intended and recognized by participants in
the system. Therefore, this type of function is known to the society. Society
knows the consequences. Consequence is observable and is sanctioned by the
society. Manifest functions are those functions in a social system which are
intended and/or overtly recognized by the participants in that social system.
The following are some of the examples of manifest
functions:
1.)
An educational
institution educates the members of the society. So this part which an
educational institution is playing is known to the society and that is why
society has recognized the educational institution for this. This is the
manifest function of the educational institution.
2.)
Dashain
festival provides the opportunity to the younger members of our society to take
blessings and well wishes from the veteran members. This also provides
happiness, merriment by eating well things, wearing new clothes, swinging in pings and taking part in Dashain fairs etc. This is the manifest
function of dashain festival.
3.)
Economic
institutions are expected to produce and distribute goods and direst flow of
capital wherever it is needed.
4.)
Dating is
expedited to help the young men and women to find out their suitability for
marriage.
5.)
The welfare
system has the manifest function of preventing the poor from starving.
6.)
Incest taboos are
expected to prevent biological degeneration.
7.)
The rain dances
of Hopi Indians are intended to bring rains.
These
manifest functions are obvious, admitted and generally applauded.
Latent Functions
These are unrecognized and unintended functions. These
are unforeseen consequences of institutions. Latent functions are those
functions which are hidden and remain unacknowledged by the participants. The
following are some examples:
1)
Educational
institutions socialize the children. They provide mass entertainment and keep
the young out of employment market. This is its latent function.
2)
Dashain
festival makes the members of a family integrated and makes warm relationship
between older and younger generations. Social integration is the latent
function of Dashain festival.
3)
Economic
institutions not only produce and distribute goods, but also promote
technological, political and educational changes, and even philanthropy.
4)
Dating not only
selects marriage partners but also supports a large entertainment industry.
5)
The welfare
system not only protects the starving, but it also has the latent function of
preventing a civil disorder that might result if millions of people had no
source of income.
6)
Incest taboo has
the latent function of preventing conflicts within the family. Its another
latent function is it reinforces the sexual union between husband and wife.
7)
The rain dances
of the Hopi Indians have a latent function of increasing social interaction.
When they gather in a place outside their village and make fire and smoke, so
that they think the smoke become clouds and bring rain, this rain dances
provides them an opportunity to share their happiness and grief and make them
integrated. This makes their social relationship more intimate.
Participant Observation
Observation is the method of investigation in which the
investigator directly and carefully sees the social processes in the field.
Observation method is a method under which data from the field is collected
with the help of observation by the observer or by personally going to the
field. In observation the investigator must be present in the field and collect
relevant data of his study. This is the oldest method of study. An observer
goes to the field with some hypothesis which he has in mind and observes the
things for the time being with the background of the hypothesis.
Participant observation method
is one of the different methods of observation. In participant observation
method, the observer takes part in all the activities of the group whose
behavior is to be observed. This method is used when the observer can so
disguise himself as to be accepted as a member of the group under study. The
observer must identify himself, closely with the group. This method is mostly
used in anthropology. This participant observation may vary from complete
membership in the group to a part-time membership in the group. He may find a
role in the group which will not disturb the usual patterns of behavior. If the
members are unaware of the scientist's purpose, their behavior is least likely
to be affected. Thus, he may be able to record the natural behavior of the
group.
C. N. Shankar Rao, in his book Sociology:
Primary Principles, has given the following some examples of participant
observational studies:
(1.) William
Whyte (1943) took the role of a participant observer in an Italian slum
neighborhood of an American city, that is, Boston
(2.) Erving
Goffman (1961), an American social psychologist spent many months as an
observer in mental hospital. His description gives us an idea as to how the
organization of an asylum systematically depersonalizes the patients and may
even aggravate their problems.
(3.) Leo
Festinger (1966) and his associates wanted to study a very exclusive cult
whose members believed that the end of the world was to come on a certain
specified day. Festinger with his associates took part in its meetings by
pretending to be believers.
Psychic Unity of Mankind
The postulate of "the psychic unity of mankind"
states that all human beings, regardless of culture
or race, share the same basic psychological and cognitive
make-up and we are all of the same kind. This postulate was originally
formulated by Adolf Bastian,
the "father of German anthropology". He was a classical German
humanist and a cultural
relativist, who believed in the intrinsic value of cultural
variation. Franz Boas,
who is the "father of American anthropology" also followed this
postulate and transmitted it on to all of his students. Edward B. Tylor
introduced it to 19th century British evolutionist
anthropology.
Bastian formulated the "principle of the psychic
unity of mankind", which states that human kind is a single species, and
that cultures differ for social, rather than biological reasons. This principle
formed the foundation of comparative
anthropology, in 19th century evolutionism,
and later. The psychic unity of mankind is one of the key assumptions of
evolutionism. It believes that the mental capacity to think and discover of all
the people of the world is almost equal. That is why, we find similarity in
different cultures and civilizations of the world which were separately grown
and developed. People of different geographical location of the world discover
various tools for their use in the same way. The cultures at various places are
also similarly developed according to this concept. In similar environmental
and surrounding situation, all the people of the world can invent parallel.
Their cultural growth is also similar and equal.
Diffusionists believe that a handful of the persons of
the world have special mental capacity who can invent and develop new things.
Other people do not have such talent; they only know to imitate others.
According to diffusionist theory, only specific part of the world have
favorable environment to develop civilization and invent new cultures. The main
difference between evolutionism and diffusionism lies in this point.
Evolutionists claim that cultures are grown and developed all over the world in
parallel inventions. Each society has to pass through the evolutionary stages
of cultural development.
Adolf Bastian was interested in the study of
similarities between different types of people rather than their differences
and he attempted to explain these similarities by man's psychic unity. The
classical evolutionists believed that cultural similarities are due to similar
environments and parallel inventions. The thought and idea in similar
environments and situations are also similar. That is why we can see
similarities of inventions in different parts of world. The main charm of
evolutionism is that people find similar solution for similar problem in
similar circumstances. The mental level of all the peoples of the world is same
and similar. If they are subjected to similar challenges and in similar
situations, they find put similar methods of their solutions. This is because
their mind structure and psychic capacity is similar and equal. This is the main
assumption of the postulate of the psychic unity of mankind.
TU Questions
1.)
Write
short notes on the following:
a. Acculturation (2055)
b. Exchange theory (2056)
c. Institution (2056)
d. Ethnocentrism (2056)
e. Functions and Dysfunctions (2057)
f. Cultural lag (2058)
g. Participant observation (2058)
h. Manifest and latent functions (2058)
i.
Function
and dysfunction (2059)
j.
Ethnocentrism
(2059)
k. Distinction between
Anthropology/Sociology (2060)
l.
Holistic
concept (2060)
m. Environmental determinism (2061)
n. Use of Organic Analogy in sociology and
anthropology (2061)
o. Psychic Unity of Mankind (2061)
CHAPTER SEVEN
Thank you for all these explanation.It's so helpful.
ReplyDelete