Introducing Western Sociologists

Written and reviewed by Subhra Gupta, Humanities faculty at UniDrill (M.A. Sociology, University of Delhi · 7 years teaching Humanities). Based on NCERT Sociology Class XI (Understanding Society), Chapter 4.

Why did sociology begin in Europe, and why then?

Physics could begin anywhere there were falling apples. Sociology needed something stranger: a society that suddenly stopped looking natural. In the 18th and 19th centuries, kings were challenged, peasants became factory workers and cities swelled with strangers. People began asking whether society itself could be studied like any other subject. Sociology is sometimes called the child of the "age of revolution" for exactly this reason. This chapter introduces the three thinkers who built its foundations, Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim and Max Weber, after setting out the world they were responding to.

The context: three revolutions

Three processes created the conditions of modernity in Europe, and through contact with Europe, the rest of the world.

The textbook adds a caution about the Enlightenment: only those who could think and reason were considered fully human, and people in so called primitive societies were seen as less than fully evolved. This was a limitation of the thinking of that age.

Why industry gave birth to sociology. Modern governments took charge of health, sanitation, crime control and "development", which created demand for scientific information about society. That information became the basis for reflection on society itself. So sociology was called the "science of the new industrial society". It emerged partly as a response to this need.

Beyond the textbook. For the exam: sociology emerged from the Enlightenment, the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution, and Marx, Durkheim and Weber are its classical founders. In reality: these three were all European men writing about European industrial society, and the textbook itself notes that ideas about society are influenced by the social conditions in which they arise. Later sociologists, including the Indian sociologists in the next chapter, adapted and questioned these ideas for other settings. Why it matters: it explains why this chapter is about "Western" sociologists and why the next one is not.

Karl Marx (1818 to 1883): history as class struggle

Marx was a social thinker, not just a philosopher. His radical political views led to exile from Germany, France and Austria. He argued for an end to oppression and exploitation and believed in scientific socialism. He held that human society had progressed through primitive communism, slavery, feudalism and capitalism, and that capitalism would give way to socialism.

Mode of production. Marx's study of the economy rests on this idea: a broad system of production linked to a historical period, defining a whole way of life. He compared it to a building with a foundation and a structure on top.

Marx's claim runs against the common idea of his time that ideas shape the world: how people earn their livelihood determines how they think. Material life shapes ideas, not the other way round. He therefore placed great emphasis on the economy as the foundation of every social system.

Class and class struggle. Marx classified people by their position in the production process, not by religion, language or nationality. People in the same position, with the same relation to property, will eventually form a class and share interests, even if they do not recognise this at first. The capitalist mode of production creates the working class: serfs and small peasants were thrown off their lands, gathered in cities and, under pressure of law and police, worked in the new factories. This shared location makes them a class.

In The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels wrote that the history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggle. In each epoch, opposing classes stood in conflict, such as lord and serf. Under capitalism the bourgeoisie (capitalists) own the means of production, while workers own nothing and must sell their labour for wages.

Alienation. Marx argued that capitalist society is marked by a growing process of alienation at several levels.

Even so, Marx considered capitalism a necessary and progressive stage, because it created the preconditions for an egalitarian future free of exploitation and poverty. He expected the working class to unite and bring about a revolution establishing a free and equal socialist society.

Pause and predict: a factory worker and a landless farm labourer both own no property and live by wages. Does Marx place them in the same class?

Check your answer: In the textbook's logic, class depends on position in the production process and in property relations, so people sharing the same position can be seen as having shared interests, even if one lives in a city and the other in a village. The class question also depends on whether they recognise those shared interests, which is class consciousness.

Emile Durkheim (1858 to 1917): society as a thing

Durkheim is considered the founder of sociology as a formal discipline. His early education was religious, but he came to hold that moral codes are the key characteristic of a society and determine how individuals behave. His wish to develop a secular understanding of religion was fulfilled in his last book.

Social facts. For Durkheim, society is a social fact that exists as a moral community over and above the individual. Social facts are like things: external to the individual yet constraining behaviour. Law, education and religion are social facts. They are collective representations that emerge from people's association, general in nature and independent of any one person. Beliefs, feelings and collective practices are examples.

Two features define his vision of sociology.

Because social solidarities pressure people to conform, behaviour follows patterns, and by observing those patterns we can identify the norms and values behind them. Durkheim held that moral facts can be observed, described and classified like other phenomena, and that the prevailing moral code reflects social conditions. Morality suited to one society can be unsuited to another.

Beyond the textbook. For the exam: social facts are external, constraining and observable through aggregated behaviour, as in the study of suicide rates. In reality: in Suicide, Durkheim went on to classify suicide into four types, egoistic, altruistic, anomic and fatalistic, linked to how strongly society integrates and regulates people. Why it matters: the chapter uses suicide only to show method (a rate is a social fact), so do not memorise it as a psychological theory.

Division of labour: two kinds of solidarity. In his first book, Durkheim classified societies by their kind of social solidarity.

Because a mechanical society is held together by sameness, it is not tolerant of differences. The textbook explains that the individual and the community were so tightly integrated that any violation of codes could be seen as a threat of disintegration. In modern society people have to depend on others for food, clothing, shelter and education, so interaction grows even as personal ties weaken.

Two views. For the exam: Durkheim emphasises solidarity and Marx emphasises conflict, though both agree that the division of labour grows more detailed and creates interdependence. Another reading: the textbook invites you to test both. Mass media have standardised fashion and music across social groups, which could challenge the idea that modern society gives more freedom to the individual. Yet people from different classes sometimes join together for common aims despite conflicting interests, which could challenge Marx. In sociology several answers can be right in different contexts, so the textbook asks you to weigh reasons for and against.

Pause and predict: a village where nearly every family farms and a metropolitan city where one person designs apps and another delivers food. Which has mechanical solidarity and which organic?

Check your answer: The farming village is closer to mechanical solidarity, with similar work and shared beliefs. The metropolis is closer to organic solidarity, because specialised people depend on each other's services. These are tendencies, not pure types.

Max Weber (1864 to 1920): understanding meaning

Weber developed an interpretive sociology of social action, and also wrote on power and domination, and on rationalisation in modern society and the relation of world religions to it.

Interpretive understanding. The aim of the social sciences, for Weber, is an "interpretive understanding of social action". They differ from the natural sciences, which seek objective laws of nature. Social action is all human behaviour to which actors attach a meaning. The sociologist's task is to recover those meanings by putting herself or himself in the actor's place. This is empathetic understanding: not "feeling for" (sympathy) but "feeling with" (empathy).

Value neutrality. Weber noted a special kind of objectivity. Social scientists must record the subjective meanings and values of others faithfully, without letting their own beliefs and opinions influence the record. They describe, not judge. He knew this was difficult, because sociologists are themselves members of society with their own prejudices, and said it takes great self discipline, an "iron will".

Ideal type. A logically consistent model of a social phenomenon that highlights its most significant characteristics. It is a conceptual tool and not an exact copy of reality, and it may exaggerate some features and downplay others. It is judged by how helpful it is for analysis, not by how accurate or detailed it is. The word "ideal" does not mean "best". Weber used ideal types to study the relationship between the ethics of world religions and rationalisation, and to suggest that the ethics of certain Protestant sects had a deep influence on the development of capitalism in Europe.

Three types of authority. Weber used ideal types to describe authority.

Bureaucracy. A mode of organisation resting on the separation of the public from the domestic world. Behaviour in the public domain is regulated by explicit rules, and officials do not have absolute power. Its features:

Weber presented bureaucracy as a modern form of political authority in which individuals are recognised for their skills and training and given the authority to carry out their responsibilities. The legal limits on tasks and authority restrain unbridled power and make officials accountable.

Two views. For the exam: Marx held that the material base of society shapes ideas, while Weber's study of the Protestant ethic shows ideas and values influencing economic life. Another reading: scholars often present the two as complementary rather than as a simple contradiction. Marx stresses economic structures and class conflict, Weber stresses meanings, values and forms of authority, and each sheds light on aspects the other leaves dim. Write the textbook contrast, then add that the two can be read together.

Pause and predict: a clerk in a government office refuses to approve a file without the correct form, even though the applicant is her neighbour. Which of Weber's types of authority is this, and why?

Check your answer: Rational legal authority in a bureaucracy. Her conduct in office is governed by rules, not personal ties, which separates public conduct from private life and makes her accountable for the decision.

The three thinkers side by side

Exam traps

60-second revision

Where this chapter connects

• Earlier ideas: Social Structure, Stratification and Social Processes in Society already used Marx and Durkheim on alienation, solidarity and enforced cooperation.
• Weber's terms: Social Change and Social Order in Rural and Urban Society uses Weber on power, authority and the Protestant ethic.
• Next: Indian Sociologists shows how scholars in India adapted these ideas to Indian conditions.
• Foundations: Sociology and Society and Terms, Concepts and their Use in Sociology set out the discipline's basic vocabulary.