Some of the important characteristics or elements of community are as follows:

Meaning of community can be better understood if we analyze its characteristics or elements. These characteristics decide whether a group is a community or not. However, community has the following characteristics or elements:

A group of people

A group of people is the most fundamental or essential characteristic or element of community. This group may be small or large but community always refers to a group of people. Because without a group of people we can’t think of a community, when a group of people live together and share a common life and binded by a strong sense of community consciousness at that moment a community is formed. Hence a group of people is the first pre-requisites of community.

A definite locality

It is the next important characteristic of a community. Because community is a territorial group. A group of people alone can’t form a community. A group of people forms a community only when they reside in a definite territory. The territory need not be fixed forever. A group of people like nomadic people may change their habitations. But majority community are settled and a strong bond of unity and solidarity is derived from their living in a definite locality.

Community Sentiment

It is another important characteristic or element of community. Because without community sentiment a community can’t be formed only with a group of people and a definite locality. Community sentiment refers to a strong sense of awe feeling among the members or a feeling of belonging together. It refers to a sentiment of common living that exists among the members of a locality. Because of common living within an area for a long time a sentiment of common living is created among the members of that area. With this the members emotionally identify themselves. This emotional identification of the members distinguishes them from the members of other community.

Naturality

Communities are naturally organised. It is neither a product of human will nor created by an act of government. It grows spontaneously. Individuals became the member by birth.

Permanence

Community is always a permanent group. It refers to a permanent living of individuals within a definite territory. It is not temporary like that of a crowd or association.

Similarity

The members of a community are similar in a number of ways. As they live within a definite locality they lead a common life and share some common ends. Among the members similarity in language, culture, customs, and traditions and in many other things is observed. Similarities in these respects are responsible for the development of community sentiment.

Wider Ends

A community has wider ends. Members of a community associate not for the fulfillment of a particular end but for a variety of ends. These are natural for a community.

Total organised social life

A community is marked by total organised social life. It means a community includes all aspects of social life. Hence a community is a society in miniature.

A Particular Name

Every community has a particular name by which it is known to the world. Members of a community are also identified by that name. For example people living in Odisha is known as odia.

No Legal Status

A community has no legal status because it is not a legal person. It has no rights and duties in the eyes of law. It is not created by the law of the land.

Size of Community

A community is classified on the basis of it’s size. It may be big or small. Village is an example of a small community whereas a nation or even the world is an example of a big community. Both the type of community are essential for human life.

Concrete Nature

A community is concrete in nature. As it refers to a group of people living in a particular locality we can see its existence. Hence it is concrete.

A community exists within society and possesses distinguishable structure which distinguishes it from others.

In sociology, the determinants of status are factors that shape an individual’s social position and influence within a social hierarchy. One key determinant is wealth or economic capital, as financial resources often correlate with higher social standing. Alongside wealth, education is a crucial factor; a higher level of educational attainment generally garners respect and better access to professional opportunities, elevating social status.

Occupation also significantly influences status, with certain professions, like medicine, law, and engineering, often viewed as prestigious. Additionally, family background plays a role in determining status, especially in traditional societies where social position is partially inherited. Cultural capital—including personal style, taste, and manners—affects how individuals are perceived socially, as these traits reflect learned behaviors associated with higher status groups.

Race, ethnicity, and gender are also important determinants, as these social categories can affect one’s status due to societal norms and biases. Achievements and contributions in fields like sports, arts, or politics further enhance status, as society often values individual accomplishments. Thus, the determinants of status are a blend of economic, cultural, and social factors that highlight both individual capabilities and systemic influences.

Meaning of Social Groups

Two or more persons in interaction constitute a social group. It has common aim. In its strict sense, group is a collection of people interacting together in an orderly way on the basis of shared expectations about each other’s behaviour. As a result of this interaction, the members of a group, feel a common sense of belonging.

A group is a collection of individuals but all collectivities do not constitute a social group. A group is distinct from an aggregate (people waiting at railway station or bus stand) member of which do not interact with one another. The essence of the social group is not physical closeness or contact between the individuals but a consciousness of joint interaction.

This consciousness of interaction may be present even there is no personal contact between individuals. For example, we are members of a national group and think ourselves as nationals even though we are acquainted with only few people. “A social group, remarks Williams, “is a given aggregate of people playing interrelated roles and recognized by themselves or others as a unit of interaction.

The Sociological conception of group has come to mean as indicated by Mckee, ” a plurality of people as actors involved in a pattern of social interaction, conscious of sharing common understanding and of accepting some rights and obligations that accrue only to members.

According to Green, “A group is an aggregate of individuals which persist in time, which has one or more interests and activities in common and which is organised.”

According to Maclver and Page “Any collection of human beings who are brought into social relationship with one another”. Social relationships involve some degree of reciprocity and mutual awareness among the members of the group.

Thus, a social group consists of such members as have reciprocal relations. The members are bound by a sense of unity. Their interest is common, behaviour is similar. They are bound by the common consciousness of interaction. Viewed in this way, a family, a village, a nation, a political party or a trade union is a social group.

In short, a group means a group of associated members, reciprocally interacting on one another. Viewed in this way, all old men between fifty and sixty or men belonging to a particular income level are regarded as ‘ aggregates’ or ‘quasi-groups’. They may become groups when they are in interaction with one another and have a common purpose. People belonging to a particular income level may constitute a social group when they consider themselves to be a distinct unit with special interest.

There are large numbers of groups such as primary and secondary, voluntary and involuntary groups and so on. Sociologists have classified social groups on the basis of size, local distribution, permanence, degree of intimacy, type of organisation and quality of social interaction etc.

Characteristics of Social Groups

Following are the important characteristics of social group:

1. Mutual Awareness:

The members of a social group must be mutually related to one another. A more aggregate of individuals cannot constitute a social group unless reciprocal awareness exist among them. Mutual attachment, is therefore, regarded as its important and distinctive feature. It forms an essential feature of a group.

2. One or more Common Interests:

Groups are mostly formed for the fulfillment of certain interests. The individuals who form a group should possess one or more than one common interests and ideals. It is for the realization of common interests that they meet together. Groups always originates, starts and proceed with a common interests.

3. Sense of Unity:

Each social group requires sense of unity and a feeling of sympathy for the development of a feeling or sense of belongingness. The members of a social group develop common loyalty or feeling of sympathy among themselves in all matters because of this sense of unity.

4. We-feeling:

A sense of we-feeling refers to the tendency on the part of the members to identify themselves with the group. They treat the members of their own group as friends and the members belonging to other groups as outsiders. They cooperate with those who belong to their groups and all of them protect their interests unitedly. We-feeling generates sympathy, loyalty and fosters cooperation among members.

5. Similarity of Behaviour:

For the fulfillment of common interest, the members of a group behave in a similar way. Social group represents collective behaviour. The-modes of behaviour of the members on a group are more or less similar.

6. Group Norms:

Each and every group has its own ideals and norms and the members are supposed to follow these. He who deviates from the existing group-norms is severely punished. These norms may be in the form of customs, folk ways, mores, traditions, laws etc. They may be written or unwritten. The group exercises some control over its members through the prevailing rules or norms.

The family is a fundamental social institution that plays a crucial role in shaping individuals and society as a whole. As the primary unit of socialization, the family is responsible for instilling values, norms, and cultural beliefs in its members, particularly during childhood. Through these shared experiences, family creates a strong sense of identity and belonging.

Families are also essential for providing emotional support, economic stability, and social security. They act as a support system, helping individuals manage challenges and fulfill their basic needs. Traditionally, family roles are defined, with members often adopting specific responsibilities such as caregiving, earning, and managing household duties. These roles reinforce social order and establish patterns for social behavior and gender roles in society.

Moreover, family structures can vary across societies, taking forms such as nuclear families, extended families, or single-parent families, reflecting cultural, economic, and social factors. As a social institution, the family is instrumental in maintaining societal continuity by reproducing and transmitting social and cultural norms across generations, making it a cornerstone of human society.

The institution of marriage holds significant sociological importance as it establishes formalized social bonds and defines legal and social relationships between individuals. Marriage serves as a foundational structure for family formation, providing a stable environment for reproduction and child-rearing. This continuity reinforces the socialization process, as parents pass down values, norms, and beliefs to the next generation.

Marriage also formalizes economic and social responsibilities between partners, creating a cooperative unit for resource sharing and mutual support. It helps maintain social order by clarifying roles within the family, contributing to social stability and reducing social conflict over relationships and inheritance.

In many cultures, marriage is associated with cultural and religious rituals that reinforce community values and affirm social ties, strengthening social cohesion. Furthermore, marriage is often linked to social status, impacting individuals’ positions within their communities. Thus, marriage as a social institution not only supports individual relationships but also upholds societal continuity, cohesion, and social structure.

Introduction

The socialization that we receive in childhood has a lasting effect on our ability to interact with others in society. How do we learn to interact with other people? Socialization is a lifelong process during which we learn about social expectations and how to interact with other people. Nearly all of the behavior that we consider to be ‘human nature’ is actually learned through socialization. And, it is during socialization that we learn how to walk, talk, and feed ourselves, about behavioral norms that help us fit in to our society, and so much more.

Socialization occurs throughout our life, but some of the most important socialization occurs in childhood. So, let’s talk about the most influential agents of socialization:-

Family

The child’s first world is that of his family. It is a world in itself, in which the child learns to live, to move and to have his being. Within it, not only the biological tasks of birth, protection and feeding take place, but also develop those first and intimate associations with persons of different ages and sexes which form the basis of the child’s personality development.

The family is the primary agency of socialisation. It is here that the child develops an initial sense of self and habit-training—eating, sleeping etc. To a very large extent, the indoctrination of the child, whether in primitive or modem complex society, occurs within the circle of the primary family group. The child’s first human relationships are with the immediate members of his family—mother or nurse, siblings, father and other close relatives.

Here, he experiences love, cooperation, authority, direction and protection. Language (a particular dialect) is also learnt from family in childhood. People’s perceptions of behaviour appropriate of their sex are the result of socialisation and major part of this is learnt in the family. As the primary agents of childhood socialisation, parents play a critical role in guiding children into their gender roles deemed appropriate in a society. They continue to teach gender role behaviour either consciously or unconsciously, throughout childhood.

Families also teach children values they will hold throughout life. They frequently adopt their parents’ attitudes not only about work but also about the importance of education, patriotism and religion.

Neighborhoods

Neighborhood can be said to be a local social unit where there is constant interaction among people living near one another or people of the same locality. In such spatial units, face to face interactions frequently take place. In this sense they are local social units where children grow up. You may observe diverse set of people in your neighborhood who differ in caste, class or religion or occupation. By interacting with such diverse set of people, you may be exposed to various customs and practices; various occupations that people pursue; the skills required for such occupations and also the qualities possessed by those members. The growing child may also imbibe values of discipline and orderly behaviour. Interactions are at both physical and social environment wherein children get easily affected. If the child is surrounded by people who are warm and cooperative, it will get definitely transmitted to him/her. On the other hand if the locality is peopled by aggressive and violent group, it is possible that such children may learn unsocial or anti-social behaviors’.

School

After family the educational institutions take over the charge of socialization. In some societies (simple non-literate societies), socialization takes place almost entirely within the family but in highly complex societies children are also socialized by the educational system. Schools not only teach reading, writing and other basic skills, they also teach students to develop themselves, to discipline themselves, to cooperate with others, to obey rules and to test their achievements through competition.

Schools teach sets of expectations about the work, profession or occupations they will follow when they mature. Schools have the formal responsibility of imparting knowledge in those disciplines which are most central to adult functioning in our society. It has been said that learning at home is on a personal, emotional level, whereas learning at school is basically intellectual.

Peer Groups

Besides the world of family and school fellows, the peer group (the people of their own age and similar social status) and playmates highly influence the process of socialization. In the peer group, the young child learns to confirm to the accepted ways of a group and to appreciate the fact that social life is based on rules. Peer group becomes significant others in the terminology of G.H. Mead for the young child. Peer group socialization has been increasing day by day these days.

Young people today spend considerable time with one another outside home and family. Young people living in cities or suburbs and who have access to automobiles spend a great deal of time together away from their families. Studies show that they create their own unique sub-cultures—the college campus culture, the drug culture, motorcycle cults, athletic group culture etc. Peer groups serve a valuable function by assisting the transition to adult responsibilities.

Mass Media

From early forms of print technology to electronic communication (radio, TV, etc.), the media is playing a central role in shaping the personality of the individuals. Since the last century, technological innovations such as radio, motion pictures, recorded music and television have become important agents of socialisation.

Television, in particular, is a critical force in the socialisation of children almost all over the new world. According to a study conducted in America, the average young person (between the ages of 6 and 18) spends more time watching the ‘tube’ (15,000 to 16,000 hours) than studying in school. Apart from sleeping, watching television is the most time-consuming activity of young people.

Relative to other agents of socialization discussed above, such as family, peer group and school, TV has certain distinctive characteristics. It permits imitation and role playing but does not encourage more complex forms of learning. Watching TV is a passive experience. Psychologist Urie Bronfenbrenner (1970) has expressed concern about the ‘insidious influence’ of TV in encouraging children to forsake human interaction for passive viewing.

Workplace

A fundamental aspect of human socialization involves learning to behave appropriately within an occupation. Occupational socialization cannot be separated from the socialization experience that occurs during childhood and adolescence. We are mostly exposed to occupational roles through observing the work of our parents, of people whom we meet while they are performing their duties, and of people portrayed in the media.

The State

Social scientists have increasingly recognized the importance of the state as an agent of socialisation because of its growing impact on the life cycle. The protective functions, which were previously performed by family members, have steadily been taken over by outside agencies such as hospitals, health clinics and insurance companies. Thus, the state has become a provider of child care, which gives it a new and direct role in the socialisation of infants and young children.

Not only is this, as a citizen, the life of a person greatly influenced by national interests. For example, labor unions and political parties serve as intermediaries between the individual and the state. By regulating the life cycle to some degree, the state shapes the station process by influencing our views of appropriate behaviour at particular ages.

Religion

While some religions are informal institutions, here we focus on practices followed by formal institutions. Religion is an important avenue of socialization for many people. The United States is full of synagogues, temples, churches, mosques, and similar religious communities where people gather to worship and learn. Like other institutions, these places teach participants how to interact with the religion’s material culture (like a mezuzah, a prayer rug, or a communion wafer). For some people, important ceremonies related to family structure—like marriage and birth—are connected to religious celebrations. Many religious institutions also uphold gender norms and contribute to their enforcement through socialization. From ceremonial rites of passage that reinforce the family unit to power dynamics that reinforce gender roles, organized religion fosters a shared set of socialized values that are passed on through society.

The relationship between society, culture, and personality is deeply interwoven, as each influences and shapes the others. Society represents the broader structure within which individuals live and interact, governed by a system of social institutions and relationships that organize collective life. Within society, culture provides the shared values, beliefs, customs, and norms that guide behavior and give society its unique identity. Culture acts as the blueprint for society, shaping the ways in which people interact, think, and perceive the world.

Personality, on the other hand, is the unique pattern of thoughts, emotions, and behaviors that characterize an individual. It develops through socialization, a process deeply influenced by both society and culture. Society offers the social environment where personality forms, while culture provides the content of that personality by instilling values, norms, and social roles. For example, an individual’s identity, attitudes, and behavioral traits are molded by cultural expectations and societal norms, affecting their personality development.

Thus, society provides the framework, culture offers the content, and personality reflects how these elements are internalized by individuals. Together, society, culture, and personality create a dynamic relationship where each continuously shapes and reinforces the other, contributing to social cohesion and the diversity of individual identities within a collective framework.

DEFINITION OF SOCIOLOGY

The term sociology was coined by Auguste Comte, who is called the father of Sociology. Sociology is concerned with the study of human relationships and the society. It is believed that relationships develop when individuals come in close contact with other and interaction takes place between them. This leads to the formation of social groups and complex relationships among these groups develop as result of constant interaction. Hence, it can be said that social self and individual self are two parts of the same coin. Given this, scholars have attempted to define and explain the subject matter of sociology.

One of the founding fathers of sociology, Auguste Comte divided the subject matter of sociology into the study of social static and social dynamic. The static was concerned with the study of how the parts of the societies inter-relate, the dynamic was to focus on whole societies as the unit of analysis and to show how they developed and changed through time (Inkeles, 1964). According to Emile Durkheim sociology is the study of social facts. Sociology can be defined as the scientific study of human life, social relations, social groups and every aspect of the society as a whole. The scope of sociology is very wide, ranging from the analysis of the everyday interaction between individuals on the street to the investigation and comparison of societies across the globe.

Psychology

The term psychology is derived from two Greek words; Psyche means “soul or breath” and Logos means “knowledge or study” (study or investigation of something). Psychology developed as an independent academic discipline in 1879, when a German Professor named Wilhelm Wundt established the first laboratory for psychology at the University of Leipzig in Germany.

Initially, psychology was defined as ‘science of consciousness’. . In the simple words, we can define psychology as the systematic study of human behaviour and experience. According to Baron (1990), psychology is the science of behaviour and cognitive processes. Psychology emphasizes on the process that occurs inside the individual’s mind such as perception, cognition, emotion, and consequence of these process on the social environment.

SOCIOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGY: THE POSSIBLE INTERLINK

Sociology and psychology together form the core of the social sciences. Right from their inception as separate academic disciplines, sociology and psychology have studied different aspects of human life. Most of the other species, work on instincts in the physical environment for their survival. While the survival of humans depends upon the learned behaviour patterns. An instinct involves a genetically programmed directive which informs behaviour in a particular way. It also involves specific instruction to perform a particular action (Haralambos and Holborn, 2008). For instance, birds have instincts to build nests and members of particular species are programmed to build a nest in a particular style and pattern. Unlike this, the human mind is influenced by the social culture, customs, norms, and values. It through socialization that humans learn specific behaviour patterns to suit them best in the physical environment. Humans process the information provided by the social context to make sense of their living conditions. Sociology’s basic unit of analysis is the social system such as family, social groups, cultures etc.

The main subject matter of psychology is to study human mind to analyses attitude, behavior emotions, perceptions and values which lead to the formation of individual personality living in the social environment. While sociology deals with the study of the social environment, social collectives which include family, communities and other social institutions psychology deals with the individual. For instance, while studying group dynamism, sociologist and psychologist initially share common interestsin various types of groups, and their structures which are affected by the degree of cooperation, cohesion, conflict, information flow, the power of decision making and status hierarchies. This initial similarity of interest, takes on different focus, both the disciplines use different theoretical positions to explain the group phenomena.

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY: HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT

The quest to study human behaviour on scientific principles started with the emergence and establishment of natural sciences during the nineteenth century. Comte thought that society could be studied using the scientific methods of natural sciences. Comte argued careful observation of the entities that are known directly to experience could be used to explain the relationship between the observed phenomena. By understanding the causal relationship between various events it is possible to predict future events. He also held the belief that once the rules governing the social life are identified, the social scientist can work towards the betterment of the society. This quest to produce knowledge about the society and place of the individual within it, on the basis evidence and observation is central to the origin of Social psychology. The ideas of early and later sociologist helped to shape the sociological social psychology. Mead studied the effect of social conditions on our sense of self. Other influence contributors in the development of sociological social psychology include Georg Simmel (1858-1918),Charles Horton Cooley (1864-1929), and Ervin Goffman.

The emergence of modern social psychology could be traced from the nineteenth century onwards. One of the first systematic manual of social psychology Social and Ethical Interpretation in Mental Development was published in New York in the year 1987 by James Mark Baldwin. However, in the year 1908, it was the work of two authors; William McDougall and Edward A. Ross that gave social psychology the status of an independent scientific discipline. This year saw the publication of two books on social psychology. The names of the books are An Introduction to Social Psychology by William McDougall and Social Psychology by sociologist Edward A. Ross.

Defining Social Psychology

There is constant interaction between the intra-individual and social context and both influence each other mutually. Social psychology could be defined as the study of the “interface between these two sets of phenomena, the nature and cause of human social behaviour” (Michener & Delamater, 1999 cf. Delamater, 2006:11). G.W Allport (1954:5) defines social psychology with its emphasis on “the thought, feeling, and behaviour of individual as shaped by actual, imagined, or implied the presence of others”. A few other definitions of social psychology are as follows:

Social Psychology is the discipline that explores in an in-depth manner the various aspects of social interaction.

Baron and Byrne (2007) define social psychology as the scientific field that seeks to understand the nature and causes of individual behavior in social situations.

Importance of primary groups in sociology

Primary groups are important in several senses. They are equally important for individual as well as society. It is also equally important for child, youth and adults.

Because they prepare individuals to lead a successful social life. Primary group is the first group with which a child comes in contact at the prime stage of his life. It is the birth place of human nature. Primary group plays a very important role in the socialization process and exercises social control over them. With the help of primary group we learn and use culture. They perform a number of functions for individual as well as society which show their importance.

• Primary group shapes personality of individuals. It plays a very important role in molding, shaping and developing the personality of an individual. Because individual first come in contact with primary group. Individual is socialized in a primary group. It forms the social nature, ideas and ideals of individuals. His self develops in primary groups. A child learns social norms, standards, beliefs, morals, values, sacrifice, co-operation, sympathy and culture in a primary group.
• Primary group fulfills different psychological needs of an individual such as love, affection, fellow feeling, co-operation, companionship and exchange of thought. In primary group he lives among his near and dear ones. It plays an important role in the reduction of emotional stresses and mental tensions. Participation with primary groups provides a sense of belongingness to individuals. He considers himself as an important member of group.
• Individual lives a spontaneous living in a primary group. Spontaneity is more directly and clearly revealed in a primary group. Because of this spontaneous living members of a primary group come freely together in an informal manner. These informal groups satisfy the need for spontaneous living.
• Primary group provide a stimulus to each of its members in the pursuit of interest. The presence of others i.e. near and dear ones in a group acts as a stimulus to each. Here members get help, co-operation and inspiration from others. The interest is keenly appreciated and more ardently followed when it is shared by all the members. It is effectively pursued together.
• Primary group provides security to all its members. Particularly it provides security to the children, old and invalids. It also provides security to its members at the time of need. A member always feels a kind of emotional support and feels that there is someone on his side.
• Primary groups acts as an agency of social control. It exercises control over the behavior of its members and regulates their relations in an informal way. Hence there is no chance of individual member going astray. It teaches individuals to work according to the prescribed rules and regulations.
• Primary group develops democratic spirit within itself. It develops the quality of love, affection, sympathy, co-operation, mutual help and sacrifice, tolerance and equality among its members.
• Primary group introduces individuals to society. It teaches them how to lead a successful life in a society. It is the breeding ground of his mores and nurses his loyalties. K. Davis is right when he opines that “the primary group in the form of family initiates us into the secrets of society”. It helps the individual to internal social norms and learns culture.
• Primary group increases the efficiency of individuals by creating a favorable atmosphere of work. It provides them security and teaches many good qualities.
• Primary groups also fulfill different needs of society. It is the nucleus of all social organizations.

Georg Simmel viewed sociology as a distinct field focused on studying the patterns and forms of social interactions rather than just the structure of society itself. According to Simmel, the subject matter of sociology is the study of social forms—the recurring patterns, dynamics, and types of relationships that emerge in society. He was particularly interested in the interactional forms that shape social relationships, such as conflict, cooperation, subordination, and exchange.

Simmel believed sociology should investigate the essence of social relationships rather than solely focusing on specific institutions or roles. For instance, he examined how forms like dyads (two-person interactions) and triads (three-person groups) create different dynamics and complexities within relationships. By examining these interactions, Simmel sought to understand how individuality and social life coexist and influence each other.

Simmel also emphasized the role of urban life, culture, and social distance in shaping social interactions, which allowed him to explore how modern society affects human relationships. His work laid the foundation for understanding how social forms and individual experiences intersect, making sociology a discipline that reveals the patterns of human interaction across various social contexts.

The term “role” describes a set of expected actions and obligations a person has for his or her position in life and relationships with others. We all have multiple roles and responsibilities in our lives,  from sons and daughters, sisters and brothers, mothers and fathers, spouses and partners to friends, and even professional and social ones.

The role not only provides a blueprint to guide the action, but also describes the goals to pursue, the tasks to perform, and the course of action for a particular scenario.

Role conflicts represent role-to-role conflicts that correspond to two or more statuses held by an individual. As we try to accommodate the many stats we hold, we experience role conflicts when we feel pulled in different directions.

The most obvious example of role conflict is the conflict between work and family, or the conflict felt when torn between family and work responsibilities. For example, consider a mother who is also a doctor. She is likely to have to work long hours in the hospital and may even call several nights a week to separate her children from her children. Many who have fallen into this situation say they are inconsistent and desperate about their situation. In other words, they experience role conflicts.

Why does role conflict occur?

Role conflicts occur when conflicting demands are placed on an individual in relation to work or position. People experience role conflicts when they feel that they are being pulled in different directions in an attempt to accommodate many of their stats. Role conflicts can be both short-term and long-term and can also be linked to contextual experiences.

There are two types of role conflict :

1. Intra-role conflict
2. Inter-role conflict

Intra-role conflicts

Conflicts within roles occur when the demand is in a single area of ​​life, such as at the workplace. For example- two managers may ask an employee to complete a task, and both cannot be completed at the same time.

Inter-role conflicts

The conflict between individuals is due to differences in their goals and values. It refers to conflicting expectations from different roles within the same person. Inter-role conflicts are work-to-family conflicts that occur when work responsibilities clash with family obligations and family-to-work conflicts that occur when family responsibilities clash with work responsibilities.

Techniques to minimize conflicts

• Focus on what is said, not on how it is said.
• Do not formulate a response right away, first listen carefully.
• Clarify and reflect on what you are hearing.
• Don’t respond to high-intensity, emotional words.
• Monitor your non-verbal “leakage.”
• Recognize emerging needs and interests of another person.
• Excuse yourself for a “time-out” if emotions are escalated.

Socialization is essential in society as it is the process through which individuals learn the values, norms, and behaviors expected by their community. This foundational process begins in early childhood within the family and continues throughout life via schools, peer groups, media, and other social institutions. Socialization helps individuals internalize cultural beliefs, guiding them to function as contributing members of society.

Through socialization, people develop a sense of identity and learn their roles within social structures, such as being a student, parent, or employee. It fosters social cohesion by ensuring shared understandings and promoting mutual expectations that facilitate smooth interactions within society. Socialization also instills moral values and cultivates skills necessary for individuals to adapt to societal changes.

Moreover, socialization is crucial for maintaining social order as it encourages conformity to cultural norms and laws, reinforcing societal stability. By shaping individuals’ attitudes and behaviors, socialization enables the continuous transmission of cultural heritage and contributes to societal continuity, making it a vital element in the functioning of any society.

Social stratification refers to a society’s categorization of its people into groups based on socioeconomic factors like wealth, income, race, education, ethnicity, gender, occupation, social status, or derived power (social and political). It is a hierarchy within groups that ascribe them to different levels of privileges. As such, stratification is the relative social position of persons within a social group, category, geographic region, or social unit.

In modern Western societies, social stratification is defined in terms of three social classes: an upper class, a middle class, and a lower class; in turn, each class can be subdivided into an upper-stratum, a middle-stratum, and a lower stratum. Moreover, a social stratum can be formed upon the bases of kinship, clan, tribe, or caste, or all four.

The categorization of people by social stratum occurs most clearly in complex state-based, polycentric, or feudal societies, the latter being based upon socio-economic relations among classes of nobility and classes of peasants. Whether social stratification first appeared in hunter-gatherer, tribal, and band societies or whether it began with agriculture and large-scale means of social exchange remains a matter of debate in the social sciences. Determining the structures of social stratification arises from inequalities of status among persons, therefore, the degree of social inequality determines a person’s social stratum. Generally, the greater the social complexity of a society, the more social stratification exists, by way of social differentiation.

Stratification can yield various consequences. For instance, the stratification of neighborhoods based on spatial and racial factors can influence disparate access to mortgage credit.

“Social stratification” is a concept used in the social sciences to describe the relative social position of persons in a given social group, category, geographical region or other social unit. It derives from the Latin strātum (plural ‘strata’; parallel, horizontal layers) referring to a given society’s categorization of its people into rankings of socioeconomic tiers based on factors like wealth, income, social status, occupation and power. In modern Western societies, stratification is often broadly classified into three major divisions of social class: upper class, middle class, and lower class. Each of these classes can be further subdivided into smaller classes (e.g. “upper middle”). Social strata may also be delineated on the basis of kinship ties or caste relations.

The concept of social stratification is often used and interpreted differently within specific theories. In sociology, for example, proponents of action theory have suggested that social stratification is commonly found in developed societies, wherein a dominance hierarchy may be necessary in order to maintain social order and provide a stable social structure. Conflict theories, such as Marxism, point to the inaccessibility of resources and lack of social mobility found in stratified societies. Many sociological theorists have criticized the fact that the working classes are often unlikely to advance socioeconomically while the wealthy tend to hold political power which they use to exploit the proletariat (laboring class). Talcott Parsons, an American sociologist, asserted that stability and social order are regulated, in part, by universal values. Such values are not identical with “consensus” but can indeed be an impetus for social conflict, as has been the case multiple times through history. Parsons never claimed that universal values, in and by themselves, “satisfied” the functional prerequisites of a society. Indeed, the constitution of society represents a much more complicated codification of emerging historical factors. Theorists such as Ralf Dahrendorf alternately note the tendency toward an enlarged middle-class in modern Western societies due to the necessity of an educated workforce in technological economies. Various social and political perspectives concerning globalization, such as dependency theory, suggest that these effects are due to changes in the status of workers to the third world.

Types of Social Stratification

The systems of social stratification do differ from one society to another, giving dimension to the alternative ways in which social hierarchies can be organized and held together. Generally, they determine a ranking of individuals and groups regarding wealth, power, and status. The types of social stratification explain how social inequalities have been structured and perpetuated in different contexts.

Caste System

Caste systems are a method of social stratification in society, where every individual is born into a particular social group or caste that defines the social status and profession of the individual for life. This system, prevalent in historical societies and those like India today, characteristically has absolute rigidity, with very little, if any, mobility across castes; it maintains rigid social boundaries. One’s caste generally governs the social role and interaction that individuals undertake with dim opportunities of changing one’s social position.

Class System

The class system refers to a more fluid form of economically-based social stratification with regard to wealth, income, and occupation. Similar to the caste system, though one can move from one group to another; this simply means that a class system is never rigid and always based on individual achievements, educational background, and economic success. It characterizes most modern industrialized societies where social status may be influenced by personal and economic factors in opposition to ascribed characteristics.

Estate System

The estate system is the historical type of social stratification predominantly prevailing in feudal society. It divides society into well-marked classes or estates, such as nobility, clergy, and commoners, with each estate having specifically defined rights and duties. Mobility is thus limited to one’s estate or class, with people usually staying within their estate or class, and social roles established by birth and land ownership rather than personal achievement.

Slavery

Slavery is a form of stratification wherein people are considered property and are made to labor without freedom in their person. The system defines the social status by the condition of being enslaved, and there is no possibility for mobility or betterment in status. Gross social inequalities and human rights violations that have severely affected the people concerned have been products of slavery’s history and modernity.

Kinship is the universal feature of human culture that served as the major organising principle in human societies. It can be defined as a principle by which individuals or groups of individuals are organised into social groups, roles, categories and genealogy by means of kinship terminologies. In Anthropology the study of kinship has existed ever since the mid-to-late 1800s, when LH Morgan and others invented the study of kinship. According to Robin Fox kinship is to anthropology what logic is to philosophy or the nude is to art; it is the basic discipline of the subject. The method central to the anthropological study of kinship is the comparative method – comparing similarities and differences of two cultures/societies. 

Kinship has been defined by a number of anthropologist highlighting the role of biology and alliance in the formation of kin relation. Let us look at the some of the key definitions:

• Claude Levi Strauss- “Kinship and its related notions are at the same time prior and exterior to biological relations to which we tend to reduce them”. 
• L.H. Morgan defines kin terms are, “reflected the forms of marriage and the related makeup of the family (system of consanguinity and affinity of woman family 1871). 
• A.R. Radcliffe- Brown (1952) agreed that “Kinship terms are like signposts to interpersonal conducts or etiquette, with the implication of appropriate reciprocal right, duties privileges and obligations. 
• MacLennan Writes that kinship terms are merely forms of solution and was not related to actual blood ties at all. 
• J. Beattie, “Kinship is not set of genealogical relationships; it is set of social relationships”.

Culture is a term that refers to a large and diverse set of mostly intangible aspects of social life. According to sociologists, culture consists of the values, beliefs, systems of language, communication, and practices that people share in common and that can be used to define them as a collective.

Culture is a concept that encompasses the social behavior, institutions, and norms found in human societies, as well as the knowledge, beliefs, arts, laws, customs, capabilities, attitude, and habits of the individuals in these groups. Culture is often originated from or attributed to a specific region or location.

Humans acquire culture through the learning processes of enculturation and socialization, which is shown by the diversity of cultures across societies.

A cultural norm codifies acceptable conduct in society; it serves as a guideline for behavior, dress, language, and demeanor in a situation, which serves as a template for expectations in a social group. Accepting only a monoculture in a social group can bear risks, just as a single species can wither in the face of environmental change, for lack of functional responses to the change. Thus in military culture, valor is counted a typical behavior for an individual and duty, honor, and loyalty to the social group are counted as virtues or functional responses in the continuum of conflict. In the practice of religion, analogous attributes can be identified in a social group.

Cultural change, or repositioning, is the reconstruction of a cultural concept of a society. Cultures are internally affected by both forces encouraging change and forces resisting change. Cultures are externally affected via contact between societies.

Polygyny—the practice of a man having multiple wives—is influenced by a range of social, economic, and cultural factors across different societies. One major cause is economic advantage, particularly in agricultural societies, where more wives contribute to household labor, farming, and child-rearing, which can enhance family wealth and productivity.

Another cause is the imbalance in the male-to-female ratio, often due to factors like war, where men are fewer than women. Polygyny provides a means for all women to be economically and socially supported, particularly in communities where women’s livelihoods depend on male partnerships.

Cultural and religious practices also support polygyny in many societies, viewing it as a norm that aligns with traditional or spiritual beliefs. For example, some communities see polygyny as a way to preserve family lineage or expand social alliances by creating ties with multiple families.

High mortality rates among men and power dynamics in societies where men hold authority also contribute to polygyny, as influential men may take multiple wives to reinforce social or political power. Thus, polygyny often emerges as a response to economic, demographic, and cultural influences that shape family structures in various societies.

Acknowledging the impact of various forces stemming from the economic growth, Kapadia concludes that despite the clashes between different generations there is a strong feeling for the joint family in the generations that is coming up. He felt that the general assumption that joint family is dying out is invalid.

Eames points out that the projected disappearance of the joint family under the impact of urbanisation and industrialisation is more hypothetical than real. Milton Singer argues that certain aspects of modernisation may even strengthen the joint family.

Prof R K Mukherjee has falsified the causal and concomitant relation between what is considered as the traditional’ joint family and the ‘modern’ nuclear family approach because this approach is not valid even to the Western societies. Hence, the assumption that urbanisation and industrialization would lead to the nuclearisation of joint family in India is basically wrong.

In his paper Traditional Groups and Developmental process, Bryce Ryan has remarked that it is a functional necessity to have extended family and kinship system in an urban setting because they fulfill an important need of migrants. Urban living cannot completely dislodge the primordial ties of family, kinship, ethnicity or religion. He has emphasised the structural redefinition of the joint family relations in India which in effect, implies dissolution of traditional bonds. Hence, urbanisation may result in fanning out of kinsmen without losing their full significance.

However there are also other sociologists who hold different views about the future of joint ‘family system in India. A.D. Ross feels that if families living separately do not come into contact over long periods of time, feelings of family obligations and emotional attachment to family members will certainly weaken anfad the authority of the former patriarch will break down. When this happens, there will be little room left to maintain a feeling of and desire for identity within the larger kinship group.

G Kurian made certain specific observations after reviewing certain contemporary studies He envisaged increasing emphasis on small family units in the near future with more individuality of people and decreased dependence on the kin for survival.

It can be concluded that growing individuality and attraction for conjugal families will lead to the establishment of small family units. The famil.es may be called nuclear families although they do not represent the clear-cut norms of the nuclear family of the West There will be more and more independent families with decreased dependence on kin and without the attitude for fulfillment of obligation.

In American conjugal family system emphasis is laid on marital ties. In contrast to American conjugal family system a new type of conjugal family system is emerging in India which is likely to continue.

In these conjugal families emphasis is given on marital ties. At the same time husband and wife maintain strong relations with kins of female side. This may be due to fact that this provides a greater opportunity for wives to work independently and raise living standards without sharing the chores of a joint family.

Sociology is the science of social structure. It deals with the relationship of humans with society, their behaviour in social spaces, the changes in society brought by humans, and cultural influence in society. 

In simple terms, Sociology is a part of the social sciences that tells us about human conduct and its functions and effects in society. The interaction between humans and society brings changes that affect everyone in multiple ways. The causes and consequences of human behaviour are the roots of sociology.

The main aspects of sociology include

• Emergence and transformation of society
• Human social behaviour
• Maintenance of social order
• Various social processes include cooperation, conflict, communication, biases.

What is economics?

Economics is a section of social sciences that interprets the availability of resources in society. It is a systematic and reasoned way of studying the pattern of demand and usage of resources and their lack in society. 

Economics deals with the wants, needs, and demands of resources and their supply and fulfilment at the individual level and in society. The study of the consumption pattern helps determine various aspects of society, such as inflation and wealth management. It also makes predictions about changes in demand and supply of resources in the future.

The main aspects of economics include:

• Wants and needs of resources
• Consumption of resources
• Production of resources
• Wealth distribution

What is economic sociology?

Economic sociology analyses economic events like inflation, market, and work using sociological philosophy and theory. It is a subdivision of sociology that studies the working of the society looking from a sociological perspective.

What is the significance of sociology in economics?

Studying the pattern of societal changes helps determine various aspects of the economy, including gender equality, education, immigration and emigration, environmental issues, framing economic welfare schemes and programs, etc. Moreover, studying these aspects of society helps find out the solutions to challenges faced by society.

The difference between sociology and economics

The main differences between sociology and economics are discussed below.

What is the relationship between sociology and economics?

The welfare and wellbeing of society come with economic prosperity. If the economy is flourishing, then it will bring harmony to society. On the other hand, if the economy faces a crisis, it will severely impact society. For example, inflation, poverty, and unemployment severely affect the health and wellbeing of individuals and society as a whole.

Sociology is also dependent on economics in various ways. Any event that happens in society is directly or indirectly influenced by economics. Every social problem has its cause in some aspect of the economy. Whether it’s the case of social evils like domestic violence or preference for male children, it all has its origin in economics.

Analysing several social changes and problems in society requires economics to understand the patterns and find solutions. With the knowledge and research of society, economics plays a crucial role in every aspect.

The relationship between sociology and economics is a complex yet close one. Without economics, there is no basis for sociology. And without sociology, economics would not make sense.

The close association between sociology and economics makes it possible to analyse and solve complex sociological and economic development problems.

The secondary groups are just opposite of primary groups. What makes the relationship secondary is the relatively narrow, utilitarian, task-oriented, time-limited focus of its activities. A secondary group is organised around secondary relationships. These relationships are more formal, impersonal, segmental and utilitarian than primary group interactions.

Formal organisations and larger instrumental associations such as trade associations, labour unions, corporations, political parties, international cartel, a club and many others are a few examples of secondary groups. In such groups, one is not concerned with the other person as a person, but as a functionary who is filling a role.

In the secondary group not total personality but a segmental (partial) personality of a person is involved. These groups are wholly lacking in intimacy of association as we generally find in primary groups. Defining these groups, Ogburn and Nimkoff (1950) write: “The groups which provide experience lacking in intimacy are called secondary groups.” Kimball Young (1942) has termed these groups as ‘special interest groups’ because they are formed to fulfill certain specific end or ends.

Features

Large Size

Secondary groups are large in size. They comprise of a large number of members and these members may spread all over the world. For example, the Red Cross Society, it’s members scattered all over the world. Because of this large size indirect relations found among the members.

Definite Aims

Secondary groups are formed to fulfill some definite’ aims. The success of a secondary group is judged according to the extent by which it became able to fulfil those aims. A school, college or university is opened to provide education.

Voluntary Membership

The membership of a secondary group is voluntary in nature. Whether one will be a member of a secondary group or not it depends on his own volition. No one can compel him to be a member of any secondary group. It is not essential that one should be a member of a particular political party.

Formal, Indirect and Impersonal Relation

The relations among the members of a secondary group are indirect, formal and impersonal type. People do not develop personal relations among themselves. Relations in a secondary group are not face-to- face rather touch and go type and casual. They interact among themselves in accordance with formal rules and regulations. Because of large size it is not possible to establish direct relations among themselves; one is not directly concerned with the other aspects of his fellow’s life. Contact and relation among member are mainly indirect.

Active and Inactive Members

In a secondary group we found both active as well as inactive members. Some members became more active while others remain inactive. This is due to the absence of intimate and personal relations among the members. For example in a political party some members do not take active interest while some others take active interest in party work.

Formal Rules

A secondary group is characterized by formal or written rules. These formal rules and regulations exercises control over its members. A secondary group is organised and regulated by formal rules and regulations. A formal authority is set up and a clear cut division of labor is made. He who do not obey these formal rules and regulations losses his membership.

Status of an individual depends on his role

It is another important characteristic of a secondary group. Because in a secondary group the status and position of each and every member depends on his role that he plays in the group. Birth or Personal qualities do not decide one’s status in a secondary group.

Individuality in Person

Secondary group is popularly known as ‘special interest groups’. Because people became member of secondary group to fulfill their self-interest. Hence they always give stress on the fulfillment of their self-interests. After fulfillment of these interests they are no longer interested in the group. As a result in secondary group individuality in person is found.

Self-dependence among Members

Self-dependency among members is another important characteristic of a secondary group. Because of the large size of the secondary group the relations among the members are indirect and impersonal. Members are also selfish. As a result each member tries to safeguard and fulfill his own interest by himself

Dissimilar Ends

Secondary group is characterized by dissimilar ends. The members of a secondary group have different and diverse ends. To fulfill their diverse ends people join in a secondary group.

Relationship is a means to an end

Secondary relations are not an end in itself rather it is a means to an end. Establishment of relationship is not an end rather individual establish relationship to fulfill his self interest. They became friends for specific purposes.

Formal Social Control

A secondary group exercises control over its members in formal ways such as police, court, army etc. Formal means of social control plays an important role in a secondary group.

Division of Labor

A secondary group is characterized by division of labor. The duties, functions and responsibilities of members are clearly defined. Each member has to perform his allotted functions.

The origin of sociology and social anthropology in India can be traced to the days when the British officials realized the need to understand the native society and its culture in the interest of smooth administration. However, it was only during the twenties of the last century that steps were taken to introduce sociology and social anthropology as academic disciplines in Indian universities.

The popularity that these subjects enjoy today and their professionalization is, however, a post-independence phenomenon. Attempts have been made by scholars from time to time to outline the historical developments, to highlight the salient trends and to identify the crucial problems of these subjects.

Sociology and social/cultural anthropology are cognate disciplines and are in fact indissoluble. However, the two disciplines have existed and functioned in a compartmentalized manner in the European continent as well as in the United States. This separation bears the indelible impress of western colonialism and Euro-centrism.

However, Indian sociologists and anthropologists have made an attempt to integrate sociology and anthropology in research, teaching and recruitment. They have made a prominent contribution to the development of indigenous studies of Indian society and have set an enviable example before the Asian and African scholars.

Another significant contribution of Indian sociology and social/cultural anthropology lies in their endeavor to synthesize the text and the context. This synthesis between the text and the context has provided valuable insights into the dialectic of continuity and change to contemporary Indian society (Momin, 1997).

It is difficult to understand the origin and development of sociology in India without reference to its colonial history. By the second half of the 19th century, the colonial state in India was about to undergo several major transformations.

Land, and the revenue and authority that accrued from the relationship between it and the state, had been fundamental to the formation of the early colonial state, eclipsing the formation of Company rule in that combination of formal and private trade that itself marked the formidable state-like functions of the country.

The important event that took place was the revolt of 1857, which showed that the British did not have any idea about folkways and customs of the large masses of people. If they had knowledge about Indian society, the rebellion of 1857 would not have taken place. This meant that a new science had to come to understand the roots of Indian society. The aftermath of 1857 gave rise to ethnographic studies. It was with the rise of ethnography, anthropology and sociology which began to provide empirical data of the colonial rule.

Herbert Risley was the pioneer of ethnographic studies in India. He entered the Indian Civil Services in 1857 with a posting in Bengal. It was in his book Caste and Tribes of Bengal (1891) that Risley discussed Brahminical sociology, talked about ethnography of the castes along with others that the importance of caste was brought to colonial rulers. Nicholas Dirks {In Post Colonial Passages, Sourabh Dube, Oxford, 2004) observes:

Risley’s final ethnographic contribution to colonial knowledge thus ritualed the divineness of caste, as well as its fundamental compati­bility with politics only in the two registers of ancient Indian monarchy or modern Britain’s ‘benevolent despotism’.

Thus, the ethnographic studies came into prominence under the influence of Risley. He argued that to rule India caste should be discouraged. This whole period of 19th century gave rise to ethnographic studies, i.e., studies of caste, religion, rituals, customs, which provided a foundation to colonial rule for establishing dominance over India. It is in this context that the development of sociology in India has to be analysed.

Sociology and social anthropology developed in India in the colonial interests and intellectual curiosity of the western scholars on the one hand, and the reactions of the Indian scholars on the other. British administrators had to acquire the knowledge of customs, manners and institutions of their subjects.

Christian missionaries were interested in understanding local languages, folklore and culture to carry out their activities. These overlapping interests led to a series of tribal, caste, village and religious community studies and ethnological and linguistic surveys. Another source of interest in Indian studies was more intellectual.

While some western scholars were attracted by the Sanskrit language, Vedic and Aryan civilization, others were attracted by the nature of its ancient political economy, law and religion. Beginning from William Jones, Max Muller and others, there was a growth of Indo logical studies. Karl Marx and Frederic Engels were attracted by the nature of oriental disposition in India to build their theory of evolution of capitalism.

Similarly, Henry Maine was interested in the Hindu legal system and village communities to formulate the theory of status to contract. Again, Max Weber got interested in Hinduism and other oriental religions in the context of developing the theory, namely, the spirit of capitalism and the principle of rationality developed only in the West.

Thus, Indian society and culture became the testing ground of various theories, and a field to study such problems as growth of town, poverty, religion, land tenure, village social organization and other native social institutions. All these diverse interests – academic, missionary, administrative and political – are reflected in teaching of sociology.

According to Srinivas and Panini (1973: 181), the growth of the two disciplines in India falls into three phases:

The first, covering the period between 1773-1900 AD, when their foundations were laid;

The second, 1901-1950 AD, when they become profession­alized;

and finally, the post-independence years, when a complex of forces, including the undertaking of planned development by the government, the increased exposure of Indian scholars to the work of their foreign colleagues, and the availability of funds, resulted in considerable research activity.

Here, three major phases in the introspection in sociology, which have been discussed by Rege (1997) in her thematic paper on ‘Sociology in Post-Independent India’, may also be mentioned. Phase one is characterized by the interrogations of the colonial impact on the discipline and nationalist responses to the same, phase second is marked by explo­rations into the initiative nature of the theoretical paradigms of the discipline and debates on strategies of indigenization.

This phase also saw critical reflections on the deductive positivistic base of sociology and the need for Marxist paradigms and the more recent phase of post-structuralism, feminist and post-modern explorations of the discipline and the field. Lakshmanna also (1974: 1) tries to trace the development of sociology in three distinctive phases. The first phase corresponds to the period 1917-1946, while the second and the third to 1947-1966 and 1967 onwards respectively.

Sociology in the Pre-Independence Period

As is clear by now that sociology had its formal beginning in 1917 at Calcutta University owing to the active interest and efforts of B.N. Seal. Later on, the subject was handled by Radhakamal Mukerjee and B.N. Sarkar. However, sociology could not make any headway in its birthplace at Calcutta.

On the other hand, anthropology flourished in Calcutta with the establishment of a department and later on the Anthropological Survey of India (ASI). Thus, sociology drew a blank in the eastern parts of the country. But, the story had been different in Bombay. Bombay University started teaching of sociology by a grant of Government of India in 1914.

The Department of Sociology was established in 1919 with Patrick Geddes at the helm of affair. He was joined by G.S. Ghurye and N.A. Toothi. This was indeed a concrete step in the growth of sociology in India. Another centre of influence in sociological theory and research was at Lucknow that it introduced sociology in the Department of Economics and Sociology in 1921 with Radhakamal Mukerjee as its head.

Later, he was ably assisted by D.P. Mukerji and D.N. Majumdar. In South India, sociology made its appearance at Mysore University by the efforts of B.N. Seal and A.F. Wadia in 1928. In the same year sociology was introduced in Osmania University at the undergraduate level. Jafar Hasan joined the department after he completed his training in Germany.

Another university that started teaching of sociology and social anthropology before 1947 was Poona in the late 1930s with Irawati Karve as the head. Between 1917 and 1946, the development of the discipline was uneven and in any case not very encouraging. During this period, Bombay alone was the main centre of activity in sociology. Bombay attempted a synthesis between the Indo-logical and ethnological trends and thus initiated a distinctive line of departments.

During this period, Bombay produced many scholars who richly contributed to the promotion of sociological studies and research in the country. K.M. Kapadia, Irawati Karve, S.V. Karandikar, M.N. Srinivas, A.R. Desai, I.P. Desai, M.S. Gore and Y.B. Damle are some of the outstanding scholars who shaped the destiny of the discipline. The products of this university slowly diffused during this period in the hinterland universities and helped in the establishment of the departments of sociology.

Certain trends of development of sociology may be identified in the pre-independence period. Sociology was taught along with economics, both in Bombay and Lucknow. However, in Calcutta, it was taught along with anthropology, and in Mysore it was part of social philosophy.

Teachers had freedom to design the course according to their interests. No rigid distinction was made between sociology on the one hand and social psychology, social philosophy, social anthropology, social work, and other social sciences such as economics and history, on the other. The courses included such topics as social biology, social problems (such as crime, prostitution and beggary), social psychology, civilization and pre-history. They covered tribal, rural and urban situations.

At the general theoretical level, one could discern the influence of the British social anthropological traditions with emphasis on diffusionism and functionalism. In the case of teaching of Indian social institutions the orientation showed more Indo-logical emphasis on the one hand and a concern for the social pathological problems and ethnological description on the other. Strong scien­tific empirical traditions had not emerged before independence. Sociology was considered a mixed bag without a proper identity of its own.

Sociology in the Post-Independence Period

The next phase, as mentioned by Lakshmanna (1974: 45), in the growth of the subject, corresponds to the period between the attainment of independence and the acceptance of the regional language as the medium of instruction in most states of the country. Towards the end of this period, we also witnessed the interest on the part of the Central Government to promote social science research through a formal organization established for the purpose.

This phase alone experienced tremendous amount of interaction within the profession as two parallel organizations started functioning for the promotion of the profession. In Bombay, Indian Sociological Society was established and Sociological Bulletin was issued as the official organ of the society. This helped to a large extent in creating a forum for publication of sociological literature.

Lucknow school, on the other hand, started the All India Annual Sociological Conference for professional interaction. Lakshmanna identifies that the research efforts mainly progress on three lines. First, there was large-scale doctoral research in the university. Second, the growing needs of the planners and adminis­trators on the one hand and the realization of increasing importance of sociological thinking and research in the planning process on the other, opened up opportunities for research projects.

Third, during this period, the growing importance of social science research also resulted in the establishment of research institutes. The development of research activity also meant the enlargement of the employment opportunities at all levels.

Correspondingly, there was also an increase in the number of universities and college departments. This period also noticed considerable vertical and horizontal mobility in the profession. Teaching of sociology got well established in the fifties. This period reflected three things as marked by Rao (1982).

First, sociology achieved greater academic status. Not only many more universities and colleges began to teach at the postgraduate and graduate levels but the discipline itself became more focused in theoretical orien­tation and highly diversified in its specialization. Secondly, sociology established its identity as discipline by separating itself from psychology, anthropology, social philosophy and social work.

Although, in some universities, still social pathology and social psychology are taught as a part of sociology courses. In many others, a highly diversified curriculum structure in proper sociology exists including such specialization as rural and urban sociology, sociology of kinship, sociology of religion, sociology of stratification, sociology of education, political sociology, medical sociology, social demography and sociology of economic devel­opment.

Thirdly, diversification followed the lines of extension of sociological approach to different areas of social life. It was related to the growing needs of development in independent India. Colonial legacy became a thing of the past and democratic processes were introduced at all levels.

Sociologists soon become sensitive to problems of development in the contexts of tribal, rural and urban situations. Problems of rural development, industrialization, and expansion of education, control of population, new political processes and institutions, social and political movements attracted their areas of social life. They started conducting empirical research with a view to understand the structure, dynamics and problems of development. All these concerns had a feedback on the teaching of sociology at various levels.

Another important change in the teaching of sociology, which came after independence, has been in regard to the external intel­lectual influences. Before independence the teaching of sociology and social anthropology was mainly, if not wholly, influenced by the then current theoretical concerns in Great Britain.

We have already mentioned the influence of diffusionism and functionalism (of Malinowski). The syllabi also reflected traditions of ethnology, evolutionism and Indology. After independence, however, American sociological traditions had a major impact on the teaching of sociology in India. This is evident from such topics in the syllabi as structural-functional theory (Parsons and Merton) and research methodology.

Besides the American, the French, German and Marxian intellectual influences also had an impact. In the midst of such diverse intellectual stimuli, Indian sociologists began to criticize, modify and develop diverse sociological approaches in the study of Indian society and culture, and these are reflected in the course of study of different universities.

Developments in the Seventies

There have been a few reviews of developments in sociology and social anthropology since earlier times till 1970s and onwards (see, for example, the collection of essays in Unnithan, Singh et al., 1965; ICSSR, 1971, 1974, 1985; Rao, 1974; Mukherjee, 1977; Mukherjee, 1979; Singh, 1986; UGC, 1978, 1979, 1982; Lele, 1981; Oommen and Mukherjee, 1986; Dhanagare, 1993; Singhi, 1996). Of these, Ram Krishan Mukherjee’s review has been more exhaustive and substantial for the discipline as a whole.

The ICSSR trend reports covered in detail the developments in each of specializations. Rao (1982: 16-23) reviewed the developments in the seventies under three heads:

(i) areas of the interests and specialization which got crystallized;

(ii) areas of interest which has developed but not got crystallized; and

(iii) emergence of new approaches in the estab­lished areas.

The seventies of the last century saw a further continued diver­sification of interests and specialization in substantive areas of research and teaching in the sixties. While, earlier, village community studies dominated researches, but the interests in the areas of agrarian relations, land reforms, peasants, agricultural labourers, and scheduled castes and tribes began to attract greater attention of sociologists and social anthropologists in the seventies.

The problems of rural society were formulated in the Marxian framework of analysis emphasizing conflicts and contradictions. The other areas of interests that were crystallized in the seventies were industrial sociology, urban sociology and social stratification. Secondly, there were six areas of interest that started getting some attention in the seventies but have not really got off the mark.

These were: sociology of profession, sociology of organization, medical sociology, social demography and studies on women, Muslims and Hindu-Muslim relations. Thirdly, it is significant to note that the seventies saw new approaches and foci in the large areas of research and teaching such as caste, kinship, religion, politics and tribal studies.

Perspectives in the Eighties

Many of the areas of specialization mentioned in the foregoing account, no doubt, gained strength in the eighties of the last century. Some areas of enquiry, such as social demography and medical sociology, were crystallized. A few other areas of investigation opened up and more research in the established areas was undertaken on new lines. Some of the new areas have been introduced.

These were: sociology of deviance, sociology of knowledge, sociology of science and technology, and historical sociology. Rao (1982) anticipated these areas for research in the eighties. There was an indication that interest in sociology of science and technology might get more widespread (Uberoi, 1978; Vishwanathan, 1977). The growing interest in historical sociology was reflected in Fox (1977).

Damle (1982: 57-58) anticipated the task of sociology for the eighties in India, which was to analyse (1) the transformation of Indian society, (2) the limits of such transfor­mation, and (3) the impact of these limits to such transformation, which was reflected either in the frustrations of the efforts to surmount the obstacles. In this context, new ideologies and protest movements acquired a special significance.

In many of the newly developing branches of sociology, scholars have made notable but isolated contributions. There has been thinking that research should be promoted in the nineties in the areas of sociology of planning and development, sociology of professions, sociology of organizations, social dimensions of poverty, law and social change, sociology of national integration etc.

Imperatives in the Nineties

The country during the nineties of the last century was passing through radical political, economical and socio-cultural changes as a result of which the scope and focus of Indian sociology has expanded. Under the influence of such developments, the Indian government that adored the policy of mixed economy ever since independence and cherished the ideals of welfarism proceeded to allow the market-oriented policy to prevail.

To achieve this goal, the government adopted a new policy of economic reforms in the year 1991 with a view to globalize its economy (Singh, 1997). Globalization is a move prompted by the leaders of the developed world. Liberalization policy, including the freedom accorded to the foreign companies and capital to enter into Indian market, is the two major steps of the government in this direction.

The impact of globalization on Indian cultural heritage and general life situation of the people of the country has generated new areas that deserve the attention of Indian sociologists who do seem to be attentive to such relevant areas as civic society (Gupta, 1997), crisis and resil­ience in the process of social change (Singh, 1993) and secularism and national integration 0oshi, 1997) but specific social impli­cation of the new economic policy is yet to be analysed.

A few courses have been introduced recently on global themes in some of the universities. They are as follows: ecology and society, issues of human rights, sociology of management, human resource devel­opment, media and society, action sociology etc. There is also need to start some more new courses like sociology of public order; peace, security and development; security management and infor­mation technology etc. These courses are not only important for teaching but also for research in the construction of society and useful for the modern occupation and profession.

Teaching of Sociology in India

The origin of sociology in India as a distinct discipline can be traced back to the period around 1920s. Teaching of sociology started in Bombay University as early as 1914 but the birth of current academic sociology took place only with the establishment of departments of sociology in Bombay and Lucknow.

As for teaching and research, nothing such happened except nominal teaching of the discipline wherever it was introduced for almost a quarter of a century. What Parvathamma states about Mysore University remains true for the entire country and for the discipline of sociology as a whole. “The undergraduate syllabi in sociology as framed by Wadia continued almost for a quarter of a century.

Only in the late 1950’s, it was changed (Parvathamma, 1978). Though one finds a nominal beginning, nothing of any consequence happened in the realm of sociology. It remained more or less static during the 1920-47 periods. This was the last phase of the colonial rule in India when the national leaders were preoccupied with the liberation movement.

Pre-independence scholars have contributed to the foundation of sociology by providing a tradition in which sociology in India could grow and evolve (Unnithan et al., 1967). Their contributions, however, began to make an impact only after independence, though the number of universities increased from 11 in 1920 to 16 in 1945. However, the number of sociology depart­ments remained just two and of these, only one was concerned for independent degree in sociology (Unnithan, 1982).

The percentage of universities, having sociology department, had been falling during 1920-50. It began to show a trend towards regular increase after 1950. By 1960, 23.8 per cent of universities in India had sociology departments. By 1965, this number rose to 29.6 per cent. Now, there are 95 universities including institutions that are deemed to be universities. Fifty-one of them or about 54 per cent accommodate departments of sociology.

In spite of their relatively greater growth in sociology departments, it is interesting that 44 (46.3%) out of 95 universities do not have any sociology teaching at all. Of the 51 universities that teach sociology, only 32 have separate departments, whereas 14 conduct undergraduate and postgraduate programmes including PhD.

There are 16 universities where sociology is combined with other social science departments but an independent degree is awarded; in three departments no degree is awarded though the subject is taught (Unnithan, 1982: 64). Besides these, according to the Universities Handbook of India, 1973, the 16 Agricultural Universities, the five All India Institutes of Technology, the three Institutes of Technology, the three Institutes of Management, the Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, and the Gujarat Vidyapeeth, Ahmedabad also offered sociology as a subject of study and/or research.

Sociology is very popular subject in the universities and colleges of India today. Currently, out of 133 traditional univer­sities, about 85 have departments of sociology apart from other departments of social sciences related to sociology like population studies and women studies.

A majority of students opt for sociology as one of their subjects at graduation level. It is considered as an easy subject to get through in examination. It is usually preferred by girls particularly those who are not much career conscious. Similarly, at the postgraduate level too, sociology receives a large number of students.

The rank of sociology comes fifth in terms of the number of the universities offering social sciences and allied subjects. This shows that from the quantitative point of view, the position of sociology as an academic discipline is not very low in spite of the fact that it entered the university curriculum only very recently.

It is also seen that at the postgraduate level, sociology has established itself as a subject of major importance, attracting the largest number of students next only to economics, history and political science. Postgraduate enrolment in the year 1969-70 was alone 4,918 – taking sociology (4,442) and anthropology (476) together which contributed 11.57 per cent of the total enrolment (42,479) for postgraduate education in social sciences.

However, the percentage was a little higher for PhD (16.34%). Of the 2,153 students enrolled for PhD in social sciences, 352 were in the field of sociology alone. According to the UGC report, out of total 2,582 faculty members of the postgraduate departments in social sciences in the universities and colleges, 243 were sociologists and 119 anthropologists. Until 1971, the country has produced a total of 485 PhD scholars in the fields of sociology, social anthropology, criminology and social work.

Since 1968, the average rate of PhDs in sociology was 46 per year. This is an impressive figure, indeed, compared to the figures for previous periods. Thus, 34 PhDs were submitted during the decade 1931-40 and 79 in the subsequent two decades of 1941-60.

There were more than a hundred PhDs from the universities of Uttar Pradesh and of Maharashtra up to 1970 whereas the position in other states was as follows: Bihar (43), Delhi (42), Madhya Pradesh (23), Gujarat (15), West Bengal (14), Rajasthan (12), Punjab (9), Karnataka (7) and others (13).

The courses and the syllabi in sociology of the various univer­sities reveal yet another dimension of development of the discipline in India. Sociology is being taught at all levels in the universities – from graduation to MPhil/MLitt level. Some courses give special emphasis to research methodology.

As regards the subject matter taught at the graduate and postgraduate levels, there seems to be some rough similarity between universities in the course. Principles of Sociology, Indian Social Institutions and Social Change are offered at both the BA and MA levels in most universities while Research Methods, Rural and Urban Sociology, Social Anthro­pology and Social Psychology are among the other subjects included in the core courses at MA level.

The rest of the subjects cover a wide range of special areas in the discipline, namely, political sociology, educational sociology, industrial sociology, sociology of kinship, religion, marriage and family, and so on. It seems that from the national point of view, there is a wider choice of optional subjects for the students of sociology than is available to students of other disciplines.

An analysis of the courses reveals several deficiencies. At present, there is a lack of integration of syllabi at all levels that could ensure a standard of uniform minimal knowledge in sociology along with possibilities for specialization and advance training in sociology. Hardly any effort is noticed to introduce new courses on the basis of rationale societal consider­ations.

Largely, the old courses continue. The gravity of problem is accentuated by the contents of the courses and the textbooks prescribed. The contents of the courses are often irrelevant to the students of sociology in India as instruction is based mostly on books written by foreign scholars for students elsewhere. All these points reflect to the overall underdeveloped nature of sociology in India (Unnithan, 1982: 68).

Overall, the quantitative expansion of sociology is increasing but the quality aspect of the development of sociology as an academic discipline in colleges and universities is appalling. Except a few prestigious universities, the status of sociology in most of the universities in the country is really degraded.

Hence, the quality research and teaching in sociology has considerably slumped. Singh (1997) writes: “Professional anxiety, achievement, motivation, entrepreneurial aspiration and changing mode of consumption have immensely affected the standard of sociology.”

Therefore, the teachers and other scholars of sociology will have to take care and pains for its revival. Importantly, and specifically, we need to be academically and politically active to influence the development of a ‘new’ sociological curriculum.

Sociological Research in India

Since independence, with the rapid development of the teaching of sociology in Indian universities and colleges, there has been a concomitant increase in the number of research studies on different aspects of sociology, resulting in doctoral dissertations and in the publication of many volumes and articles in various professional journals. Several previous surveys of the development of sociology in India present the process in different phases and trends, notably those by Becker and Barnes (1961), Saran (1958), Bottomore (1962), Clinard and Elder (1965), Vidhyarthi (1972), and the Indian Council of Social Sciences Research (ICSSR) (1972).

Despite these attempts, little attention has so far been paid in the direction of proper research taking steps of methods of data collection, techniques, degree of quantity and quality, arial unit of study, and theoretical orientations in specific substantive areas of sociology.

Usually, it is seen that while at the university department level, there are facilities of doing research which do not exist at the college level. Even at the department level there is no system of sabbatical leave where the teacher can take time off for the research. Fieldwork is an essential aspect of research in sociology and unless a teacher has a year or nine months off, he cannot conduct research.

The ICSSR and the UGC have suitable schemes for providing these facilities. There is thus now no dearth of money to conduct research. The problem is to control spurious research. The ICSSR, which is the main agency for promoting research in sociology and social anthropology, has laid down priorities in keeping with social goals. It is necessary to initiate research to teach new courses as research and teaching are intimately related in the development of the discipline.

Research in sociology got a considerable boost in the country since independence. Several studies conducted by sociologists were financed, sponsored and supported by several agencies. There was another welcome trend in the introduction of the courses on methods of social research as part of the MA syllabus. In fact, this was also emphasized by the UGC Review Committee on Sociology (1960).

Significant sophistication in research methodology is an urgent desideratum for present assessment of the rapidly changing and complex social organization to which we belong. In the field of doctoral research, the progress in sociology has been remarkable.

In spite of the fact that almost till the middle of the fifties, a much less number of recognized supervisors were available for the guidance of the doctoral research students in the departments of the univer­sities. Besides these limitations, sociology and other allied fields granted as many as 438 doctoral degrees up to 1970 and economics and political science exceeded these figures.

The personnel position in sociology is still on the lower side. There are only 243 sociology teachers as compared to larger number in economics and political science, psychology and geography. This has to be further viewed in the light of the numbers of the university and college departments.

In terms of the number of departments at the university level, sociology (51) is behind only from economics (72), political science (59) and commerce (56). The position at the college level is roughly the same. When we try to match the spread of the discipline and its manpower requirements, it becomes clear that there had been some defect in the recruitment pattern as revealed by the existence of a large number of unfilled professorial posts in several universities.

Senior members of the profession should take note of this unsatis­factory situation. In spite of the limitation of personnel, a very large number of research projects (50), constituting the highest share (25.5%) of the ICSSR grants, were undertaken by the scholars belonging to the sociology discipline.

A total of 19 theses were published in sociology. The position is still brighter if we add in it social anthropology. In fact, the acceptance of the largest number of projects (above 20%) in sociology was a matter of satisfaction because the formulations of the problems were realistic and sound.

There has been a realization that diverse research methods were complimentary rather than conflicting. The early seventies saw a bitter debate between the surveyors and participant observers. But, both realized that the two could be complementary. There has been more researches using statistical surveys methods.

There were a number of training courses in quantitative methods including computer programming. Besides quantitative techniques, other techniques such as historical analysis, case studies and partic­ipant observation are also increasingly used by sociologists and social anthropologists depending on the nature of the problem of investigation and its aim.

Sociological Research in India: The State of Crisis

The recent years have seen the publications in EPW of a number of articles discussing and for the most part deploring the current state of research and teaching in sociology. Speaking especially of the situation in western India, they support the view that sociology in India has become a rather lacklustre disci­pline, its leading concepts presented through outdated mass-market American texts, and notably devoid of engagement with the social world outside the classroom.

The 1990s have seen engaged debate on the crisis in the discipline. This debate saw a series of responses from the scholars in the field assessing the ‘tiredness of the disci­pline’ (Deshpande, 1995), the possibilities of ‘a community of discourse’ , the dangers of ‘uncritical metropolitanism’ (Murthy, 1993) and the relevance of gender and feminist pedagogues as strategies to confront the crisis (Rege, 1994; Uberoi, 1994).

The discussion has been made on the construction of socio­logical discipline (Thappan, 1991; Hegde, 1992) and teaching of sociology in Indian universities (Uberoi, 1989-90; Deb 1997). In the recent years, a new dimension has been reflected in the debate taking the issue of gender studies (Dube, 1986, 1996, 1997; Desai, 1997; Bhagwat and Rege, 1991; Patel 1994; Uberoi, 1994) and women’s movement (Niranjana, 1992; John, 1996).

Veena Das (1993) tries to locate the crisis in sociological research in India in three institutional structures – the universities, the UGC and the professional bodies such as the Indian Socio­logical Society. At the level of the universities, the proliferation of the subject has simply not been matched by the will to ensure competence in teaching and research. In several universities, textbooks such as that of MacIver and Page, written almost 50 years ago, continue to be taught.

Second, where teaching and research are conducted in regional languages, students do not acquire profi­ciency even in reading in the English language. This is in fact that rhetorical statements about national self-respect notwithstanding, neither the translations of competent sociological works in the regional languages nor original contributions add up to a sufficient body of literature that may be available in these languages.

Thus, a student fails to acquire competence in his subject on the basis of this literature. Third, the policies for recruitment and promotion of teachers increasingly sacrifice academic competence for political expediency. Fourth, the examination of PhD dissertations is managed within small coterie of scholars.

If the universities are to take a share of the blame for the falling standards for research, the UGC cannot escape its major responsi­bility either. The decision-making bodies in the UGC seem to have completely misguided notions about the state of social science research in the country. Finally, the professional bodies have done little to salvage the situations. The interests of the profession lie not only in producing greater number of jobs for sociologists but in ensuring that ethical practices in the discipline are maintained.

Possible Sociological Discourses

We need to concentrate on some of the essentials of sociological discourses to develop sociology in India. They are:

(1) The development of sociology in India may be viewed in terms of the historicity of social conditions that have shaped the sociological perspectives from time to time. The theoretical and cognitive systems of sociology are socially conditioned (Singh, 1986).

It is to be hoped that thinking in this direction will result in the concentration of contested themes and in the recovery of key Indian socio-cultural realities and textual tradi­tions, traditions that have remained or continue to remain as an excluded part of hegemonic sociology or its margin (Nadarajah, 1996). Perhaps, this is the right time to resume the ‘Indian sociology’ by recognizing context and culture of the society and to overcome from the identification of sociology as solely a western.

(2) The production of sociological knowledge can be qualitatively changed with a sociological curriculum helping the multi- faceted contestation of western sociological knowledge. There is a need to consider not only the content of social science education in our universities but also the methodology used in the production of such knowledge (Nadarajah, 1996).

(3) Institutionalization of research requires a proper fit between the growing needs of theory and the increasing demands of society. Generally, public funds are made available by the government, UGC, ICSSR and other agencies in terms of the criteria set out for priorities. The question of priorities has to be answered in the context of the relevance of research.

(4) While paying attention to research priorities, the needs of individual scholars pursuing a promising but out-of-the- way enquiry should not be neglected. Research efforts involving interdisciplinary approach or bold methodological innovation should, on principle, be encouraged. The ICSSR standing committee has also recommended these suggestions in the eighties.

To conclude, the history of the development of sociology has not been much encouraging. At its beginning anthropology and ethnology helped the colonial rule to establish its foundation. In other words, the discipline of sociology was partly responsible for the survival of colonialism and feudalism in princely states. The feudal mentality of Indian people is thus due to sociology, anthro­pology and ethnology. It must be said that this discipline has not been worth its salt in India.

If we make a survey of the sociological literature which has cropped up during the last about 100 years does not take into account any massive event which took place in India. India’s freedom struggle was a long struggle and it sought the participation of the masses. All the people participated in the movement notwithstanding the plural character of the Indian society.

It was a great event in the history of India. The sociologists did nothing to analyse the freedom struggle. It is difficult to find any book on sociology written by our so-called sociologists. When the masses were busy fighting for their freedom, our sociologists such as N.K. Bose and G.S. Ghurye were writing on caste and ethnicity. Such a record of sociology can easily be called ungrateful to the nation. How can we be proud of such sociologists?

Another memorable event in India’s history has been the mass exodus of people from Pakistan after the division of country between India and Pakistan. Burning trains from Pakistan were coming to India and the blood-stained trains were leaving India for Pakistan. Lakhs of refugees crossed the borders. It never happened earlier but the sociologists who claimed to be the analysts of Indian society did not mention anything about this tragic event.

Besides, an event, which is a remarkable in the building of our nation-state, is the era of building modern India. Nehruji and his generation of national leaders started Five-Year Plans for the devel­opment of industry and village agriculture. The sociologists again turned their eyes to this era of development.

It is discouraging to learn that the sociologists observed silence on this process of devel­opment. However, the sociologists made some village studies. Actually, there was a flood of such studies. These studies made some contributions. But, these contributions have false theoretical claims. Dominant caste, sanskritization, westernization, parochialization and universalization are some of the contributions which have not proved to be of any help for the development of villages. They have proved to be Utopian for the nation.

There are several problems for the country. The problems are multi-ethnic, multi-caste, multi-religion, multi-region and multi-linguistic. Economic problems coupled with unemployment are disasters. It is expected of sociology to analyse the social ills and bring out some solutions. In the present work, we are discussing social thinkers of contemporary India. They are also responsible to relax-in comfortable armchairs and enjoy the academic status.

CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIETY

1. Society is abstract

If society is viewed as a web of social relation­ships, it is distinct from a physical entity which we can see and perceive through senses. As written earlier, Maclver argued, “we may see the people but cannot see society or social structure, but only its only external aspects”. Social relationships are invisible and abstract. We can just realize them but cannot see or touch them. Therefore, society is abstract. Reuter wrote: “Just as life is not a thing but a process of living, so society is not a thing but a process of associating”.

2. Likeness and difference in society

Society involves both likeness and difference. If people are all exactly alike, merely alike, their relationships would be limited. There would be little give-and-take and little reciprocity. If all men thought alike, felt alike, and acted alike, if they had the same standards and same interests, if they all accepted the same customs and echoed the same opinions without questioning and without variation, civilization could never have advanced and culture would have remained rudimentary. Thus, society needs difference also for its existence and continuance.

We can illustrate this point through the most familiar example of family. The family rests upon the biological differences between the sexes. There are natural differences of aptitude, of capacity, of interest. For they all involve relation­ships in which differences complement one another, in which exchange takes place.

Likeness and difference are logical opposites but for under­standing likeness, comprehension of its relation to the other is necessary. Society exists among those who have some degree of likeness in mind and in the body. F.H. Giddings called this quality of society as “consciousness of kind” (a sense of likeness). Though likeness and difference both are necessary for the society to exist, the difference is always subordinated to likeness in society. The likeness has a predominant share in the constitution of society.

3. Cooperation and conflict in society

Cooperation and conflict are universal elements in human life. Society is based on cooper­ation but because of internal differences, there is conflict also among its members. This is why Maclver and Page observed that “society is cooperation crossed by conflict”. We know from our own experience that a person would be handicapped, showed down, and feels frustrated if he is expected to do every­thing alone, without the aid of others. “Cooperation is the most elementary process of social life without which society is impos­sible” (Gisbert, 1957).

Though cooperation is essential for the constitution of society but modem conflict theorists (such as Marx) have highlighted the role of conflict in society. If there is no conflict, even in small measures, society may become stagnant and people may become inert and inactive. However, the expression of disagreement in the form of conflict must always be held within tolerable bounds.

4. Society is a process and not a product

“Society exists only as a time sequence. It is becoming, not a being; a process and not a product” (Maclver and Page, 1956). In other words, as soon as the process ceases, the product disappears. The product of a machine endures after the machine has been scrapped. To some extent, the same is true not only of material relics of man’s past culture but even of his immaterial cultural achievements.

5. Society as a system of stratification

The society provides a system of stratification of statuses and classes that each individual has a relatively stable and recognisable position in the social structure.

The problem of reaching a unanimous definition of sociology stems from the field’s broad scope and diverse approaches to understanding society. Sociology encompasses a wide array of topics such as culture, institutions, interactions, and social change, making it challenging to define in a way that captures all aspects. Different sociologists emphasize various elements; for example, Auguste Comte viewed sociology as a science of social order and progress, while Max Weber emphasized understanding social action and subjective meanings.

The plurality of perspectives—including structural-functionalism, symbolic interactionism, conflict theory, and postmodernism—adds to this difficulty. Each approach has its own focus, from examining social structures and institutions to understanding individuals’ experiences and power dynamics, leading to competing definitions.

Additionally, sociology often intersects with other disciplines like psychology, anthropology, and economics, which further broadens its scope and makes a single, unified definition elusive. This lack of consensus reflects sociology’s dynamic nature and its adaptability to study complex social phenomena from multiple viewpoints, though it also means that defining sociology in a unanimous way remains an ongoing challenge.

Synthetic School of thought is another important school of thought of the scope of Sociology. It arises in reaction to the formalistic school of thought. The synthetic school of thought wants to make sociology a synthesis of social sciences. According to this school of thought the scope of sociology is very wide.

It want to make sociology a general science and encyclopaedic or all inclusive. This school opines that different aspects of social life are inter-related. Hence we can’t understand society with the study of only one aspect that is why Sociology should attempt to study social life as a whole. As sociology studies social life as a whole hence it is obvious that the scope of sociology is very wide. The main advocates of this school of thought are Emile Durkheim, L.T. Hobhouse, P. A. Sorokin, Morris Ginsberg, Karl Mannheim and Alex Inkles. Opinions of these scholars about the scope of sociology are described below:

Emile Durkheim

The chief exponent of synthetic school of thought Emile Durkheim opines that the scope of sociology has three main divisions or field of study such as Social Morphology, Social Physiology and general sociology.

(a) Social Morphology includes all those subjects which are fundamentally geographic such as population its size, density, distribution, mobility etc. It analyses the size and quality of the population in as much as it affects the qualities of social relationships and social groups.

(b) Social Physiology includes all those subjects which are studied by particular social sciences such as religion, language, economy, law etc. In other words social physiology has different branches such as sociology of law, sociology of religion etc. which are regarded as special sociologies. These branches deals with a set of social facts related to different social groups.

(c) General Sociology is the philosophical part of Sociology. It aims at discovering the general character of social facts and to formulate general social laws.

L.T. Hobhouse

Famous English Sociologist L.T. Hobhouse holds similar view like Durkheim about the scope of Sociology. According to him Sociology is a synthesis of social sciences but the immediate task of Sociologist is threefold such as (a) one must pursue his studies in his particular part of the social field (b) keeping in mind the interconnections of social relations one should try to interconnect the results arrived at by different social sciences (c)Sociologist should interpret social life as a whole.

P.A. Sorokin

Sorokin opines sociology studies various aspects of the social relationships hence cannot be called as a special science. According to him the scope of sociology includes (a) the study of relationship between various aspect of social phenomena (b) the study of relationship between the social and non-social (c) the study of general features of social phenomena.

Morris Ginsberg

Another exponent of synthetic school Ginsberg opines that Sociology studies and classifies all forms of social relationships, studies the relationship between individual and society and the relationship among different aspects of social life such as economic, political, religious etc. However Ginsberg divides the scope of Sociology into four main divisions such as social morphology, social control, social process and social pathology.

Social Morphology studies the quality and quantity of population, social group, social structure and social institutions. Social control studies the mechanisms i.e. both formal and informal by which society controls the behaviour of its members. Social process studies different types of interaction like co-operation, competition and conflict. Social Pathology studies social problems of poverty, population, crime etc.

Karl Mannheim

Another exponent of synthetic school of thought Karl Mannheim divides the scope of sociology into two main divisions such as systematic and general sociology and historical sociology. Systematic and general sociology explain the main factors of living together. Historical sociology studies the historical variety and actuality of the general forms of society. It is divided into two sections such as comparative sociology and social dynamics.

Alex Inkles

Another modern exponent of synthetic school Alex Inkles opines that the scope of sociology includes social analysis, primary concepts of social life, basic social institutions and social processes.

Thus, it is concluded that the scope of sociology is very wide. It is both a social science and a special science. It synthesizes all special sciences. Society is the subject matter of all social sciences. But there is no conflict between two schools of thought. One studies the part and other studies the whole. Both part and whole are interrelated. We can’t study the part without studying the whole and vice-versa. Hence the scope of sociology must be wide.

MacIver and Page were influential sociologists known for their work in defining and analyzing key concepts in sociology, particularly regarding social structure, institutions, and community. In their seminal work, Society: An Introductory Analysis, they explored the nature of social relationships and examined how societies are organized and maintained through various social institutions like family, government, and religion.

MacIver and Page are particularly recognized for differentiating between “association” and “community.” They defined community as a social group characterized by shared values and a sense of belonging, typically bound by geographical location or common identity. In contrast, they saw associations as organized groups created to achieve specific purposes, such as clubs or political organizations.

Their analysis of social change emphasized that societies are in constant flux, influenced by cultural evolution, technology, and shifts in social norms. MacIver and Page argued that social institutions adapt over time to meet new needs, and they highlighted the importance of cooperation and conflict as fundamental forces in shaping society.

Their work has had a lasting impact on sociology, providing foundational concepts for understanding social organization, structure, and the role of institutions in human society.

Societies can be categorized into various types based on their mode of subsistence, organization, and technological development. Here are some of the main types:

1. Hunting and Gathering Societies: These are the earliest forms of society, where small, nomadic groups survive by hunting animals and gathering plants. With a strong focus on community cooperation and minimal social hierarchy, they are typically egalitarian and rely on shared resources.

2. Pastoral Societies: These societies are based on domesticating animals like sheep, goats, and cattle for food, clothing, and transportation. They often migrate to find grazing areas, forming tribal or clan-based structures with more defined social roles and wealth accumulation.

3. Horticultural Societies: Horticultural societies practice small-scale farming using basic tools, allowing for more permanent settlements. This stability enables a larger population and the beginning of social stratification as people take on specialized roles outside of food production.

4. Agrarian Societies: These societies engage in large-scale agriculture with advanced tools like the plow, resulting in surplus food production. Agrarian societies are highly stratified, with complex social hierarchies, including a land-owning elite and a peasant class. They also have more defined political and economic systems.

5. Industrial Societies: Driven by industrialization and mechanized production, these societies have complex economic systems and emphasize manufacturing and mass production. Industrial societies feature urbanization, high division of labor, and distinct social classes based on economic roles.

6. Post-Industrial Societies: Emerging in the late 20th century, post-industrial societies focus on information, services, and technology rather than industrial production. The economy is driven by knowledge-based sectors like information technology, finance, and services, with high value placed on education and innovation.

Each type of society reflects adaptations to environmental, technological, and cultural changes, evolving to meet the needs of its people and setting the stage for further social development.

In sociology, institutions are fundamental to the organization and functioning of society, providing stability, structure, and continuity. Here are some of the main functions of institutions in sociology:

1. Socialization: Institutions such as family, education, and religion play a central role in socializing individuals. They instill values, norms, and cultural beliefs, helping individuals learn how to behave and interact in society.

2. Maintenance of Social Order: Through institutions like law, government, and religion, society enforces norms and rules that regulate behavior. This function helps reduce conflict, maintain social order, and create predictability in social interactions.

3. Provision of Basic Needs: Institutions fulfill essential needs, such as the family providing emotional and economic support, and economic institutions supplying resources for food, shelter, and employment. This function is vital for individual and group survival.

4. Perpetuation of Culture: Institutions ensure the transmission of cultural heritage, values, and traditions across generations. This is evident in educational and religious institutions, which promote cultural continuity and a shared identity.

5. Role Allocation and Organization: Institutions allocate social roles and responsibilities, helping society function smoothly. For instance, economic institutions define occupational roles, while political institutions assign roles of authority and governance.

6. Adaptation to Change: Institutions help society adapt to changing environments by evolving practices, norms, and rules. For example, economic and technological institutions facilitate adaptation to advancements, while political institutions address new social challenges.

7. Social Integration and Cohesion: Institutions like education, community organizations, and media foster social integration by creating a sense of belonging and shared purpose, promoting social cohesion and reducing social fragmentation.

Through these functions, institutions are essential in guiding behavior, fostering stability, and ensuring social continuity, enabling society to adapt and evolve in a coordinated and organized manner.

The family is considered a universal institution because it exists in every society, playing a crucial role in organizing and sustaining human life. As the primary unit of social organization, family provides individuals with emotional support, identity, and a sense of belonging. Across diverse cultures, family serves essential functions such as socialization, economic support, and reproduction.

Family is the first social environment where individuals learn values, norms, and behavioral expectations that help them integrate into society. This process of socialization equips children with the skills and knowledge necessary to participate in wider society. Furthermore, families provide economic support by meeting basic needs like food, shelter, and clothing, creating a stable foundation for individuals.

In addition to its functional role, family fosters emotional bonds among members, establishing strong ties that promote social cohesion and solidarity. Despite differences in form and structure—whether nuclear, extended, or joint—family as an institution remains central to human experience. Its universality underscores its role in preserving cultural continuity, adapting to societal changes, and ensuring the well-being of individuals and the stability of society as a whole.

Auguste Comte is regarded as the founder of sociology and was instrumental in establishing sociology as a distinct academic discipline. Comte coined the term “sociology” and aimed to apply scientific principles to the study of society, a method he called positivism. He believed that social phenomena could be observed, classified, and analyzed in the same systematic way as natural sciences, seeking to uncover laws of social order and progress that govern human behavior.

Comte’s vision for sociology involved two main components: social statics and social dynamics. Social statics focused on understanding the structures that maintain social stability, such as family, religion, and education. Social dynamics, on the other hand, studied the processes of social change and the progression of society through historical stages. Comte identified three stages of societal development: the theological, metaphysical, and scientific (positive) stages, each characterized by a different way of understanding the world.

By emphasizing the scientific study of social structures and change, Comte laid the foundation for sociology’s development as a rigorous discipline. His ideas greatly influenced later sociologists who expanded on his concepts of social order, progress, and the use of empirical methods in studying society. Comte’s contributions underscore his importance as a pioneer who helped shape the course of modern sociological thought.

Characteristics of Rural Community

Size of the Community

The village communities are smaller in area than the urban communities. As the village communities are small, the population is also low.

Density of Population

As the density of population is low, the people have intimate relationships and face-to-face contacts with each other. In a village, everyone knows everyone.

Agriculture is the Main Occupation

Agriculture is the fundamental occupa­tion of the rural people and forms the basis of rural economy. A farmer has to perform various agricultural activities for which he needs the cooperation of other members. Usually, these members are from his family. Thus, the mem­bers of the entire family share agricultural activities. That is the reason why Lowry Nelson has mentioned that farming is a family enterprise.

Close Contact with Nature

The rural people are in close contact with nature as most of their daily activities revolve around the natural environment. This is the reason why a ruralite is more influenced by nature than an urbanite. The villagers consider land as their real mother as they depend on it for their food, clothing and shelter.

Homogeneity of Population

The village communities are homogenous in nature. Most of their inhabitants are connected with agriculture and its allied occupations, though there are people belonging to different castes, religions and classes.

Social Stratification

In rural society, social stratification is a traditional characteristic, based on caste. The rural society is divided into various strata on the basis of caste.

Social Interaction

The frequency of social interaction in rural areas is com­paratively lower than in urban areas. However, the interaction level possesses more stability and continuity. The relationships and interactions in the prima­ry groups are intimate. The family fulfills the needs of the members and exer­cises control over them.

It is the family, which introduces the members to the customs, traditions and culture of the society. Due to limited contacts, they do not develop individuality and their viewpoint towards the outside world is very narrow, which makes them oppose any kind of violent change.

Social Mobility

In rural areas, mobility is rigid as all the occupations are based on caste. Shifting from one occupation to another is difficult as caste is determined by birth. Thus, caste hierarchy determines the social status of the rural people.

Social Solidarity

The degree of social solidarity is greater in villages as com­pared to urban areas. Common experience, purposes, customs and traditions form the basis of unity in the villages.

Joint Family

Another characteristic feature of the rural society is the joint family system. The family controls the behaviour of the individuals. Generally, the father is the head of the family and is also responsible for maintaining the discipline among members. He manages the affairs of the family.

Material culture is the aspect of culture manifested by the physical objects and architecture of a society. The term is primarily used in archaeology and anthropology, but is also of interest to sociology, geography and history. The field considers artifacts in relation to their specific cultural and historic contexts, communities and belief systems. It includes the usage, consumption, creation and trade of objects as well as the behaviors, norms and rituals that the objects create or take part in.

Material culture is contrasted with symbolic culture or non-material culture, which include non-material symbols, beliefs and social constructs. However, some scholars include in material culture other intangible phenomena like sound, smell and events, while some even consider it to include language and media. Material culture can be described as any object that humans use to survive, define social relationships, represent facets of identity, or benefit peoples’ state of mind, social, or economic standing.

The scholarly analysis of material culture, which can include both human made and natural or altered objects, is called material culture studies. It is an interdisciplinary field and methodology that tells of the relationships between people and their things: the making, history, preservation and interpretation of objects. It draws on both theory and practice from the social sciences and humanities such as art history, archaeology, anthropology, history, historic preservation, folklore, archival science, literary criticism and museum studies.

Importance of primary groups in sociology

Primary groups are important in several senses. They are equally important for individual as well as society. It is also equally important for child, youth and adults.

Because they prepare individuals to lead a successful social life. Primary group is the first group with which a child comes in contact at the prime stage of his life. It is the birth place of human nature. Primary group plays a very important role in the socialization process and exercises social control over them. With the help of primary group we learn and use culture. They perform a number of functions for individual as well as society which show their importance.

• Primary group shapes personality of individuals. It plays a very important role in molding, shaping and developing the personality of an individual. Because individual first come in contact with primary group. Individual is socialized in a primary group. It forms the social nature, ideas and ideals of individuals. His self develops in primary groups. A child learns social norms, standards, beliefs, morals, values, sacrifice, co-operation, sympathy and culture in a primary group.
• Primary group fulfills different psychological needs of an individual such as love, affection, fellow feeling, co-operation, companionship and exchange of thought. In primary group he lives among his near and dear ones. It plays an important role in the reduction of emotional stresses and mental tensions. Participation with primary groups provides a sense of belongingness to individuals. He considers himself as an important member of group.
• Individual lives a spontaneous living in a primary group. Spontaneity is more directly and clearly revealed in a primary group. Because of this spontaneous living members of a primary group come freely together in an informal manner. These informal groups satisfy the need for spontaneous living.
• Primary group provide a stimulus to each of its members in the pursuit of interest. The presence of others i.e. near and dear ones in a group acts as a stimulus to each. Here members get help, co-operation and inspiration from others. The interest is keenly appreciated and more ardently followed when it is shared by all the members. It is effectively pursued together.
• Primary group provides security to all its members. Particularly it provides security to the children, old and invalids. It also provides security to its members at the time of need. A member always feels a kind of emotional support and feels that there is someone on his side.
• Primary groups acts as an agency of social control. It exercises control over the behavior of its members and regulates their relations in an informal way. Hence there is no chance of individual member going astray. It teaches individuals to work according to the prescribed rules and regulations.
• Primary group develops democratic spirit within itself. It develops the quality of love, affection, sympathy, co-operation, mutual help and sacrifice, tolerance and equality among its members.
• Primary group introduces individuals to society. It teaches them how to lead a successful life in a society. It is the breeding ground of his mores and nurses his loyalties. K. Davis is right when he opines that “the primary group in the form of family initiates us into the secrets of society”. It helps the individual to internal social norms and learns culture.
• Primary group increases the efficiency of individuals by creating a favorable atmosphere of work. It provides them security and teaches many good qualities.
• Primary groups also fulfill different needs of society. It is the nucleus of all social organizations.

Alex Inkeles (March 4, 1920 – July 9, 2010) was an American sociologist and social psychologist. His main areas of research were national character and the culture and society of the Soviet Union. His career was mostly spent at Harvard University and Stanford University. In addition to being the founding editor of the Annual Review of Sociology, some of his recognitions included membership in the National Academy of Sciences, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and American Philosophical Society.

Alex Inkeles was born on March 4, 1920 in Brooklyn, New York. His parents were Jewish immigrants from Poland, though lived in a neighborhood that predominantly consisted of Sicilians. He attended Cornell University for his bachelor’s degree in 1941 and master’s degree in 1946. While at Cornell, he took several high-level courses in the Russian language. After World War II he attended Columbia University for his PhD, graduating in 1949.

He spent World War II digging telephone poles for the US Army Signal Corps. He later received orders from the Office of Strategic Services that reassigned him to reading Soviet newspapers and listening to Soviet radio due to his proficiency with Russian. In the post-war era, his research often focused on Soviet society. He authored Public Opinion in Soviet Russia in 1950 and The Soviet Citizen: Daily Life in a Totalitarian Society in 1961. Inkeles joined the staff of Harvard University in 1948 when he was hired to lead the field work for large-scale interviews of Soviet émigrés in Europe. He became a full professor of sociology in 1957, remaining at Harvard until 1971. He had a research fellowship at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences from 1955 to 1956.

In 1972 he was hired at Stanford University. There, he worked as senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of both sociology and education. He was the founding editor of the Annual Review of Sociology, which was first published in 1975. He remained editor through 1980, with Ralph H. Turner as acting editor in 1978.

Nature of Sociology

The nature of sociology is defined by several key characteristics. Firstly, sociology employs a scientific approach, utilizing systematic and empirical methods to study social phenomena. This involves observation, experimentation, and analysis to draw conclusions about social behaviour and structures. Secondly, sociology examines social relationships, focusing on how individuals interact within groups, organizations, and societies. It studies the patterns and consequences of these interactions, including the formation of social norms, roles, and institutions. Additionally, sociologists explore diversity and inequality, investigating issues related to race, gender, ethnicity, and class and how these factors contribute to social inequality and power dynamics.

Furthermore, sociology investigates social institutions, such as family, education, religion, and the economy, analyzing how social behaviour shapes and shapes them. It is also concerned with social change, striving to understand how and why societies evolve over time. This includes studying social movements, technological advancements, and shifts in cultural values and norms. Finally, sociology takes a holistic perspective, considering the influence of individual actions and larger social forces. It seeks to understand the interplay between personal experiences and societal structures. 

Scope of Sociology

The scope of sociology is extensive, covering various dimensions of social life, behaviour, and structures. It includes the study of major social institutions such as family, education, religion, government, and the economy, examining their functions, structures, and impacts on individuals and society. Sociology also focuses on social stratification, exploring hierarchical arrangements based on class, caste, race, gender, and other forms of inequality, and the processes that maintain or challenge these hierarchies. 

Additionally, it delves into socialization, investigating how individuals learn and internalize societal norms, values, and roles. The discipline also examines social change, studying how societies evolve over time through movements, technological advancements, and cultural shifts. Furthermore, sociology analyzes social interactions and relationships within groups, communities, and networks, considering micro-level individual behaviours and macro-level societal trends. By addressing these and other areas, sociology provides a comprehensive understanding of the complexities of human social life and the dynamics of societal change.

Scope of Sociology in India

The scope of sociology in India extends further into various realms that deeply influence the country’s social fabric and trajectory. It scrutinizes the intricate interplay between tradition and modernity, examining how cultural practices and norms adapt or resist in the face of rapid social transformations. Sociology also investigates issues of social mobility and aspirations, exploring how individuals and communities navigate opportunities and challenges in pursuit of socio-economic advancement. 

Additionally, it delves into the complexities of governance, bureaucracy, and public administration, analyzing their effectiveness in addressing social issues and delivering public services. Moreover, sociology in India engages with emerging areas such as environmental sociology, studying the intersections between society and the environment and the implications for sustainable development and ecological justice. Furthermore, it examines the role of media, technology, and communication in shaping public discourse, collective identities, and social movements, highlighting their influence on social change and activism. By exploring these multifaceted dimensions, sociology in India provides critical insights into the complexities of contemporary Indian society and contributes to fostering inclusive, equitable, and resilient communities.

David Emile Durkheim is a French sociologist. He is considered one of the chief architects of the discipline of sociology as part of modern social science. Emile Durkheim has put forward theories about how modern society can function (together) as one unit cohesively and also how society can retain its integrity. 

His theories and analyses have laid the foundation of modern society as we know it today. Some of his popular works include ‘The Division of Labour in Society –1893,’ ‘The Rules of Sociological Method,’ and ‘The Elementary Forms of Religious Life –1912.’ His works greatly influenced the intellect of Frenchmen till 1917, when he passed away.

As far as the Emile Durkheim theory is concerned, he wished to set and achieve 3 social goals.

1. He wanted sociology to be officially recognised in the modern world as a social science.

2. He wanted to study how a society could maintain oneness and function as a single unit, despite having people from different ethnic backgrounds, cultures and religions as part of it.

3. Lastly, Emile Durkheim was very interested in the role that scientific thought and knowledge would play in modern society. He wanted to study the effect of exploring scientific knowledge.

Emile Durkheim Theory

As part of his work in making people recognise sociology as modern social science, he authored some works and wrote articles, the theories of which are relevant today too. The Emile Durkheim theory had many works and texts explaining modern social phenomena and important elements influencing society. A few of them are explained as below:

The Division of Labour in Society

This is his first major work; it attempts to explain the basis of social cohesiveness; what are the factors that make society function as one single unit. This work presents many of Emile Durkheim’s theories and sheds greater light on his methodology of explaining modern sociology. Some of the important points of this work are:

• Emile Durkheim argues that social togetherness is of two types chiefly – the first is how society stands and works together as one unit. The second is what binds an individual to his society. According to him, the division of labour creates organic solidarity in modern society. This is a tangible sense in an individual of being one with the society, relating to it and following its principles

• He also poses some contradictions in this text. According to Giddens, Durkheim comes across a problem in that ‘he sees a moral ambiguity (confusion or lack of clarity) in the relationship of the individual with modern society.’ This is because, with the distinct division of labour, individuals in a society develop their own consciousness. At the same time, however, the individual’s morality asks that they provide unquestioned service to their society. Both of these things create a kind of lack of clarity as above

• With regard to this, he also expressed concern, in that he felt that division of labour might end splitting people up into groups; organic solidarity then might not be sufficient in bringing them together

• Lastly, Emile Durkheim’s theory on morality is seen more in a social context than in a philosophical sense

The Rule of Sociological Method

His second work based on modern sociology is ‘The Rule of Sociological Method,’ written in 1895. Through this work, he expressed some wishes and advocated the following:

• He wanted to implement a way that would guarantee the belief of modern society in science and its principles. He wanted scientific thought to truly become a way of life. He was a pioneer in creating an approach to studying social phenomena (everyday happenings and occurrences in modern society) that were absolutely rooted in science and scientific thought, without a doubt

• Through this, he also questioned the objectivity of the sociologist. According to Emile Durkheim, social observation must be as impartial and impersonal as is possible, though it can never be 100%. According to him, sociology should allow for the comparison of different social facts as opposed to studying each social fact as independent of the other

• He agreed with Herbert Spencer, a fellow sociologist, that a society could be compared to a living organism. This theory of Emile Durkheim prepared the foundation of modern functionalism in society since you cannot study or analyse a society’s functionalism without first considering it to be one unit or one organism

• His focus of analysis was more on social facts rather than on the motivations behind the actions of an individual

Emile Durkheim’s Social Facts

Apart from the division of labour and organic solidarity, Emile Durkheim’s Social Facts also put forth some other concepts. These are:

1. Collective Consciousness: Each citizen in a common society has the same thought system, beliefs and sentiments. These form the base of the collective or common conscience. Sometimes, individuals commit acts that go against these beliefs and sentiments, which are disapproved of by society, making them acts of crime.
2. Mechanical Solidarity: This term explains the kind of oneness and support towards social institutions that an individual feels and expresses automatically, being part of the same society. For example, when an individual agrees that a certain crime should be punished, he ends up expressing solidarity towards the society that is mechanical.
3. Social Structure: According to Emile Durkheim, social structure is not the sum total of similar individuals with the same attitudes and outlooks towards life and society. Instead, social structure is made up of different organs – made of different parts but making just one whole, an entire structure which is society. These small entities are secondary to and just individual parts of one central whole – society. These small entities don’t exist parallel to each other, but they are interconnected and work in coordination to function as one cohesive unit.
4. Role of State and Occupational Groups: He postulates that the state has a very important role in the functioning of society. By fulfilling key functions required of it like serving justice, maintaining individual health, ensuring education to all, the state would ensure that the moral fabric of society remained strong and that principles of morality were present and being practised by individuals.

In sociology, a peasant society refers to a social structure predominantly composed of small-scale farmers who primarily engage in subsistence agriculture. These societies are often characterized by traditional customs, limited technological advancements, and a close-knit social structure that fosters community interdependence. Unlike urban societies that thrive on industrialization and market economy, peasant societies rely on land-based resources and familial labor for survival.

A significant feature of peasant societies is the strong bond to the land. Land is not merely a source of income but is deeply intertwined with cultural identity and ancestral heritage. This connection often limits their mobility, as attachment to land and family traditions outweighs the pursuit of economic opportunities elsewhere. Additionally, social hierarchies within peasant societies are usually based on age, family lineage, and patriarchal structures rather than wealth accumulation or professional achievements.

However, with the rise of globalization and urbanization, peasant societies are increasingly exposed to external influences that disrupt traditional lifestyles. These changes often introduce market pressures, compelling peasants to produce surplus for sale rather than personal consumption, thereby shifting their roles within the broader economy.

In conclusion, peasant societies maintain a unique place in sociology due to their reliance on traditional agricultural practices, their strong communal bonds, and the challenges they face from modern economic forces. Understanding these societies offers insight into how traditional cultures adapt or resist in the face of global transformations.

In sociology, a reference group refers to a group to which an individual compares themselves, providing a standard of evaluation. It influences an individual’s behavior and attitudes, regardless of whether they are a member of that group. Reference groups can be aspirational (ones individuals wish to join) or non-aspirational (ones individuals wish to avoid).

The term reference group, first coined by the sociologist Hebert Hyman (1942), refers to any group that someone uses as a point of comparison in the process of their self-appraisal.

Although competition and conflict are the disintegrative or dissociative social processes, we find difference in their nature, types and functions. So these two social processes should not be confused with each other. The distinction between these two may be indicated in the following points.

Competition

1. Competition is continuous. It can never end. So it is called a never ending social process.
2. Competition is an impersonal process. The competing individuals do not have per­sonal contact what-so-ever.
3. Competition is an unconscious Process because the individuals or the groups are not aware of it. Their attention is mainly fixed on the object of competition. i.e. a reward or a prize.
4. Competition is a peaceful and non-violent process. There is absence of coercion or violence.
5. In competition all the competitors derive benefit from it.
6. Competition, when becomes rigorous, results in conflict.
7. Competition and co-operation can go together simultaneously Competition does not stand in the way of co-operation and vice-versa.
8. Competition encourages hard work.
9. Competition observes social laws.
10. Competition is productive.

Conflict

1. Conflict lacks continuity. It is an intermittent social process.lt takes place suddenly and comes to an end quickly. It is an ever-ending social process.
2. Conflict is a personal process. The conflicting parties know each other personally and try to defeat the opponent.
3. Conflict is a conscious process. Because the parties involves in conflict are aware of it and make deliberate efforts to reach the goal which takes place on a conscious level.
4. Conflict is generally a violent process as people engaged in conflict use violent methods.
5. In conflict people suffer heavy losses.
6. Competition when becomes personalized, leads to conflict.
7. It is conflict, which puts brakes on co-operation for a short period.
8. Conflict discourages efforts.
9. Conflict disregards social laws.
10. Conflict is non-productive.

Meaning of Social Control

Generally speaking, social control is nothing but control of the society over individuals. In order to maintain the organisation and the order of the society, man has to be kept under some sort of control. This control is necessary in order to have desired behaviour from the individual and enable him to develop social qualities.

Society in order to exist and progress has to exercise a certain control over its members since any marked deviation from the established ways is considered a threat to its welfare. Such control has been termed by sociologists as social control.

Social control is the term sociologists apply to those mechanisms by which any society maintains a normative social system. It refers to all the ways and means by which society enforces conformity to its norms. The individual internalises social norms and these become part of his personality. In the process of socialisation the growing child learns the values of his own groups as well as of the larger society and the ways of doing and thinking that are deemed to be right and proper.

But every social group makes errors, great or small, in the socialising the young, says Lapiere. Even at best, the internalisation be so the social norms can scarcely of complete that a person’s own desires exactly coincide with the social expectations of his group.

Hence, there is some deviations from group norms in every group. But any deviation beyond a certain degree of tolerance is met with resistance, for any marked deviation from the accepted norms is considered a threat to the welfare of the group.

Hence sanctions – the rewards or punishments- are applied to control the behaviour of the individual and to bring the nonconformists into line. All these efforts by the group are called social control, which is concerned with the failures in socialisation. Social control, as says Lapiere, is thus a corrective for inadequate socialisation.

According to E.A. Ross, the individual has deep-rooted sentiments that help him to cooperate with other fellow members to work for social welfare. These sentiments are sympathy, sociability and a sense of justice. But these sentiments by themselves are not enough to suppress the self-seeking impulses of the individual.

Society has to make use of its mechanism to accomplish the necessary order and discipline. This mechanism is called social control. As Ross defines, “Social control refers to the system of devices whereby society brings its members into conformity with the accepted standard of behaviour.

Ogburn and Nimkoff have said that social control refers to the patterns of pressure which society exerts to maintain order and established rules”.

As Gillin and Gillin say, “Social control is the system of measures, suggestions, persuasion, restrain and coercion by whatever means including physical force by which society brings into conformity to the approved pattern of behaviour, a subgroup or by which a group moulds into conformity its members”.

According to Maclver,” Social control is the way in which entire social order coheres and maintains itself – how it operates as a whole, as a changing equilibrium.”

In fact social control may be defined as any influence which the society exerts upon its members for the purpose of providing the welfare of the group. It is the way in which our social order coheres and maintains itself. It is that mechanism by which a community or group operates as a whole and maintains a changing equilibrium.

There are various means and agencies by which individuals are induced or compelled to confirm to the norms of the society.

Types or Forms of Social Control

Different social thinkers have categorised social control in different ways. A few classifications in regard to types and forms of social control are as follows:

Forms of social control as given by Karl Mannheim

Karl Mannheim, the famous social thinker, has categorised social control under the following two heads:

(a) Direct social control,

(b) Indirect social control.

(a) Direct social control:

That type of social control which directly regulates and controls the behaviour of the individual is called Direct Social Control. This type of control is to be found in family, neighbourhood, play-groups and other types of primary groups. In these institutions, parents, neighbours, teachers, classmates etc., keep control over the behaviour of the individuals.

(b) Indirect social control:

In this type of social control distant factors keep control over the behaviour of the individual. Such a type of control is exercised by secondary groups through customs; traditions, rationalised behaviour etc. and public opinion are important forms of indirect social control.

Forms of social control as given by Gurvitch

According to Gurvitch social control is of the following four types:

(a) Organised social control:

In this type of social control, the behaviour of the individual is regulated either through voluntary means or through democratic ways. This is done through natural ways of social control.

(b) Unorganised social control:

This social control is exercised by values of culture and usages, traditions, fashion, symbol etc. This is an elastic type of social control and is related to day-to-day life.

(c) Spontaneous social control:

This type of social control is exercised by ideas, rules and regulations, values, norms etc.

(d) More spontaneous social control:

Social control that is exercised by direct social and group experience, such as, aspirations, decisions, desires, etc., is called more spontaneous social control.

Forms of social control as given by Kimball Young

Well-known social thinker Kimball Young has categorised social control under the following two heads:

(a) Positive social control, (b) Negative social control

(a) Positive social control:

In this type of social control positive steps such as reward, the policy of appreciation etc. are used for keeping the person under control. As a result of these steps man tries to behave in the best possible manner in the society.

(b) Negative social control:

This is just reverse of the positive form of social control. In this form of social control individual on the fear of punishment and derecognition by the society is made to behave in conformity with the values of the society.

Hayes’s classification of social control

He has classified social control under the following two heads:

(a) Control by sanction, (b) Control by socialisation and education.

(a) Control by sanction:

In this type of social control, those who act according to the values of the’ society are rewarded, while to those who act against the norms of the society are punished.

(b) Control by socialisation and education:

Through education and socialisation, the child is taught to act according to the norms of the society.

Forms of social control as given by Lumbey

The well-known social thinker Lumbey has classified social control under the following two categories:

(a) Physical force method, (b) Human symbol method

Under the first form, man is made to behave in a particular manner by application of physical force, but in the second form, he is made to behave in conformity with the values of the society through language, traditions, customs, religion, rituals, etc.

Forms of social control according to Cooley

According to Cooley there are two forms of social control:

(a) Conscious. (b) Unconscious.

Through conscious form or social control, society compels an individual to act according to its accepted objectives. Law, Propaganda, Education are such forms. Through unconscious method, social institutions such as religion, customs, traditions, etc. keep control over the behaviour of the individual.

General views about forms of social control

Generally social control is classified under the following two forms:

(a) Formal social control, (b) Informal social control

(a) Formal social control:

This type of social control is exercised by known and deliberate agencies of social control, such as law, punishment, army, Constitution etc. Man is forced to accept these forms of social control. Generally these forms are exercised by secondary groups.

(b) Informal social control:

These agencies of Social Control have grown according to the needs of the society. Folk ways, mores, customs, social norms etc. fall under this category of social control. Generally primary institutions exercise this type of social control.

1. Horizontal Mobility: It refers to change of residence or job without status change. Under this type of social mobility, a person changes one’s occupation but the overall social standing remains the same. Certain occupation like doctor, engineer and teacher may enjoy the same status but when an engineer changes one’s occupation from engineer to teaching engineering there is a horizontal shift from one occupational category to another but no change has taken place in the system of social stra tification.
2. Vertical Mobility: Vertical mobility refers to any change in the occupational, economic, political status of an individual or a group which leads to change of their position. Vertical Mobility stands for change of social position, either upward or downward.
3. Intergenerational Mobility: This type of mobility means that one generation changes its social status in contrast to the previous generation. However, this mobility may be upward or downward. For e.g., people of lower caste or class may provide facilities to their children to get higher education, training and skills, with the help of which the younger generation may get employment in higher position.
4. Intragenerational Mobility: This type of mobility takes place in the lifespan of one generation. A person may start one’s career as a clerk and after acquiring more education, becomes an IFS Officer. Here the individual moves up and occupies a higher social position than previously.

Formal and Informal Groups are an integral part of social and organizational frameworks. They provide a structure for communication, teamwork, and the pursuit of shared objectives. Formal Groups are intentionally formed within an organization’s structure. They have defined roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships; whereas, Informal Groups emerge spontaneously within an organization based on social interactions, shared interests, or personal relationships.

What is Formal Group?

Formal Groups are intentionally formed within an organization’s structure. They have defined roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships. These groups are created to achieve specific organizational objectives, such as completing projects, making decisions, or implementing strategies. Membership in formal groups is typically determined by job roles, qualifications, or organizational hierarchy. Communication within formal groups tends to follow established protocols and channels. Examples of formal groups include committees, task forces, and project teams.

Features of Formal Group

1. Purpose: Formal Groups are formed with a clear purpose or objective in mind, such as completing a project, making decisions, or implementing strategies to achieve organizational goals.
2. Structure: Formal Groups have a defined structure, with designated leaders, members, and roles. The structure may vary depending on the nature of the group and its objectives. But, it is typically outlined in organizational charts or documents.
3. Membership: Membership in formal groups is often determined by job roles, qualifications, or organizational hierarchy. Individuals are selected or assigned to formal groups based on their expertise, skills, or relevance to the group’s objectives.

What is Informal Group?

Informal Groups emerge spontaneously within an organization based on social interactions, shared interests, or personal relationships. Unlike formal groups, they are not officially recognized or structured by the organization. Instead, they form naturally among employees who have common interests or social connections. The purpose of informal groups is often social or emotional, providing members with a sense of belonging and support. Leadership within informal groups is informal and may shift among members based on expertise, charisma, or social influence. Communication within informal groups is typically more relaxed and flexible, relying on informal conversations, social gatherings, or digital platforms. Examples of informal groups include lunchtime cliques, friendship circles, and hobby clubs formed by employees.

Features of Informal Group

1. Formation: Informal Groups form organically based on social interactions, shared interests, or personal relationships among employees. They are not officially recognized or structured by the organization and may exist alongside formal groups.
2. Purpose: The purpose of informal groups is often social or emotional, providing members with a sense of belonging, support, or camaraderie within the workplace. While informal groups may indirectly influence organizational outcomes, their primary focus is not on achieving specific organizational objectives.
3. Structure: Informal Groups typically lack a formal structure or designated leaders. Leadership within informal groups may be informal and fluid, with influence distributed among group members based on personal charisma, expertise, or social status.

Difference between Formal and Informal Group

What Are Norms?

Social norms are specific rules dictating how people should act in a particular situation, values are general ideas that support the norm”. There are four types of norm we can distinguish:

1. Folkways

Norms shape attitudes, afford guidelines for actions and establish boundaries for behavior. Moreover, norms regulate character, engender societal cohesion, and aid individuals in striving toward cultural goals.

Conversely, the violation of norms may elicit disapprobation, ridicule, or even ostracization. For instance, while the Klu Klux Klan is legally permitted in the United States, norms pervading many academic, cultural, and religious institutions barely countenance any association with it or any espousal of its racist and antisemitic propaganda.

Consequently, we see the potency of a norm condemning certain viewpoints being promoted through informal means even in the absence of any equivalent formal counterparts.

What Are Values?

Values are beliefs that we have about what is important, both to us and to society as a whole. A value, therefore, is a belief (right or wrong) about the way something should be.

Values are essential in validating norms; normative rules without reference to underlying values lack motivation and justification. Meanwhile, without corresponding norms, values lack concrete direction and execution (McAdams, 2001).

While the common values of societies can change overtime, this process is usually slow. This means these values tend to be appropriate for their historical period (Merton, 1994).

There are still commonly shared values within societies, but they become generalized, a more general underpinning for social practices.

Durkheim notes that value consensus continues to exist in modern societies but in a weaker form because industrialization has resulted in people having greater access to a greater variety of knowledge and ideas, e.g., through the mass media and science.

Assimilation is the process through which a minority group acquires the morals and social mores of a dominant group or host culture, eventually assimilating into the dominant group. The dominant and minority groups may experience changes due to the process.

Explanation

Assimilation is a perspective on racial relations that assumes the host culture is culturally homogenous and that the immigrant community’s purpose is to fast assimilate into the host community by taking on host characteristics. Due to the lack of cultural sensitivity, ethnic minority cultures are denigrated. It may result in the minority group being eliminated via strategies like busing.

Understanding the long-term effects of immigration—for the immigrants, their descendants, and the culture that welcomes them—requires a fundamental understanding of assimilation.

Assimilation is a term that the Chicago School first used to describe the process through which foreigners, mainly migrants, give up their unique culture and accept the cultural norms of the host community. Commonly, it was assumed that second-generation migrants would experience this. There is no one assimilation model, but the idea was closely tied to Robert Park’s concept of the United States as a “melting pot,” which was expected to lessen racial and ethnic barriers.

Assimilation truly made an effort to comprehend how diverse civilizations come into being due to the mutual cultural blending and adaption of many distinct groups.

Assimilation was fueled by contemporary organizational structures, including urbanization, the market, mass culture, and universal education.

The seven forms of assimilation that Milton Gordon identified—cultural, structural, marital, identificational, attitudinal, behavioral, and civic—need not necessarily overlap.

A minority group or culture becoming more like the dominant group in a society, or adopting wholly or partly the values, habits, and beliefs of another group, is known as cultural assimilation.

The process through which an outsider, immigrant, or subordinate group becomes wholly incorporated into the dominant host society is called acculturation. People like Robert Park used the phrase in early American studies of racial relations.

It is contrasted with accommodation, where the subordinate group just followed the dominant group’s expectations.

It is also compared to the concept of competition, where it established its ideals in opposition to the mainstream and eradication and exclusion (which saw no room for interaction between subordinate and dominant groups).

Assimilation suggested that the weaker group had indeed come to adopt and absorb the dominant group’s values and culture. This theory of the process, which was partly influenced by American concerns about the increasing immigrant population in that country, has come under fire for exaggerating the significance of the dominant group’s values and ignoring the capacity of new or subordinate groups to both influence the dominant group’s values (creating a “melting-pot culture”) or coexist with it while upholding their values (creating a “multi-cultural society”).

Difference Between Culture and Civilization

Acculturation is a process of social, psychological, and cultural change that stems from the balancing of two cultures while adapting to the prevailing culture of the society. Acculturation is a process in which an individual adopts, acquires and adjusts to a new cultural environment as a result of being placed into a new culture, or when another culture is brought to someone. Individuals of a differing culture try to incorporate themselves into the new more prevalent culture by participating in aspects of the more prevalent culture, such as their traditions, but still hold onto their original cultural values and traditions. The effects of acculturation can be seen at multiple levels in both the devotee of the prevailing culture and those who are assimilating into the culture.

At this group level, acculturation often results in changes to culture, religious practices, health care, and other social institutions. There are also significant ramifications on the food, clothing, and language of those becoming introduced to the overarching culture.

At the individual level, the process of acculturation refers to the socialization process by which foreign-born individuals blend the values, customs, norms, cultural attitudes, and behaviors of the overarching host culture. This process has been linked to changes in daily behaviour, as well as numerous changes in psychological and physical well-being. As enculturation is used to describe the process of first-culture learning, acculturation can be thought of as second-culture learning.

Under normal circumstances that are seen commonly in today’s society, the process of acculturation normally occurs over a large span of time throughout a few generations. Physical force can be seen in some instances of acculturation, which can cause it to occur more rapidly, but it is not a main component of the process. More commonly, the process occurs through social pressure or constant exposure to the more prevalent host culture.

Scholars in different disciplines have developed more than 100 different theories of acculturation, but the concept of acculturation has only been studied scientifically since 1918. As it has been approached at different times from the fields of psychology, anthropology, and sociology, numerous theories and definitions have emerged to describe elements of the acculturative process. Despite definitions and evidence that acculturation entails a two-way process of change, research and theory have primarily focused on the adjustments and adaptations made by minorities such as immigrants, refugees, and indigenous people in response to their contact with the dominant majority. Contemporary research has primarily focused on different strategies of acculturation, how variations in acculturation affect individuals, and interventions to make this process easier.

Culture Diffusionism is a sociological concept that explains how cultural elements such as beliefs, technologies, and customs spread from one society to another. It suggests that cultures do not develop in isolation but rather evolve through interactions and exchanges with neighboring or distant groups. This diffusion occurs through various means, such as migration, trade, conquest, and communication.

Diffusionists argue that cultural innovation is often limited within isolated societies; instead, most cultural advancements are borrowed or adapted from other cultures. For example, agricultural practices, religious beliefs, and technological inventions often originate in one society and spread to others, influencing and transforming their ways of life. Diffusion can occur both directly through personal contact or indirectly through intermediaries or even symbolic exchange.

Historically, this process has led to the development of complex societies, as cultural elements mix to create hybrid forms of language, religion, and art. While cultural diffusion can lead to greater global understanding, it can also cause tension when dominant cultures overpower or assimilate smaller, local cultures, leading to issues of cultural loss and identity conflicts.

In sum, Culture Diffusionism highlights the interconnectedness of human societies and emphasizes how cross-cultural exchanges shape the world’s diverse cultural landscapes. It underscores that cultural practices are not solely indigenous creations but are often the result of dynamic interactions across time and space.

Though in day to day discourses the term institution very often used as a synonym to the word association still there exists a great deal of differences between the two. Human beings forms association to fulfill his aims and objectives. Along with this he forms some rules, regulations and procedures which is known as institution. However following differences are found between the two.

• Association refers to an organized group of people having definite aims. But institutions are forms of procedures and way of doing things.
• State, Flood relief association, political party are examples of association whereas college, family, marriage etc. are the example of institution.
• Association lacks stability and temporary in nature whereas institutions are stable and permanent in nature.
• Association represents human aspects because it comprised of human beings. When a group of people organize themselves to fulfill some specific aims association is formed. But institutions refers to a social condition of conduct and behavior. Because institutions consists of rules, regulations, laws and procedures.
• Associations are concrete in nature because it have it’s own form. But institutions are abstract in nature because it does not have a concrete design and have no form.
• Associations are things and denote membership whereas institutions are modes or ways of service or ways of doing things. Men form association and live in it but he acts through institution. In other words institution gives life to association.
• Association are formed to fulfill man’s needs and necessities whereas institutions grows naturally and spontaneously.
• Association is an organised group whereas institution refers to the organized way of doing things and a procedure of working.
• Association has specific name by which it is known but institution do not have any name rather it identifies itself through a symbol which may be material or non-material.
• Association exercises control in a formal ways whereas institutions exercises control in an informal ways.
• Association has legal status but institutions do not have any legal status. It can’t sue or be sued.

Charles Henry Cooley was a prominent sociologist who introduced a fundamental classification of social groups into primary and secondary groups. His classification focuses on the nature of social interactions and the closeness of relationships within these groups, offering insight into how individuals form personal identities and build social connections.

Primary groups are small, intimate groups that have a profound impact on an individual’s values, beliefs, and behavior. They are typically composed of family members and close friends with whom people have direct, face-to-face interactions over a long period. These groups play a crucial role in shaping one’s emotional well-being and self-identity, as they provide a sense of belonging and emotional support. Cooley emphasized that the connections within primary groups are enduring and intrinsic, meaning that they are valued for their emotional depth rather than any utilitarian purpose.

On the other hand, secondary groups are larger, more impersonal associations where relationships are goal-oriented and often temporary. These groups typically include colleagues, classmates, or members of an organization, where interactions are structured around specific objectives rather than emotional bonds. While they may not significantly impact an individual’s self-concept, secondary groups are essential for achieving practical goals and fulfilling professional roles in society.

In essence, Cooley’s classification underscores how different types of groups fulfill distinct social and personal functions, with primary groups offering emotional depth and secondary groups providing instrumental support. His work highlights the varying ways in which social connections shape human experience and individual development.

Meaning of Social Process

Society is a system of social relations. Social relationships may be studied by the kind or mode of interaction they exhibit. These kinds or modes of interaction are called social processes. Social processes are the fundamental ways in which men interact and establish relationships.

Definition of Social Processes

1. According to MacIver, “social process is the manner in which the relations of the members of a group, once brought together, acquire a distinctive character”.

2. According to Horton and Hunt opines “the term social process refers to the “repetitive forms of behaviour which are commonly found in social life.”  

Types of Social Processes

The major types of social processes are given below with a diagram under two broad headings.

A. Associative process: Cooperation, Accommodation, Assimilation

B. Dissociative process: Competition, Conflict

A. ASSOCIATIVE PROCESS

Associative processes are also called the integrative or conjunctive social processes which are essential for the integration and progress of the society.

1. Cooperation
2. Accommodation
3. Assimilation

COOPERATION

Meaning of Cooperation

Cooperation is one of the most basic, pervasive and continuous social processes. It is the very basis of social existence. The term “Cooperation” is derived from the two Latin words: “co” means ‘together’ and ‘operari’ meaning ‘to work’. Hence cooperation means working together or joint activity for the achievement of common goal or goals. So, it is a process in which individuals or groups work unitedly for the promotion of common goals or objectives. It is a goal oriented social process. It is very important as human society and its development have been possible with cooperation.

Definition of Cooperation

1. Merrill and Eldredge: ‘cooperation is a form of social interaction wherein two or more person work together to gain a common end.’
2. A. W. Green: ‘cooperation is the continuous and common Endeavour of two or more persons to perform a task or to reach a goal that is commonly cherished.’
3. Fairchild: ‘cooperation is the process by which the individuals or groups combine their effort, in a more or less organized way for the attainment of common objective.’

Characteristics of Co-operation

Following are some of the important characteristics of co-operation:

1. Continuous Process: It is a continuous process. There is continuity in the collective efforts in co-operation
2. Personal Process: This is a process in which the individuals and the groups personally meet and work together for a common objective.
3. Conscious Process: In the process of co-operation the organized individuals or the groups work together consciously.
4. Universal Process: Co-operation is also a universal social process. Because it is found everywhere in all periods of time.
5. Common Ends: Common ends can be better achieved by co-operation which is essential for the welfare of both individuals and society.
6. Organized Efforts: Co-operation is a process of social interaction which is based on the organized efforts of individuals and groups.

Types of Cooperation

Different sociologists have classified co-operation in different ways. Some of the important types of co-operation are the following.

Maclver and Page have divided cooperation into two main types namely, Direct Cooperation  and Indirect Cooperation.

1. Direct cooperation: In the process of cooperation when individuals and groups cooperate directly with each other, that is called direct cooperation. There exists a direct relationship among individuals and the groups. It permits the people to do things together because the nature of work itself calls for the participation of men or groups in a together situation. It brings social satisfaction. It makes the difficult tasks easy.

Examples of direct cooperation in societies

• In rural communities the people co-operate in carrying the ill person to the doctor.
• The people co-operate on marriage, birth, Eid’s and other occa­sions of celebration.
• In urban communities people of a political party co-operate with one another in general walks of social life.
• In urban areas, the people of a religious sect co-operate with one another with special interest

2. Indirect cooperation: In the process of cooperation when people do things individually and indirectly for the achievement of a common goal that is called indirect cooperation. Here the goal is one or common, but the individuals perform specialized functions for its attainment. This cooperation is based on the principles of division of labour and specializations of functions. So, in modern society indirect cooperation plays an important role as the present technological age requires specialization of skills and functions.

Examples of Indirect Cooperation

• The owners of a mill and its workers co-operate with one an­other.
• The businessmen and the customers co-operate on the selling rates of the products.
• The exogamous system of marriage is a marriage between two families of different castes and Biradari (means a caste or sub-caste, e.g., Goldsmith, Blacksmith, Skinner etc.). This system is grow­ing popular in urban social life.
• The people living in urban communities co-operate in different acts of social life even if they belong to different professions, castes, classes, sects and political parties.
• Co-operation among the people of different professions is a nice example of this type. In this way, they fulfill the needs of one another. This type of co-operation is indirect

Classifications of Cooperation given by A. W. Green are given below –

• Primary cooperation: In this type of cooperation there is an identity of interests but no self-interest among those who cooperate. Every member is conscious of the welfare of all. It owes its origin to personal satisfaction. It is present in primary groups like family, neighbourhood and children’s play groups. Here there is an identity or ends of interest and all the members in some way or the other, derive benefit from primary cooperation.
• Secondary cooperation: In these groups the individuals cooperate with each other for the achievement of some self-interest. This is the characteristic feature of modern civilized society which is very much witnessed in political, economic, religious, commercial, educational and other groups. It does not provide equal benefits to all its members.
• Tertiary cooperation: Primary and secondary cooperation is the characteristic of an individual person while tertiary cooperation characterizes the interaction among various social groups, large or small. These groups make certain adjustments voluntarily with each other under certain compelling circumstances. The attitude of groups cooperating with each other is selfish and opportunistic in the extreme.

For example, in an election when two political parties cooperate with each other to defeat the rival party, it is called tertiary cooperation.

Role and importance of cooperation:

Being a universal and continuous social process, cooperation plays a dominant role but it is very much essential for the welfare of the society as well. So, the role of cooperation may be discussed by two angels. They are –

• From an individual point of view.
• From the point of view of society.

Role of cooperation from individual point of view:

1. Man can fulfil his basic and fundamental needs such as food, clothing and shelter by cooperation. It also fulfils many psychological needs of human beings.
2. It is not possible for individuals to reach their respective goals without the active cooperation of other members in society.
3. Cooperation is the foundation on which our social life is built up. The existence of society and the survival of human beings depend upon the cooperative spirit and mutual aid of men and women.
4. With the solid and active cooperation of his fellow beings, man can lead a happy and comfortable life.

Role of cooperation from the point of view of society:

1. It helps society to progress. Progress can be better achieved through united action. Progress in science, technology, agriculture, industry, transport and communication etc. has been possible with cooperation.
2. It is the mainspring of collective life. It builds society, it conserves society. In a democratic country, cooperation has become a necessary condition of collective life and activities.
3. It provides solutions for many international problems and disputes. Because cooperation as a process of integration has the quality to bring end to different problems through united activities.
4. Progress is granted permanence only by cooperation. Because conflict inspires the individual to progress, but he does so not only if he gets cooperation.

ACCOMMODATION

Meaning of Accommodation

It refers to understanding, adjustment or agreement. It is a process of getting along inspite of differences. Accommodation is one of the principal types of social processes. It is through this process that social order arises. Park and Burgess have said that human social organization is fundamentally the result of an accommodation of conflicting elements. Throughout his life man has to face a number of conflicting situations.

For example, the workers of an industry or a factory may go on strike today for some reason but they are bound to come back tomorrow after some settlement with the management. The husband and wife may quarrel for serious things at one time or another but most of the time they live together with mutual love and affection.

Definition of Accommodation

Some of the important definitions of accommodation are given below –

1. Maclver and Page define that, “accommodation refers particularly to the process in which man attains a sense of harmony with his environment.”
2. According to Ogburn and Nimkoff, “Accommodation is a term used by the sociologists to describe the adjustment of hostile individuals or groups.”
3. According to Gillin and Gilllin, “Accommodation is the process by which competing and conflicting individuals and groups adjust their relationship to each other in order to overcome the difficulties which arise in competition, contravention or conflict.”
4. According to George A. Lundberg, “Accommodation has been used to designate the adjustments which people in groups move to relieve the fatigue and tensions of competition and conflict.”
5. In the opinion of Biesanz, “In one sense, accommodation is the basis of all formal social organization.”

Characteristics of Accommodation

1. Universal Process: It is found in all societies at all times in all fields of social life. Since no society can function smoothly in a state of perpetual conflict, accommodation becomes necessary.
2. Continuous Process: This process is not limited to any fixed social situation. It follows sooner or later as and when conflict takes place. The continuity of accommodation does not break at all.
3. Both conscious and unconscious process: Accommodation is a conscious process when the conflicting individuals or groups make efforts consciously to get accommodated to situations but accommodation is mainly an unconscious activity.
4. End-result of conflict: The hostile individuals or groups realize the importance of accommodation only after they get involved in some kind of conflict. If there is no conflict, there can be no question of accommodation.
5. It is a mixture of love and hatred: According to Ogburn and Nimkoff, accommodation is the combination of love and hatred. Love leads to co-operation while hatred leads to conflict.

Forms or methods of accommodation

Accommodation takes place in different ways and accordingly assumes different forms. Some of the important forms or methods of accommodation are:

1. Yielding to coercion: Most of the hostile individuals or groups yielding to physical or some kind of power exhibit the spirit of accommodation in order to end a conflict. For example, the weaker party submits to the stronger one out of fear and the stronger party can pressurize the weaker party by its superior strength. For example, an act of this kind happens after a war between two nations comes to an end.

2. Compromise: The conflict between the hostile individuals or groups having equal strength comes to an end through compromise in the process of accommodation. This is based on the principle of give and take. Here the involved parties have to make some sacrifices voluntarily for each other. So, it is a kind of voluntary accommodation. When the conflicting parties realize that the continuation of conflict would cause sheer waste of their time, energy and money, they automatically want a kind of accommodation which is called compromise.

3. Tolerance: Tolerance is a method of accommodation in which two or more contesting parties tolerate each other with sympathy and try to understand the viewpoint of others. They patiently bear the differences that exist between them. For example, the co-existence of Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs etc. in Indian society is due to the method of tolerance. This is the best form of accommodation.

4. Arbitration: When the hostile individuals or groups have equal strength and are determined to stick to their view point, there is intervention of a third party, who acts as their arbitrator or mediator. The decisions of the arbitrator are binding on the parties concerned. For example, the conflict between the labour and management is resolved through the arbitration or arbitrator.

5. Conciliation: This is another method of accommodation in which the third party only gives some suggestions in order to terminate a conflict. But the acceptance of these suggestions is not the binding force. It is up to the discretion of the contending parties.

6. Conversion: This form of accommodation involves a sudden rejection of one’s beliefs, convictions and loyalties and the adoption of others. As a result of which the convincing party is likely to accept the viewpoints of the other party. In consequence, the party which has been convinced is quite likely to abandon its own ideas or beliefs or religion or claims in preference for the viewpoint of the other side with which it tries to identify itself. For example, ordinarily conversion is thought of only in connection with religion.

7. Sublimation: This is a method which involves the substitution of non-aggressive attitudes and activities for aggressive ones. In this method the conflicting groups give vent to their tendencies of aggression that is harmless to anyone else and also obviates conflict. For example, Mahatma Gandhi conquered violence and hatred by love and compassion.

8. Rationalization: In this method the contending parties try to justify their action on the basis of some imaginary ideas to avoid conflict. Hence, one blames others instead of accepting one’s defects, one can retain self-respect. For example, sometimes the students believe that failure in the examinations is due to the defects in the valuation of answer scripts; they do not see the fact that their preparations for examinations are quite inadequate.

Accommodation is a significant integration social process. It is not only useful to the individuals or groups but also to the entire society.

1. Society functions smoothly with accommodation. It checks conflict and maintains cooperation among the individuals and groups which is essential for social life.

2. It helps the individuals and groups to adjust themselves to changed functions and statutes which are brought about by changed conditions. It helps them to carry on their life activities together even with conflicting interests.

3. The realization of people that they should lead a happy and comfortable life has become possible only through accommodation.

4. It is the very foundation of a social organization. Because it consists in the avoiding and delaying of conflict with disagreeable circumstances. The contending forces are adjusted to balance in this process. Hence, society maintains its balance.

ASSIMILATION

Meaning of Assimilation

Assimilation is one of the types of interaction. Like accommodation it is also a form of social adjustment. But it is more permanent than accommodation. Assimilation is concerned with the absorption and incorporation of the culture by another. It has reached this stage of assimilation only after accommodation. Assimilation makes the dissimilar individuals or groups similar because it is a process by which individuals or groups come to share the same sentiments and goals. Hence assimilation requires more fundamental changes than accommodation. For example, in India, the religious tolerance among the different religious groups is the most appropriate one as they have assimilated many points of each other’s culture into their own and have made them integral part of their own social conduct.

Definition of Assimilation

Some of the following definitions given by eminent scholars are the following:

1. According to Young and Mack, “Assimilation is the fusion or blending of two previously distinct groups into one.”
2. According to Bogardus, “assimilation is a process whereby attitudes of many persons are united and thus develop into a united group.”
3. According to Biesanz and Biesanz, “Assimilation is the social process whereby individuals or groups come to share the same sentiments and goals.”
4. Hurton and Hunt say that, “the process of mutual cultural diffusion through which persons and groups come to share a common culture is called assimilation.”
5. Ogburn and Nimkoff define assimilation, “As the process whereby individuals or groups once dissimilar because similar, that is, because identified in their interest and outlook.”
6. In the words of Park and Burgess, “Assimilation is a process of interpenetration and fusion in which persons and groups acquire the memories, sentiments and attitudes of other persons or groups and, by sharing their experience and history, are incorporated into a common culture life.”

Characteristic of Assimilation

From the above definitions of assimilation, the following characteristics have been pointed out. They are:

1. Universal Process: Assimilation as a process of integration is present in every society, all the time.
2. Unconscious process: Usually the individuals or groups involved in the process of assimilation are unconscious of what is taking place. Unconsciously one assimilates himself with others.
3. Slow and gradual process: The process of assimilation cannot take place suddenly. Rather it takes time. It depends upon the nature of contacts. If it is primary, assimilation is natural and rapid. If it is, secondary assimilation is slow.
4. It is a two-way process: It is based on the principle of give and take. When one cultural group is in contact with another, it borrows from its certain cultural elements and incorporates them into its own culture. So, it affects both.
5. It is confined to multiple fields: The process of assimilation is not confined to a single field but it is confined to multiple fields. In the religious field, for example, it may take place when an individual or a group of individuals of a particular religious background get converted into some other religious set or group.

Role and importance of assimilation

1. In this integrative social process, the individuals or groups acquire the culture of another group in which they come to live by adopting its pattern of thinking, behaving, its attitudes and values.
2. As assimilation is a cultural and psychological process. It results in the promotion of cultural units.
3. It plays a very significant role in the development of human personality.
4. It brings similarity among dissimilar individuals or groups.
5. It brings change in old culture, customs, traditions, folkways, mores, morals, law and religions etc.

Factors contributing towards assimilation or factors promoting assimilation

1. Toleration: When the people of one culture tolerate the spread of another culture irrespective of their differences, tolerance takes place. Here, people of different cultures maintain balance by developing contacts, by participating in common social and cultural activities. So, toleration is an essential condition for promoting assimilation which is in turn helpful in unity and integrity of the community.
2. Intimacy: The development of close social relationships makes the process of assimilation natural and its degree become high. But when social relationships are not close and artificial, the process becomes slow. So, intimacy is another condition for assimilation.
3. Cultural equality: If there are striking similarities between the cultures, then there is no bar for assimilation to take place. When the degree of intimacy and toleration becomes high, it facilitates the growth of this process.
4. Equal economic standard: Difference in economic standard hinders assimilation. But individuals or groups having equal economic standards can easily establish intimacy which in turn avoids jealousy, hatred and conflict. Here assimilation progresses.
5. Amalgamation: When individuals or groups come into close contact with one another, amalgamation takes place. For example, the matrimonial relationship between the Hindus and Non-Hindus facilitate the process of assimilation.

Factors hindering assimilation or harmful to assimilation

There are some factors which are harmful to the growth of assimilation or the factors which obstruct the process of assimilation. These factors are explained below –

1. Isolation: Individuals who live separately or feel isolated cannot establish good social relationships with others in the society. So due to lack of close or intimate relationship, the process of assimilation is hampered or even it does not take place.
2. Cultural differences: Differences in culture also hinder assimilation. The cultures having different religions, races, languages, customs, traditions do not have close relationships with each other. If assimilation takes place there, it is very difficult for its continuity.
3. Differences in economic standard: Difference in economic standard encourages the feeling of inferiority and superiority. There occurs the feeling of high and low. People with the feeling of superiority decline to establish social relations with those having a sense of inferiority. So, differences in economic standard stand as an obstruction in the process of assimilation.
4. Physical differences: Differences in physical characteristics like colour of the skin, growth of human body and other physiological features act as hindrances to assimilation. For example, the differences in the physical features of the black and white hinder assimilation among them.
5. Domination and subordination: Intimate social relation is very much essential for assimilation. But assimilation is absent or is hampered when one group dominates the other. It lacks social relationships.

DISSOCIATIVE PROCESSES

Dissociative social processes are also called the disintegrative or disjunctive social processes. These processes hinder the growth and development of society, their absence results in stagnation of society.

1. Competition
2. Conflict

COMPETITION

Meaning of Competition

Competition is the most fundamental form of social struggle. It is a natural result of the universal struggle for existence. It is based on the fact that all people can never satisfy all their desires. Competition takes place whenever there is an insufficient supply of things that human beings commonly desire. Whenever and wherever commodities which people want are available in a limited supply, there is competition.

Definition of Competition

There are many definitions of competition given by different scholars. Some of the important definitions are given below:

1. Park and Burgess: “Competition is an interaction without social contact.”
2. Biesanz: “Competition is the striving of two or more persons for the same goal which is limited so that all cannot share.”
3. Horton and Hunt: “Competition is the struggle for possession of rewards which are limited in supply, goods, power, love – anything.”
4. Competition may also be defined as “the process of seeking to monopolise a reward by surpassing all rivals.”

From the above definitions it may be concluded that competition is a process in which individuals or groups try to obtain things or things which have limited supply and which they cannot achieve or share collectively.

Features of Competition

Competition as disintegrative social process has the following characteristic features:

1. Universal Process: It is the most universal social process present in all societies, whether civilized or uncivilized, rural or urban, traditional or modern in all periods of history and among all classes of people like doctors, engineers, workers, students and farmers etc.
2. Continuous process: Competition is a continuous process as it never comes to an end. If one process of competition ends then another process of competition stands there. The desire for status, power and wealth in an ever degree makes competition a continuous process.
3. Unconscious process: The individuals or the groups who are involved in the process of competition do not bother about themselves but they are primarily concerned with the achievement of goal or reward. Hence competition takes place on an unconscious level.
4. Impersonal process: Those who take part in competition do not know one another at all. They do not compete with each other on a personal level. They focus their attention on the goal or reward which they are trying to achieve. They do not have any contact whatsoever.
5. Always governed by norms: Nowhere competition is unregulated. It is always and everywhere governed by norms. Competitors are expected to use fair means to achieve success.

Forms or types of Competition

Competition as a universal social process is found in all fields of social life. In our day to day life we come across many types or forms of competitions. Some of the important competitions are the following.

1. Political Competition: This type of competition is found in the political field. For example, during elections each and every political party competes for getting majority. This is not only found at national level but at international level. Also, there is keen competition between nations who are wedded to different political ideologies.
2. Social competition: To get high social status usually this social competition is mostly observed in open societies where an individual’s talent, capacity, ability as well as merit are given weightage.
3. Economic Competition: In the economic field economic competition is fairly observed. It is the most vigorous form of competition. It is reflected in the process of production, distribution and consumption of goods. In the economic field men compete for salaries, jobs and promotions etc. they generally compete for higher standard of living. This economic competition is not only present at individual level but also at group level.
4. Cultural Competition: Cultural competition is present among different cultures. When two or more cultures try to show their superiority over others, this type of competition takes place. For example, in modern society there is cultural competition between the Hindus and the Muslims. In the ancient period, there was a strong competition between the cultures of Aryans and Non-Aryans.
5. Racial competition: Like cultural competition, racial competition is found among the major races of the world. When one race tries to establish its supremacy over other races, it gives birth to racial competition. For example, the competition between Negroes (Black) and the whites is the bright example of racial competition.

CONFLICT

Meaning of conflict

Conflict is an ever present process in human society. Whenever a person or persons or groups seek to gain reward not by surpassing other competitors but preventing them from effective competition, conflict takes place.

In other words, it is a competition in its more hostile and personal forms. It is the process of seeking to obtain rewards by eliminating or weakening the competitors. It is seen that conflict makes an individual or group try to frustrate the effort of another individual or group who are seeking the same object. It implies a struggle or fight among individuals or groups for a particular purpose or a number of purposes.

For example, the movements like Civil Disobedience, Non-Cooperation and Satyagraha launched by Mahatma Gandhi against the Britishers in India before Independence are in conflict. Even in today’s society conflict is found in every sphere like caste, religion, language, culture and so on. Thus, it is considered as a universal social process.

Definition of Conflict

1. Kingsley Davis defines conflict, “as a modified form of struggle.”
2. Maclver and Page state that, “Social conflict included all activity in which men contend against one another for any objective.”
3. A. W. Green says, “Conflict is the deliberate attempt to oppose, resist or coerce the will of another or others.”
4. Majumder defines that, “Conflict is an opposition or struggle involving an emotional attitude of hostility as well as violent interference with autonomous choice.”

From the above definitions, it is clear that individuals or groups involved in conflict try to oppose, resist or coerce each other deliberately. It is the opposite of cooperation. It is a process which leads two or more persons or groups to try to frustrate the attempts of their opponents to attain certain objectives.

Some of the examples which take us to different dimension are:

• The conflict between nations leads to national conflict.
• The conflict between different political parties leads to political conflict.
• Caste conflict, class conflict and racial conflict etc.

Features of conflict

From the above definition the following characteristics may be noted.

1. Universal Process: Conflict is found in all societies in all periods of time. The degree and the form of conflict may vary from society to society and from time to time but it is present in all types of societies.
2. Conscious process: This is a process in which the conflicting parties are very much conscious in causing loss or injury to persons or groups. They attempt to fight or oppose and defeat each other consciously.
3. Personal process: The chief aim of conflict is to cause harm or to bring loss to the opponents. The conflicting parties personally know each other. So in this form of struggle to overcome the opponents, the goal is temporarily relegated to a level of secondary importance.
4. Intermittent process: Conflict is not as continuous as competition. It is an intermittent process. It takes place suddenly and comes to an end quickly. It never continues for ever due to the occasional occurrence of conflict.
5. Conflict is based on violence: Sometimes conflict takes the form of violence. Violence is harmful to the growth of the society and retards the process as it creates a number of problems.

CAUSES OF CONFLICT

According to Freud and some other psychologists, the innate instinct for aggression in man is the main cause of conflicts. Generally, it arises from a clash of interest within groups and societies and between groups and societies. The significant causes are:

1. Individual difference: It is true that we, the human being, are not alike by nature, attributes, interests, personalities etc. These differences may lead to conflict among human beings.
2. Cultural differences: The culture of a group differs from the culture of the other group. The cultural differences among the groups sometimes cause tension and lead to conflict.
3. Differences of opinion regarding interest: In fact, the interests of different people or groups occasionally clash. For example, we can say that the interests of the employers and employees vary in many respects which may ultimately lead to conflict among them.
4. Social change: Social changes occur off and on in each and every society. Conflict is an expression of social disequilibrium. Social change is the cultural log which leads to conflict.

TYPES OF CONFLICT

Conflict may be of various types, like –

1. Overt and covert: Overt conflict has some manifestation but covert conflict or latent conflict primarily remains invisible.
2. Personal and corporate: Personal conflict occurs within the group due to hostility, jealousy etc., on the other hand, corporate conflict occurs among the groups within a society or between two societies.
3. Temporary and perpetual: When conflicts occur among the individuals in the bus or in the shop or in the road are called temporary conflict, on the other hand when conflict occurs between two rival groups, then it is called perpetual conflict.

Conflict is not a continuous process. It may stretch for some time. In each and every conflict there is an intermittent period of peace and social harmony.

According to different scholars, they classify conflict differently.

• Classification of Maclver and Page

According to Maclver and Page there are mainly two types of conflict.

i. Direct conflict: In this type of conflict, the conflicting individuals or groups try to harm each other directly to attain the goal or reward at the expense of their opponents even by going to the extent of injuring or destroying their rivals. Direct conflict may be of two types.

a. Less violent: Sometimes direct takes less violent form. So, it is less harmful. For example, litigation, propagandistic activities etc.

b. More violent: More violent forms of direct conflict is more harmful, for example, war, riots, revolutions etc.

ii. Indirect conflict: When the conflicting parties try to frustrate the efforts of their opponents indirectly it is called indirect conflict. The keen competition among the parties automatically takes the form of indirect conflict. For example, when two manufacturers go on lowering the prices of their commodities till both of them are declared insolvent is indirect conflict.

• Classification of Gillin and Gillin.

Gillin and Gillin have given five types of conflict. They are:

1. Personal conflict: It takes place on a personal level due to the selfish nature of man and the members of the same group when there is clash in their aims and ideas. For example, the conflict between two qualified persons for a common post.
2. Racial Conflict: It takes place among different races of the world. Some of the races feel superior to other races and some others feel inferior. So, the feeling of superiority and inferiority causes racial conflict. For example, the conflict between Whites and Negroes (Black).
3. Political conflict: It is found in the political field. When the different political leaders or the political parties try to gain power in democratic countries it is called political conflict.
4. Class conflict: It is present among the different classes of the society. Our modern society has been characterized by classes which are based on power, income, education etc. although class is an open system conflict takes place among different classes due to the difference in power, income, prestige etc. For example, the conflict between the proletariat and bourgeoisie according to Karl Marx led to class struggle.
5. International Conflict: It takes place between different nations. When the nations try to achieve a common objective by suppressing each other, international conflict takes place. For example, the conflict between India and Pakistan regarding the Kashmir issue.

• Classification of George Simmel

According to him there are four major forms of conflict. They are:

1. War: It is a type of direct conflict. When all the efforts of the different nations fail to resolve the conflict, war takes place. This is the only solution to bring peace.
2. Feud: It is another type of conflict which takes place among the members of the society. So, it is also called intra-group conflict. It differs from society to society in degrees. It is also sometimes referred to as factional strife.
3. Litigation: It is judicial by nature. In order to redress grievances and to get justice people take the help of the judiciary which is called litigation. For example, for a piece of land when two farmers take the help of the judiciary. Litigation takes place.
4. Conflict of Impersonal Ideals: When the individuals do not aim at achieving personal gain but for some ideals it is called the conflict of impersonal ideals. Here every party tries to justify the truthfulness of its own ideals. For example, when a political party tries to show that its ideals are better than that of other political parties. This conflict takes place.

Importance of Conflict

Although conflict is a form of struggle or fight, it is essential both for the individuals and society. It performs both constructive as well as destructive functions. Conflict is constructive in the sense when it is helpful in the smooth running of the society. It is destructive when it hinders the peaceful atmosphere and retards the progress of the society.

The chief functions of conflict may be discussed under two broad headings. They are:

1. Positive functions: The positive functions are purely constructive in nature.

• • Conflict increases fellow feeling, brotherhood and social solidarity within groups and societies. For example, inter-group conflict promotes intra-group cooperation.
  • Conflict helps in the exchange of cultural elements when it comes to an end.
  • It changes the status of the group or society which comes to be regarded as a superpower.
  • When conflict is over, the parties give up old values and accept new ones. It brings changes in old customs, traditions, folkways and mores.
  • Sometimes conflict helps in increasing the production which adds to the national income.

2. Negative Function: The negative functions are called the destructive functions. Some of the negative functions of conflict are given below.

• • In the process of conflict, the defeated party becomes psychologically and normally down.
  • Time, money and energy of the conflicting parties get exhausted.
  • Uncontrolled conflict brings violence which leads to destruction of lives and properties of countless individuals.
  • Social solidarity is adversely affected by conflict. It hinders national integration.
  • Sometimes conflict leads to inter-group tension and disrupts group unity.
  • Conflict diverts members attention from group objectives.

From the above discussion we come to know that conflict has both positive and negative importance. Its positive functions are more important than the negative ones. Moreover, conflict plays a very important role in consolidating a group internally.

Distinction between Cooperation and Competition

Cooperation is an associative or integrative social process and competition is a disintegrative or dissociative social process. Although these processes are universal, they differ from each other in the following points.

Co-operation:

1. Co-operation is a process of working together for common rewards.

2. The qualities like natural awareness, understanding, helpfulness and selfless attitude are necessary for co­operation.

3. Co-operation is limitless. Because one can go to any extent to help others.

4. Co-operation is always beneficial as it brings normally positive results.

5. Co-operation provides satisfaction and contentment to people.

6. The degree of solution for many international problems and disputes provided by co-operation is higher.

Competition:

1. Competition is a process in which individuals or groups struggle for some goal or end.

2. For competition self-confidence, strong aspirations, the spirit of adventure and readiness to suffer and to struggle are needed.

3. Competition has limitations as it is bound by norms.

4. Constructive competitions are always beneficial but uncontrolled competition is always harmful or dangerous.

5. Competition may cause satisfaction as well as dissatisfaction.

6. Competition may contribute to socio-economic progress as well as to general welfare but there is no chance for solution of inter­national problems and disputes.

Distinction between Accommodation and Assimilation

The Learning Process from when we are born, what we learn, the order and way we learn it, is not as random and chaotic as it might seem but organized and follows, more or less, a clearly defined pattern. If you have watched young children develop you will know that most crawl or shuffle before they can walk and almost no one’s first utterances are in complete sentences. While we are all proud when our child first points and utters the word “cat” to a four-legged feline nearby; we are even more pleased when he or she can distinguish between a cat and a dog, both of which have four legs, prominent ears, whiskers and a long tail. That is a sign of increasing discrimination on the child’s part.

The most important differences between accommodation and assimilation are listed below:

Accommodation:

1. Accommodation is the natural result of conflict. It takes place just after conflict is over.

2. Accommodation takes place suddenly by bringing radical changes.

3. Accommodation is a conscious process. The individuals or the groups make efforts consciously for accommodation.

4. Accommodation may or may not be a permanent process because the conflicting parties do adjust on a temporary basis.

5. Accommodation takes place between conflicting parties.

6. Accommodation is based upon both love and hatred.

7. Accommodation is a process of social adjustment.

Assimilation:

1. Assimilation takes place only after accommodation.

2. Assimilation is a slow and gradual process.

3. Assimilation is an unconscious process. People of different cultures get assimilated unconsciously.

4. Assimilation is a permanent process as the individuals or groups assimilate with each other on a more or less permanent basis.

5. Assimilation is based upon friendly and cordial relationships.

6. Assimilation is both a cultural and psychological process.

7. Accommodation is a process of social adjustment.

Distinction between Competition and Conflict

Although competition and conflict are the disintegrative or dissociative social processes, we find differences in their nature, types and functions. So, these two social processes should not be confused with each other. The distinction between these two may be indicated in the following points.

Competition:

1. Competition is continuous. It can never end. So, it is called a never-ending social process.

2. Competition is an impersonal process. The competing individuals do not have per­sonal contact what-so-ever.

3. Competition is an unconscious Process because the individuals or the groups are not aware of it. Their attention is mainly fixed on the object of competition. i.e. a reward or a prize.

4. Competition is a peaceful and non-violent process. There is absence of coercion or violence.

5. In competition all the competitors derive benefit from it.

6. Competition, when it becomes rigorous, results in conflict.

7. Competition and co-operation can go together simultaneously. Competition does not stand in the way of co-operation and vice-versa.

8. Competition encourages hard work.

9. Competition observes social laws.

10. Competition is productive.

Conflict:

1. Conflict lacks continuity. It is an intermittent social process. it takes place suddenly and comes to an end quickly. It is an ever-ending social process.

2. Conflict is a personal process. The conflicting parties know each other personally and try to defeat the opponent.

3. Conflict is a conscious process. Because the parties involved in conflict are aware of it and make deliberate efforts to reach the goal which takes place on a conscious level.

4. Conflict is generally a violent process as people engaged in conflict use violent methods.

5. In conflict people suffer heavy losses.

6. Competition, when personalized, leads to conflict.

7. It is conflict, which puts brakes on co-operation for a short period.

8. Conflict discourages efforts.

9. Conflict disregards social laws.

10. Conflict is non-productive.

Resocialization is a process in which a person is taught new norms, values, and practices that foster their transition from one social role to another. Resocialization can involve both minor and major forms of change and can be both voluntary or involuntary. The process ranges from simply adjusting to a new job or work environment, to moving to another country where you have to learn new customs, dress, language, and eating habits, to even more significant forms of change like becoming a parent. Examples of involuntary resocialization include becoming a prisoner or a widow.

Resocialization differs from the formative, lifelong process of socialization in that the latter directs a person’s development whereas the former redirects their development.

Learning and Unlearning

Sociologist Erving Goffman defined resocialization as a process of tearing down and rebuilding an individual’s role and socially constructed sense of self. It is often a deliberate and intense social process and it revolves around the notion that if something can be learned, it can be unlearned.

Resocialization is also necessary among people who have never been socialized from the start, such as feral or severely abused children. It is also relevant for people who haven’t had to behave socially for long periods, such as prisoners who have been in solitary confinement.

Resocialization and Total Institutions

A total institution is one in which a person is completely immersed in an environment that controls every aspect of day-to-day life under a singular authority. The goal of a total institution is resocialization to completely alter an individual and/or group of people’s way of living and being. Prisons, the military, and fraternity houses are examples of total institutions.

Within a total institution, resocialization is comprised of two parts. First, the institutional staff attempts to break down the residents’ identities and independence. This can be accomplished by making individuals give up their possessions, get identical haircuts, and wear standard-issue clothing or uniforms. It can be further achieved by subjecting individuals to humiliating and degrading processes such as fingerprinting, strip searches, and giving people serial numbers as identification rather than using their names.

The second phase of resocialization is attempting to build a new personality or sense of self, which is usually accomplished with a system of reward and punishment. The goal is conformity, which results when people change their behavior to accommodate the expectations of an authority figure or those of the larger group. Conformity can be established through rewards, such as allowing individuals access to a television, book, or telephone.

Horizontal mobility is the mobility of the individual or group in the same social class, in the same situation category, without changing the level of power or status. Horizontal mobility, which is a type of social mobility, refers to the change of physical space or profession without changes in the economic situation, prestige, and lifestyle of the individual, or the forward or backward movement from one similar group or status to another.

Pitirim Sorokin defines horizontal mobility as a change in religious, regional, political, or other horizontal shifts without any change in vertical position. According to Andrew W. Lind, horizontal mobility occurs when a person changes their profession, but their social status remains unchanged. Eg. if a doctor switches from a job in health care to teaching in medical school, the profession changes, but dignity and social status remain the same. According to Cameron Anderson, social status is the level of social value that a person is considered to have. The American sociologist Linda K. George listed the social status factors in horizontal mobility as work, wealth, success, education, ethnicity, and marital status.

What are folkways?

According to Reuter and Hart (1933), “The folkways are simple habits of action common to the members of the group; they are the ways of the folks that are somewhat standardised and have some degree of traditional sanction for their persistence”. Maclver and Page (1949) defined it as: “The folkways are the recognized or accepted ways of behaving in the society.”

In simple terms, folkways are the customary, normal and habitual ways of the group to meet certain needs or solving day-to-day problems. The time of meals, the number of meals per day, the manner of taking meals—lunch or dinner, the kind of food used, the manner of its preparations, the manner of speech and dress, forms of etiquette and the numerous other facts of daily life are some of the examples of customary practices to which individuals conform in their personal habits.

Any routine activity in itself is a habit from the point of view of the individual person but when it becomes general among the communicating folk, it is known as folkway, i.e., a habit of a group. Out of habits develop the uniformities in habit to which sociologist’s term as folkways or customs. Not all (group) habits become general. They differ from individual to individual and place to place.

Habits are repetitive actions of a person

They are learned in the process of socialisation. They become the second nature of the individual. When habits are socially approved and followed by a number of persons in a society, they become folkways, for example, habits of exchanging greetings and courtesies.

The wearing of a cap, hat or turban and many other matters of dress are habits of individuals but they are folkways from the point of view of the group. Shaking hands, eating with forks and knives, driving on the left or right hand side of the street, attending classes in paints and skirts rather than gowns or bathing suits or writing as ‘Dear Sir’, Gentleman in the letter are a few of many western or American folkways.

Similarly, wearing turban and sherwani (long embroidered coat) and riding the female horse by the bridegroom at the time of marriage procession, wearing a Mangal Sutra (a gold chain with beads) by a married Hindu woman, bidding ‘Namaste’ with joined palms or cleaning of hands before taking food are some of the examples of Indian folkways. Folkways cover a good proportion of our daily habits from the rules of simple etiquette to the technical way of handling problems.

Characteristics

W.G. Sumner (1906) wrote

“The folkways are unconscious, sponta­neous, uncoordinated adjustment of man to his environment, the product of the frequent repetition of petty acts, often by great numerous acting in concern or at least acting in the same way when face to face with the same need.”

The major characteristics of folkways are as under

1. Folkways arise spontaneously out of the fundamental fact that man must act in order to live. They generally arise unconsciously in a group such as shaking hands, tipping the hat, calling on strangers and without planned or rational thought.
2. Folkways develop out of group experience. They are passed down from generation to generation through interaction.
3. They change as culture changes or when we enter different situations.
4. Folkways are the weakest norms, which are most often violated but least likely to carry any severe punishment. Violations of folkways bring only mild censure in the form of some smiles, glances, or occasional comments from others.
5. Folkways are not looked on by most people as moral matters. They are deemed the ‘right’ way and ‘normal’. People accept most of them unquestionably.
6. Folkways differ from mores in that they are less severely sanctioned and are not abstract principles.
7. Folkways (customs) may and sometimes do become burdensome.
8. Every society has some/many folkways. Even the most primitive society will have a few hundred folkways. In modern industrial societies they become even more numerous and involved.

Importance

Folkways are the basis of culture. They give us better understanding about a particular culture. They are regulative and exert pressure upon the individual and the group to conform to the norms. They are most powerful and control the behaviour of individuals in society even more than the state action. Folkways are as indispensable to social life as language, and they serve much the same purpose.

The term “role” describes a set of expected actions and obligations a person has for his or her position in life and relationships with others. We all have multiple roles and responsibilities in our lives,  from sons and daughters, sisters and brothers, mothers and fathers, spouses and partners to friends, and even professional and social ones.

The role not only provides a blueprint to guide the action, but also describes the goals to pursue, the tasks to perform, and the course of action for a particular scenario.

Role conflicts represent role-to-role conflicts that correspond to two or more statuses held by an individual. As we try to accommodate the many stats we hold, we experience role conflicts when we feel pulled in different directions.

The most obvious example of role conflict is the conflict between work and family, or the conflict felt when torn between family and work responsibilities. For example, consider a mother who is also a doctor. She is likely to have to work long hours in the hospital and may even call several nights a week to separate her children from her children. Many who have fallen into this situation say they are inconsistent and desperate about their situation. In other words, they experience role conflicts.

Why does role conflict occur?

Role conflicts occur when conflicting demands are placed on an individual in relation to work or position. People experience role conflicts when they feel that they are being pulled in different directions in an attempt to accommodate many of their stats. Role conflicts can be both short-term and long-term and can also be linked to contextual experiences.

There are two types of role conflict :

1. Intra-role conflict
2. Inter-role conflict

Intra-role conflicts

Conflicts within roles occur when the demand is in a single area of ​​life, such as at the workplace. For example- two managers may ask an employee to complete a task, and both cannot be completed at the same time.

Inter-role conflicts

The conflict between individuals is due to differences in their goals and values. It refers to conflicting expectations from different roles within the same person. Inter-role conflicts are work-to-family conflicts that occur when work responsibilities clash with family obligations and family-to-work conflicts that occur when family responsibilities clash with work responsibilities.

Techniques to minimize conflicts

• Focus on what is said, not on how it is said.
• Do not formulate a response right away, first listen carefully.
• Clarify and reflect on what you are hearing.
• Don’t respond to high-intensity, emotional words.
• Monitor your non-verbal “leakage.”
• Recognize emerging needs and interests of another person.
• Excuse yourself for a “time-out” if emotions are escalated.

Scope means area of study or field of inquiry or the subject matter. Each and every science has its own field of study or field of enquiry, so also sociology. Study of sociology is organised within a specific boundary which is known as the scope of Sociology. Similarly each and every science has its demarcated boundary without which it is very difficult to study a subject systematically.

Hence it is necessary to demarcate the boundary and delimit the scope of a subject. But Sociologists are not unanimous about the scope of Sociology. Some Sociologists opines sociology studies everything and anything under the Sun. Sociologist V.F. Calberton writes, “Since Sociology is so elastic a science, it is difficult to determine just where its boundaries begin and end, where sociology becomes social psychology and where social psychology becomes sociology or where economic theory becomes sociological doctrine or biological theory becomes sociological theory, something which is impossible to decide.

“But this view makes the scope of sociology too wide. Hence an attempt has been made to demarcate the scope of Sociology.

However, there are two main schools of thought among the Sociologist about the scope and subject matter of sociology such as (1) Formalistic or specialist School of thought and (2) The Synthetic School of thought.

The formalistic or Specialist School of Thought 

This school of thought is headed by German Sociologist George Simmel. The other main supporters of this school of thought are Alfred Vierkandt, Leopold Vonwiese, Max-Weber Albion Small and Ferdinand Tonnies.

According to them Sociology cannot study social life as a whole. Hence the scope of Sociology is very limited. According to this School of thought the scope of Sociology consists of forms of social relationships. These Sociologists want to keep the scope of Sociology distinct from other social sciences. These schools of thought consider sociology as a pure and independent science. However the views of the supporters of this school of thought are as follows:

George Simmel

Simmel agree with the formalistic view that Sociology is a pure and independent science. According to him Sociology is a specific social science which should describes, classifies, analyses and delineates the forms of social relationships, the process of socialization and social organization. Sociology should confine itself in studying formal behaviour instead of studying actual behaviour.

Simmel makes a distinction between the forms of social relationships and their contents and opines that sociology should confine itself in explaining different forms of social relationships and study them in abstraction whereas their contents are dealt with by other social sciences. Hence Sociology is the science of the forms of social relationship. Because it comprehends the forms of social relationships and activities, not the relationships themselves. Co-operation, competition, sub­ordination, division of labour etc. are different forms of social relationships or behaviour. Thus, according to Simmel the scope of Sociology is very limited.

Alfred Vierkandt

Another leading advocate of formalistic school Vierkandt opines that Sociology is a special branch of knowledge which deals with the ultimate forms of mental or psychic relationships which link men to one another in society. These mental relationships consist in love, hate, co-operation etc. which shape particular types of social relationships. He further maintains that Sociology can be a definite science only when it abstains from a historic study of concrete societies. Thus in Vierkandt’s opinion the scope of sociology is very limited as it deals with the ultimate forms of mental or psychic relationships.

Leopold Vonwiese

Another advocate of formalistic school Vonwiese opines that the scope of Sociology is very limited because it only studies the forms of social relationships and forms of social processes.

He has divided these social relationships and social processes into many types. According to Vonwiese there are two social processes in society such as associative and dissociative social process. Co-operation, accommodation, assimilation etc. are example of associative process. Whereas competition and conflict are example of dissociative process. Accordingly he have identified more than 650 forms of human relationships.

Max-weber

Another supporter of formalistic school Max-weber agrees with the formalistic view that the scope of Sociology is very limited. Because Sociology attempt to make an interpretative understanding of social action and social behaviour. It should confine itself in the analysis and classification of social action and social behaviour. Social behaviour is that which is related to the behaviour of others. Sociology studies these behaviour only.

Albion Small

Another advocate of formalistic school small opines that the scope of sociology is very limited because it does not study all the activities of society. It only confines itself in studying the genetic forms of social relationships, behaviour and activities.

Ferdinand Tonnies

Tonnies strongly support the formalistic school of thought and opine that Sociology is a pure and independent science. On the basis of forms of social relationships Tonnies differentiated between ‘Gemeinschaft’ and ‘Gesellschaft’ i.e. society and community and opines that the main aim of sociology is to study the different forms of social relationship that comes under these two categories.

Thus we conclude that according to this school of thought sociology studies a particular aspect of social relationships in their abstract nature and not in any concrete situation.

Cultural Lag is a sociological concept developed by William Fielding Ogburn to describe the delay that occurs when material culture (such as technology, tools, and infrastructure) changes faster than non-material culture (such as values, beliefs, and social norms). This gap often creates social problems and conflicts as society struggles to adjust to new advancements within its cultural framework.

Material culture typically advances quickly through innovation and invention, whereas non-material culture requires time to integrate these changes into established social practices and ethical standards. For instance, the rapid development of digital technology has brought about significant changes in how people communicate and access information, but many societies still grapple with issues related to privacy, cybersecurity, and digital ethics. This inability of non-material culture to keep pace with technological progress can lead to confusion, resistance, and even moral dilemmas.

The concept of cultural lag emphasizes that as societies evolve, it is crucial to address the imbalance between technological advancements and societal norms to promote social stability and adaptation. Understanding cultural lag helps sociologists and policymakers identify areas where cultural adaptation is needed to reduce friction between new technologies and existing social values.

In sociology, customs and mores are types of social norms that guide human behavior within a society, though they differ in importance and strictness.

Customs are established practices or habits that are generally followed by members of a community, often without strict enforcement. They are informal social expectations and are frequently tied to traditions, such as greeting gestures, celebrations, and dress codes. Customs help create a sense of continuity and familiarity within a culture, offering guidelines for polite behavior. While they contribute to social cohesion, violating a custom usually does not result in severe consequences.

Mores, on the other hand, are deeply rooted moral norms that are essential for the functioning of society. They represent a society’s core values and dictate what is considered right or wrong. Mores often govern issues related to ethics, justice, and social order, such as honesty, loyalty, and prohibitions against violence. Violations of mores typically lead to serious social sanctions or legal penalties, as these norms are fundamental to maintaining moral integrity and stability within a community.

In sum, customs and mores play distinct yet complementary roles in shaping social behavior. Customs create a shared cultural identity, while mores enforce the moral framework necessary for societal harmony. Together, they ensure that individuals act in ways that uphold both the traditions and values of their society.

Social deviance refers to behaviors or actions that violate the accepted norms or standards of a society or social group. It encompasses a range of activities that deviate from social expectations, from minor transgressions like dress code violations to serious offenses like theft or violence. Sociologists study deviance to understand why people break social norms and how society responds to such behaviors.

Deviance is often classified as either formal or informal. Formal deviance includes actions that break laws or official rules, such as criminal acts that are subject to legal penalties. Informal deviance consists of behaviors that, while not illegal, are viewed as socially unacceptable or immoral—for example, rudeness or eccentric dress. Both forms of deviance challenge the conformity expected within a society and can lead to social disapproval or stigma.

Societal reactions to deviance vary widely. In some cases, deviance prompts punishment or reform efforts; in others, it can lead to social change as deviant behaviors become normalized over time. For instance, civil rights movements once seen as deviant later gained acceptance and reshaped societal norms.

The study of social deviance sheds light on how societies define and enforce normalcy, as well as on the role of power in determining what is considered deviant. It underscores that deviance is not inherently negative but can also be a force for innovation and progress within a society.

Meaning of Cooperation

Cooperation is one of the most basic, pervasive and continuous social processes. It is the very basis of social existence. The term “Cooperation” is derived from the two Latin words: “co” means ‘together’ and ‘operari’ meaning ‘to work’. Hence cooperation means working together or joint activity for the achievement of common goal or goals. So, it is a process in which individuals or groups work unitedly for the promotion of common goals or objectives. It is a goal oriented social process. It is very important as human society and its development have been possible with cooperation.

Definition of Cooperation

1. Merrill and Eldredge: ‘cooperation is a form of social interaction wherein two or more person work together to gain a common end.’
2. A. W. Green: ‘cooperation is the continuous and common Endeavour of two or more persons to perform a task or to reach a goal that is commonly cherished.’
3. Fairchild: ‘cooperation is the process by which the individuals or groups combine their effort, in a more or less organized way for the attainment of common objective.’

Characteristics of Co-operation

Following are some of the important characteristics of co-operation:

1. Continuous Process: It is a continuous process. There is continuity in the collective efforts in co-operation
2. Personal Process: This is a process in which the individuals and the groups personally meet and work together for a common objective.
3. Conscious Process: In the process of co-operation the organized individuals or the groups work together consciously.
4. Universal Process: Co-operation is also a universal social process. Because it is found everywhere in all periods of time.
5. Common Ends: Common ends can be better achieved by co-operation which is essential for the welfare of both individuals and society.
6. Organized Efforts: Co-operation is a process of social interaction which is based on the organized efforts of individuals and groups.

Types of Cooperation

Different sociologists have classified co-operation in different ways. Some of the important types of co-operation are the following.

Maclver and Page have divided cooperation into two main types namely, Direct Cooperation  and Indirect Cooperation.

1. Direct cooperation: In the process of cooperation when individuals and groups cooperate directly with each other, that is called direct cooperation. There exists a direct relationship among individuals and the groups. It permits the people to do things together because the nature of work itself calls for the participation of men or groups in a together situation. It brings social satisfaction. It makes the difficult tasks easy.

Examples of direct cooperation in societies

• In rural communities the people co-operate in carrying the ill person to the doctor.
• The people co-operate on marriage, birth, Eid’s and other occa­sions of celebration.
• In urban communities people of a political party co-operate with one another in general walks of social life.
• In urban areas, the people of a religious sect co-operate with one another with special interest

2. Indirect cooperation: In the process of cooperation when people do things individually and indirectly for the achievement of a common goal that is called indirect cooperation. Here the goal is one or common, but the individuals perform specialized functions for its attainment. This cooperation is based on the principles of division of labour and specializations of functions. So, in modern society indirect cooperation plays an important role as the present technological age requires specialization of skills and functions.

Examples of Indirect Cooperation

• The owners of a mill and its workers co-operate with one an­other.
• The businessmen and the customers co-operate on the selling rates of the products.
• The exogamous system of marriage is a marriage between two families of different castes and Biradari (means a caste or sub-caste, e.g., Goldsmith, Blacksmith, Skinner etc.). This system is grow­ing popular in urban social life.
• The people living in urban communities co-operate in different acts of social life even if they belong to different professions, castes, classes, sects and political parties.
• Co-operation among the people of different professions is a nice example of this type. In this way, they fulfill the needs of one another. This type of co-operation is indirect

Classifications of Cooperation given by A. W. Green are given below –

• Primary cooperation: In this type of cooperation there is an identity of interests but no self-interest among those who cooperate. Every member is conscious of the welfare of all. It owes its origin to personal satisfaction. It is present in primary groups like family, neighbourhood and children’s play groups. Here there is an identity or ends of interest and all the members in some way or the other, derive benefit from primary cooperation.
• Secondary cooperation: In these groups the individuals cooperate with each other for the achievement of some self-interest. This is the characteristic feature of modern civilized society which is very much witnessed in political, economic, religious, commercial, educational and other groups. It does not provide equal benefits to all its members.
• Tertiary cooperation: Primary and secondary cooperation is the characteristic of an individual person while tertiary cooperation characterizes the interaction among various social groups, large or small. These groups make certain adjustments voluntarily with each other under certain compelling circumstances. The attitude of groups cooperating with each other is selfish and opportunistic in the extreme.

For example, in an election when two political parties cooperate with each other to defeat the rival party, it is called tertiary cooperation.

Role and importance of cooperation

Being a universal and continuous social process, cooperation plays a dominant role but it is very much essential for the welfare of the society as well. So, the role of cooperation may be discussed by two angels. They are –

• From an individual point of view.
• From the point of view of society.

Role of cooperation from individual point of view:

1. Man can fulfil his basic and fundamental needs such as food, clothing and shelter by cooperation. It also fulfils many psychological needs of human beings.
2. It is not possible for individuals to reach their respective goals without the active cooperation of other members in society.
3. Cooperation is the foundation on which our social life is built up. The existence of society and the survival of human beings depend upon the cooperative spirit and mutual aid of men and women.
4. With the solid and active cooperation of his fellow beings, man can lead a happy and comfortable life.

Role of cooperation from the point of view of society:

1. It helps society to progress. Progress can be better achieved through united action. Progress in science, technology, agriculture, industry, transport and communication etc. has been possible with cooperation.
2. It is the mainspring of collective life. It builds society, it conserves society. In a democratic country, cooperation has become a necessary condition of collective life and activities.
3. It provides solutions for many international problems and disputes. Because cooperation as a process of integration has the quality to bring end to different problems through united activities.
4. Progress is granted permanence only by cooperation. Because conflict inspires the individual to progress, but he does so not only if he gets cooperation.

Inequality in society is rooted in various bases that determine how resources, opportunities, and status are distributed among individuals and groups. These bases of inequality shape access to wealth, power, and privilege, often leading to social stratification and hierarchical divisions.

One of the primary bases of inequality is economic status, where disparities in income and wealth create distinct social classes. Economic inequality affects individuals’ access to education, healthcare, and overall quality of life, often reinforcing cycles of poverty and affluence across generations. Another crucial base is race and ethnicity, where discrimination and prejudice against certain groups lead to systemic inequalities, limiting opportunities and perpetuating social exclusion.

Gender is also a significant factor in inequality, with traditional norms and expectations often leading to patriarchal structures that limit women’s rights and access to leadership roles and economic resources. Similarly, age and disability can create barriers, as certain age groups and individuals with disabilities may face marginalization and reduced access to employment and social services.

Additionally, education is a key basis of inequality, as access to quality education often dictates one’s future economic mobility and social standing. Those with limited educational opportunities are at a disadvantage in the job market and in social status, which further perpetuates inequality.

In sum, the bases of inequality—economic status, race, gender, age, disability, and education—intersect to shape social hierarchies and influence individuals’ life chances. Addressing these inequalities requires understanding how these bases interact and contribute to the persistent disparities that characterize modern societies.

The caste system is a hierarchical social structure deeply rooted in South Asian societies, particularly India. Traditionally, it divides people into rigid social classes or “castes” based on birth, determining one’s occupation, social interactions, and marital prospects. Originating in ancient Hindu society, the caste system classified individuals into four main categories: Brahmins (priests and scholars), Kshatriyas (warriors and rulers), Vaishyas (merchants and traders), and Shudras (laborers and service providers). Outside this system are the Dalits or “Untouchables,” who were historically marginalized and subjected to severe discrimination.

The caste system has influenced Indian social, political, and economic dynamics for centuries. Despite modern constitutional safeguards and legal protections aimed at eliminating caste-based discrimination, deep-rooted prejudices still persist in many areas, affecting social mobility and access to opportunities. Today, affirmative action policies attempt to address historical injustices, offering reservations in education and employment for disadvantaged groups. However, while legal reforms have weakened some aspects of the caste system, the cultural and social remnants of caste divisions continue to influence contemporary society, posing challenges for social equality and inclusivity in modern India.

The concepts of in-group and out-group are essential to understanding social identity and group dynamics. An in-group refers to a group with which an individual identifies strongly and feels a sense of belonging and loyalty. Members of an in-group often share common interests, values, and goals, fostering a sense of solidarity and mutual support. For example, family, close friends, and cultural or national groups typically form in-groups.

In contrast, an out-group is perceived as a group that is distinct and different from one’s in-group, often seen as opposing or threatening to the values or norms of the in-group. This distinction can lead to prejudice, stereotyping, and sometimes conflict, as people tend to favor their in-group over out-groups, a phenomenon known as in-group bias. These group distinctions are significant in social psychology because they influence how individuals perceive and interact with others, shaping attitudes, behaviors, and social cohesion within societies.

There would be no society if there were no people talking to one another, acting and interacting, cooperating with one another. But how to behave in one’s society or what is right and what is wrong in the society, all these things one -has to learn in the society. Each society has its own special set of rules, its own customs and tradi­tions, its own set of values and beliefs, and each must teach its members to fit into the society.

The idea of society implies a mutual give-and-take by the individuals concerned either in the form of mutual glances, waving of hand, greeting, handshake, conversation or the more subtle forms of give-and-take such as letter writing, season or festival greeting, sending and acknowledging of gifts, talking on phone, e-mailing, Internet chatting and participating in public affairs.

The relationship between individual and society can be viewed from three angles:

(i) Functionalist,

(ii) Inter-actionist, and

(iii) Culture and personality.

Functionalist view: How society affects the individual?

What is the relationship of the individual to society? Functionalists regard the individual as formed by society through the influence of such institutions as the family, school and workplace. Early sociolo­gists such as Herbert Spencer, Emile Durkheim and even Karl Marx, who was not a functionalist, examined society as existing apart from the individual. For Durkheim, society is reality; it is first in origin and importance to the individual.

Durkheim’s keen discussion of the collective consciousness showed the ways in which social interactions and relationships and ultimately society influence the individual’s attitudes, ideas and sentiments. He utilised his theory of ‘collective representation’ in explaining the phenomena of religion, suicide and the concept of social solidarity.

Thus, Durkheim is classed as a ‘social realist’, a champion of ‘sociologism’, for he propounded the kind of ‘social realism’ that gave ultimate social reality to the group, not to the individual. Durkheim’s conception left little room for individual initiative and freedom.

In contrast to Auguste Comte (known as father of sociology), who regarded the individual as a mere abstraction, a somewhat more substantial position by Durkheim held that the individual was the recipient of group influence and social heritage. In sociological circle, this was the ‘burning question’ (individual v/s society) of the day.

How society is important in the formation of individual’s person­ality is clearly reflected in the cases of isolated and feral children (children who were raised in the company of animals such as bears and wolves). The studies of feral children, referred to earlier (Anna, Isabelle, Kamla, Ramu etc.), have clearly demonstrated the impor­tance of social interaction and human association in the development of personality.

Interactionist view: How is society constructed?

How an individual helps in building society? For inter-actionists, it is through the interaction of the people that the society is formed. The main champion of this approach was Max Weber (social action theorist), who said that society is built up out of the interpretations of individuals.

The structuralists (or functionalists) tend to approach the relationship of self (individual) and society from the point of the influence of society on the individual. Inter-actionists, on the other hand, tend to work from self (individual) ‘outwards’, stressing that people create society.

This perspective is sometimes referred to as ‘symbolic interactionism’. W.I. Thomas, George Mead and Herbert Blumer were the most influential figures among the inter-actionists. Other recent approaches, which also place emphasis on individual, are ethnomethodology and phenomenology which is basically a philosophical perspective.

Symbolic interactionism emphasises the importance of symbolic means of communication—language, gesture and dress etc. Inter-actionists fully accept that society does constrain and form individuals but they also consider that there is invariably opportunity for some ‘creative’ action (W.I. Thomas).

A prominent theorist of the last century, Talcott Parsons (1937, 1951) ignored the American symbolic interactionists and tried to attempt a grand synthesis of individual action and large-scale structure in his theory. But, his emphasis was heavily on the large-scale structure (society).

He believed that it is the structure of society which determines roles and norms, and the cultural system which determines the ultimate values of ends. His theory was severely criticised by George Homans (1961). In his Presidential address (1964), “Bringing man Back In”, Homans re-established the need to study individual social interactions, the building blocks of society.

A recent well-known theorist Anthony Giddens (1984) has not accepted the idea of some sociologists that society has an existence over and above individuals. He argues: “Human actions and their reactions are the only reality and we cannot regard societies or systems as having an existence over and above individuals.”

Culture and personality view: How individual and society affect each other? Or how individual and society interacts?

Both the above views are incomplete. In reality, it is not society or individual but it is society and individual which helps in under­standing the total reality. The extreme view of individual or society has long been abandoned. For sociologists—from Cooley to the present—have recognised that neither society nor the individual can exist without each other and that they are, in reality, different aspects of the same thing. Many studies conducted in the field of social/cultural anthropology substantiate this view.

This view was laid down mainly by Margaret Mead, Kardiner and others who maintained that society’s culture affects personality (individual) and, in turn, personality helps in the formation of society’s culture. These anthropologists have studied how society shapes or controls individuals and how, in turn, individuals create and change society.

Thus, to conclude, it can be stated that the relationship between society and individual is not one-sided. Both are essential for the comprehension of either. Both go hand in hand, each is essentially dependent on the other. Both are interdependent on each, other.

A few writings of the past and present individualists—Thomas Hobbes (17th century) and John Stuart Mill (19th century) have failed to recognise this interdependency. And today, on the basis of same misunderstanding of ±e interrelationship, we hear long echoes of this ‘threat’ of the social order to the individual in our legislative assemblies, UNO and champion of human rights organisations.

These institutions and organisations regard every new measure of social security (such as MESA or POTA Acts in India) as a ‘blow’ to liberty. The same misunderstanding is held by thinkers such as Benjamin Kidd and philosopher Hegel who oppose the above views.

In their opinion the individual should be subordinated to society. They say that the individual should sacrifice their welfare at the cost of society. Both these views are extreme which see the relationship between individual and society from merely the one or the other side. But surely all is not harmonious between individual and society. The individual and society interact on one another and depend on one another. Social integration is never complete and harmonious.

Currently, serious students question the utility of this prolonged debate over individual versus society. They perceived the individual and society as different sides of the same coin. Society cannot exist without individuals nor can individuals exist outside the society. “Sociology studies interaction between the self (or individual) and groups, and interaction between the groups. The self may both affect certain groups (and so society) and be affected by these groups.

Individuals are part of society” (Mike O’ Donnell, 1997). It is unlikely that this controversy will ever be solved. Moreover, it is a debate, which is not just confined to sociology, but preoccupies scholars in all fields of the social sciences.

Introduction

There are no limitations to human desires. People are full of greed, lust, and anger. To overcome all the dark side of our lives there is the existence of an Ashram system. The existence of Ashram system can be found in India since ages. The system of ashram and its theory was suggested by ancient sages. They believed that system of ashram makes a man satisfied with a healthy and prosperous life. Moreover, one can get spiritual knowledge, education, and find the morals of life by following the system of Ashrams.

The System of Ashrams

The system of ashrams work follows four principles such as Dharma, Artha, Kama and lastly Moksha. The whole life of a human being is driven through these four principles only. The words Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha signify the meaning of virtue, wealth, willingness, and freedom. The sequence is very important to achieve the goal of life. At first, there is Dharma which satisfies the term well established. This principle of life works differently in different situations of life. It is the ultimate resource of human values.

Then the second principle is Artha signifies achievements that are wealthy. The achievements can be of different types such as learning the virtue of life, skills, and habits. As a result, achieving artha requires an intermediate level of motivation. It refers to the culturally conditioned ideas that shape individual desire. The depth and stability of such cultural ideas are relative. They have larger and more enduring than personal aspirations because they are shared by many people within the community that exists even as individuals come and go. As a result, achieving Artha requires an intermediate level of motivation. It refers to the culturally conditioned ideas that shape individual desire. The depth and stability of such cultural ideals are relative. They are larger and more durable than personal aspirations because they are shared by many people within the community that endures even as individuals come and go. The third principle is the Kama which signifies the willingness of humans for any object. These desires vary from person to person. It can be decreased or controlled by time or by experience. The principle of Kama is the best example to motivate a person.

The last and final goal of the Ashram system is to take a man to the Moksha. It implies the freedom of human beings. There is no existence of desires. People are free from the factors that hamper our mental and physical health. There is only the existence of knowledge and spirituality. However, all the Ashrams work upon spiritual theory.

Explore our latest online courses and learn new skills at your own pace. Enroll and become a certified expert to boost your career.

Importance of an Ashram in Ancient Indian Society

An Ashram is the step of life where people take a break and prepare themselves to step into a new stage of life. It has played a great role in managing the lives of ancient people. In ancient history, four stages of life are classified based on the theory of Ashrams. Each of the Ashrams signifies the different goals of life to be achieved by a person. People used to follow the steps throughout their entire lives. The sections of the Ashram and their importance is described below −

• Significance of Brahmacharya − The initial stage of life is known as Brahmacharya. A child enters the cycle of Ashrams of life stages by the ceremony of upanayana where they are considered the reborn child. A boy of eight years old is chosen for the ceremony. Kshatriya boys of ten years and Vaishya boys of twelve years are allowed for the ceremony. There is no place for the Sudra boys to take part in the process as they were not permitted to take education. In this stage, children are taught about disciplines, cultures of India and the Vedas. Personality development is the agenda of this Ashram.

• Significance of Grihastha −This is the second stage of life where a boy enters youth life from his childhood life. He entered into married life. However, they have to provide services to people, requiring themselves along with the birds and animals.

• Significance of Vanaprashta − The next stage of life is known as Vanaprashta which begins at the age of fifty. At this time he has to leave his family as well as the village. He has to go to the forest alone and practice meditation. This is the way of making the soul pure. The control of the senses is the main focus of the vanaprastha. Sometimes the wife of the man is permitted to live with him for the sake of performing social activities.

• Significance of Sannyasa − The final stage of life entered after the vanaprastha took place at the age of 75 years. In this stage, a person forgets about all the bindings with the world and serves to the God.

Education in Ashrams

Previously it had been discussed that an Ashram is the best place for gaining knowledge. From the stage of Brahmacharya, a child studies the Vedas and spirituality. After that, he learns how to eliminate desires from life. In the case of Grihastha life, he learns to take responsibility and duties of his family as well as to serve the whole world. In the Vanaprastha stage, a person not only serves the world but also he spreads knowledge and experience to the young generations. In the Sannyasi stage, he learns to sacrifice his life to God and starts working in the service of God. Moreover, he learns to forget about the attachment to the family as well as the universe.

Conclusion

The life of human beings is linked up with Ashrams. India is the harbour of spiritual activities. It is the root of Indian culture and history. The Ashram has a great role in developing a person mentally and physically. But nowadays the agenda of Ashrams have tangled with the lifestyle of the young generations. There is no essence of Vedic knowledge remaining in society. People forget to do their duties and responsibilities towards the society as well as the nation. A man enjoys the Grihastha stage from marriage to the end of his life which results in conflicts and troubles in their family. A person without the knowledge of life stages, cannot survive in society or cannot be happy inside. So, there is a requirement of spreading the knowledge of Ashrams rapidly among the current generations.

An agrarian society is a type of society whose economy is primarily based on agriculture and the cultivation of crops. In sociology, agrarian societies are seen as one of the earliest forms of structured societies, where people transitioned from hunter-gatherer lifestyles to settled farming communities. This shift allowed for the production surplus, which could be stored, traded, or redistributed, leading to the development of social hierarchies and specialized roles beyond farming, such as traders, leaders, and artisans.

In agrarian societies, land ownership and control of agricultural resources became central to social status and power dynamics, often leading to the creation of class divisions between landowners and laborers. These societies typically have strong family structures and communal values, with extended families working together on shared agricultural land.

Agrarian societies laid the foundation for urbanization and the development of civilizations, as agricultural stability enabled population growth and the rise of complex political, economic, and cultural systems. Although largely replaced by industrial and post-industrial societies in many parts of the world, agrarian societies still exist in rural areas, where traditional farming practices and community-centered living continue to be significant.