• Change is an ever-present phenomenon in the world, constantly affecting everything, including society.
• Heraclitus, an ancient Greek philosopher, famously stated that it is impossible to step into the same river twice because both the man and the river have changed, emphasizing the impermanence and inconstancy of everything except change itself.
• Social order is not static but constantly changing, a concept that has been explored by sociologists since Comte, who distinguished between social statics (what is) and social dynamics (how it changes).
• Sociologists aim to understand both the structure of society and the causes of its change, as noted by the Roman poet Lucretius, who said, “Happy is he who can know the causes of things.”
• Social change is a perplexing and constant problem in sociology, as nothing social remains the same or abides.
• Change is the Law of Nature: Nature is constantly in motion, and this principle applies to society as well. Society is a dynamic entity and an ongoing process, not a static phenomenon.
• Social change has occurred throughout all societies, at all times, and will continue to do so, regardless of how traditional or conservative a society may be.
• Human society is inherently changeable. While individuals seek stability and societies may promote the illusion of permanence, society is influenced by many forces that cause inevitable change.
• India today is different from India in the past, and its future is uncertain, demonstrating the unpredictable nature of social change.
• Over a period of a decade or two, significant changes can and do occur in human society, making the sociologist’s task of understanding society more complex, as the social landscape itself changes during their exploration.
• The study of social change involves recognizing that society is in a state of constant flux, affecting both the methodssociologists use and the results they find.

• Change refers to any alteration, difference, or modification that occurs over time in a situation or object.
• Social change specifically refers to changes in human interactions and interrelations, as society is a “web of social relationships.”
• Social change involves changes in the system of social relationships, understood in terms of social processes, social interactions, and social organization.
• It includes alterations in the structure and functions of society.
• Definitions of Social Change:
  • M.E. Jones: “Social change describes variations or modifications in any aspect of social processes, social patterns, social interaction, or social organization.”
  • Kingsley Davis: “Social change refers to alterations in social organization, specifically the structure and functions of society.”
  • Majumdar, H.T.: “Social change is a new fashion or mode that modifies or replaces the old in the life of a people or in the operation of society.”
  • Maclver and Page: “Social change is a process responsive to many types of changes, including those in manmade conditions, attitudes and beliefs, and changes beyond human control, such as biological and physical changes.”
  • Maclver (in another context): “Social change is simply a change in human relationships.”
• Social change is a complex phenomenon that remains one of the great unsolved problems in social science.
• The phenomenon of social change is not simple, and it is difficult to understand in its entirety.
• Unsolved problems in social change:
  • What is the direction of social change?
  • What is the form of social change?
  • What is the source of social change?
  • What are its causes and consequences?
  • What are its conditions and limitations?
  • What is the rate of change?
  • Are changes due to human engineering or uncontrollable cosmic design?
  • Is it necessary to control social change?
  • Can man regulate it to suit his conveniences and desires?
• These questions are significant because of their complexity and human significance.

NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL CHANGE

• Social change is continuous: Society is in a state of constant change. These changes cannot be stopped, and society is always undergoing flux, from the beginning of history to the present day.
• Social change is temporal: Social change occurs through time and follows a time-sequence. Society exists as a process of becoming, not as a static being. Change involves the modification and renovation of behavior, which requires time.
• Social change is environmental: Social change takes place within a geographic or cultural context. Both these contexts influence human behavior and, in turn, are influenced by humans. Social changes never occur in isolation or vacuum.
• Social change is human change: Social change is significant because it involves human aspects. The composition of society is always changing, and people both cause and are affected by these changes.
• Social change results from interaction of multiple factors: A single factor may trigger change, but physical, biological, technological, cultural, and other factors interact to bring about social change, reflecting the interdependence of social phenomena.
• Social change may create a chain reaction: Change in one aspect of society can trigger a series of changes in others. For example, changes in women’s rights, privileges, and status can lead to changes in family structure, economic patterns, and political structures.
• Social change involves tempo (rate) and direction: Social change typically assumes a direction, which may be idealized or inevitable. The rate of change varies across societies and over time, depending on factors like openness, rural/urban settings, etc.
• Social change may be planned or unplanned: Planned change is human-engineered through programs and projects to control the rate and direction of change. Unplanned change results from natural calamities like floods, earthquakes, etc.
• Short vs long-run changes: Some changes have immediate effects, while others may take years or even decades to show results. Immediate changes may not always reflect long-term trends.
• Social change is an objective term: The term “social change” describes a categorical process without any value judgments. It is amoral, meaning it is not inherently moral or immoral. Sociologists study change without taking a stance for or against it.

SOCIAL CHANGE AND CULTURAL CHANGE

• Social change refers to alterations in social organisation, including the structure and functions of society.
• Cultural change is a broader concept that includes all changes in culture, such as art, science, technology, philosophy, and changes in the forms and rules of social organisation.
• Kingsley Davis states that cultural change is broader than social change, and social change is only a part of it.
• All social changes are cultural changes, but not all cultural changes are social changes.
• Cultural changes become social changes only when they impact human relations and social organisation.
• Examples of cultural changes include changes in musical styles, painting styles, writing rules, and pronunciation. These are purely cultural changes and do not affect the social system.
• Social changes like the rise of organised labour in capitalistic society or the introduction of communism over democracy are examples of social change.
• Social change can affect human relations, social organisation, and may lead to changes in the economic organisation, administration methods, legislation, and economic policies.
• Over time, social changes can contribute to changes in the way of life of people, and thus can also be called cultural changes.
• Cultural change is broader than social change, though no part of culture is entirely separate from the social order.
• Sociologically, cultural change is important only to the extent that it arises from or impacts social organisation.

CAUSES OF SOCIAL CHANGE

• Social change is a complex phenomenon where the cause and effect relationship is not always clear.
• No single cause produces a single effect in the social world; there is always a plurality of causation.
• Multiple factors or causes work together to produce the same results in social change.
• Harry M. Johnson identifies three types of causes for social change:
  1. Causes inherent in the social system in general or in particular kinds of social systems.
  2. Causes due to some impact from the social environment of the social system.
  3. Causes due to some impact from the non-social environment.
• These causes can combine in various ways, with one change potentially leading to a series of changes.
• The component parts of the social system are interrelated, meaning any change in one part causes adjustive changesin others.

Internal Causes of Social Change

Strain and Conflict:

• Conflict of interests is always present in all social systems, more evident in the political field.
• The concept of power implies conflicting purposes.
• In stable social systems, conflicts are settled within institutionalised rules.
• No society is free from conflicts; attempts to resolve conflict lead to some form of change.
• Latent conflict exists between those benefiting more from the system and those benefiting less.
• This conflict becomes manifest if the disadvantaged are made to feel that the existing system is not the only realistic option.

Social Problems:

• Problems such as caste prejudices, prostitution, juvenile delinquency, overpopulation, unemployment, poverty, beggary, slum clearance needs, etc., involve social conflict, which leads to social change.
• These problems arise due to internal deficiencies in society.
• To solve or reduce these problems, the existing social order must be changed.
• For example, addressing overpopulation in India may involve convincing people to adopt birth control measuresor family planning, which can affect value systems, marriage and family structures, and the moral system.

Revolutions and Upheavals:

• The most intense conflict in a society occurs during a revolution.
• Internal factors like exploitation, suppression of liberty, hunger, tyranny, bad roads, commercial restrictions, corruption, military defeats, famine, high prices, low wages, and unemployment contribute to revolutions.
• Revolutions (e.g., the American Revolution, French Revolution, Russian Revolution) bring about far-reaching changes in society.

Cultural Change:

• Cultural innovation contributes to social change.
• An innovation is a new combination of old elements from the innovator’s own society or from another society.
• The diffusion of culture within and between societies is a significant source of social and cultural change.

The Impact of the Social and Nonsocial Environment

• The environment, both social and nonsocial, influences social structure.
• For social change, the impact of the social environment is more significant than the nonsocial environment.
• The impact of the nonsocial environment on the social structure is relatively slight under normal conditions.
• Changes in the nonsocial environment due to human activities, like soil erosion, deforestation, and exhaustion of mineral resources, can lead to some social changes.
• Changes in the nonsocial environment due to nature itself, such as floods, famines, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, cyclones, and hurricanes, may sometimes cause adaptive social changes.
• The social environment has a more significant influence on bringing about social changes.
• Shifts in political alliances, military invasions, peaceful immigration, and trade shifts can create difficult problems of adjustment in the social system.
• Any of these changes is likely to affect some parts of the social structure first and then have further effects in other parts later.

SOURCES OF SOCIAL CHANGE

• Sociologists have debated the sources of social change.
• Cultural anthropologists are particularly interested in this topic, with two main groups: (1) diffusionists and (2) inventionists.

Diffusionists

• • Social or cultural change occurs through cultural diffusion, which refers to the introduction of behavior modifications from another culture.
  • Diffusion is the spread of cultural elements from one local group to another, either singly or in a complex.
  • It is less frequently used to refer to dissemination within a single group.
  • Diffusionists argue that since inventions do not happen constantly in all societies, each society borrows cultural elements from others to progress.
  • They provide examples of tribes that achieved progress by borrowing cultural elements.
  • Cultural diffusion is the primary source of social change, as societies that fail to benefit from others’ achievements progress very slowly.
  • For example, the Maori people of New Zealand became civilised within 100 years by borrowing cultural elements from others.

Inventionists

• • Social change originates in the inherent capacity of people to make inventions.
  • Inventions are the major source of social change and involve the rearrangement of known traits into new patterns or configurations.
  • Inventions (material or non-material) have led to profound changes in social organisation and the cultural framework.
  • For example, the invention of electricity led to significant changes in industry, agriculture, communication, and transport.
  • Inventionists argue that social change doesn’t always occur due to cultural diffusion and criticize the idea that elements of South American culture were borrowed from places like India, Egypt, Jawa, and Polynesia.
  • They contend that societies can initiate changes independently.

Conclusion

• • Both diffusionists and inventionists have elements of truth.
  • The source of social change involves both diffusion and invention, and both cannot be completely accepted or rejected.
  • Sometimes, it is difficult to identify when, where, how, and from whom inventions occurred.
  • Some inventions occur simultaneously in two or more places.
  • Inventions may change as they are diffused to other places.
  • A single invention can lead to multiple subsequent inventions.
  • Internal invention and external diffusion are two originating sources of change that influence each other.
  • An internally inventive society also seeks knowledge from other societies.
  • Every social change is unique and foreign, whether it originates internally or externally.

RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL CHANGE

• Social change is universal, but societies and cultures are relatively permanent.
• Social and cultural functions do not change overnight, even in dynamic populations.
• There is always some resistance to change in every society.
• Not all changes are welcomed without questioning and resistance.
• For example, the removal of evil practices like child marriage, human sacrifice, animal sacrifice, untouchability, and taboos on intercaste marriages in India took a long struggle.
• The opposition to woman suffrage in the United States lasted for over fifty years.
• The abolition of slavery was achieved only after a prolonged civil war.
• In Britain, women gained the voting right in the early 20th century after much opposition.
• Major reforms in Christianity took centuries to take place.
• Communism was introduced in Russia amid strong opposition and violence.
• Ogburn and Nimkoff noted that some of the greatest blessings of humanity were bitterly resisted, often with violence, before being accepted.

Reasons for the Opposition to Social Change

Reasons for opposition to social change:

• Lack of New Inventions:

  • Social change depends on new inventions (objects, techniques, thoughts, devices, and plans).
  • If people lack a craving for new things or if inventions are absent, it hinders change.

• Rejection or Non-Acceptance of New Inventions:

  • Change is impossible if people keep rejecting new inventions.
  • Many inventions, like William Harvey’s Blood Circulation Theory and Galileo’s theory of the planetary system, were initially opposed.
  • Even the use of steam energy in British Naval Ships faced opposition.

• Imperfections of New Inventions:

  • New inventions often have imperfections such as inadequate performance, easy breakage, and difficulty in repair.
  • People may oppose inventions due to these inadequacies.

• Fear Towards the New:

  • People have fear of new ideas or practices, even while adopting new objects or thoughts.
  • Examples include Indians’ fear of British medicine, English education, and sea voyages.

• Tradition and Reverence for the Past:

  • People have a traditional attitude and uphold old, familiar practices.
  • They are emotionally and sentimentally attached to outdated practices, making them resistant to new things.

• Ignorance:

  • Ignorance often leads to opposition to new inventions or changes.
  • New ideas take time to be understood, such as the rejection of the germ theory of disease or the initial resistance to the iron plough in America.
  • Social inventions may be opposed longer than material inventions, as they are harder to demonstrate effectively.

• Habit:

  • Habits and customs create resistance to social change.
  • People are reluctant to give up familiar practices and adopt new ones, leading to rejection of new practices.

• Economic Disparity and Difficulty:

  • Economic inequality (gap between rich and poor) and economic distress hinder acceptance of social change.
  • Those suffering economically are often skeptical or unable to accept change.

• Intellectual Laziness and Administrative Defects:

  • Change requires creativity, dynamism, and rationality, which some people lack.
  • Inefficient and corrupt administration also hinders change.
  • Bureaucracy may be conservative, acting as an obstacle to progress.

• Power of Vested Interests:

  • People with vested interests resist changes that threaten their position.
  • These individuals, often organized in opposition groups, fight social change to protect their self-interests.
  • For example, capitalists resist progressive labor laws, and traditionalists in India resist social reforms.
• Not all resistance is harmful:
  • Opposition to social change is sometimes justifiable.
  • Some innovations or changes may be harmful when judged by certain values (e.g., replacing democracy with totalitarianism).
  • Resistance to unworkable or impractical technological inventions is also justifiable if disadvantages outweigh advantages.
  • Resistance can have a positive side, as not all changes are beneficial or worthwhile.

ROLE OF VALUES IN SOCIAL CHANGE

• Structural change is most importantly seen in changes in values, which are fundamental to social structure.
• Values directly affect the content of social roles and social interactions, not just cultural aspects like classicism in art.
• Values are a component of culture and undergo gradual changes, though they are often considered the most staticelement of society.
• In industrialised and urbanised societies, values change at a faster pace compared to tradition-bound societieswhere values change more slowly.
• Factors such as scientific and technological innovations, political and economic changes, education, and urbanisation cause shifts in values.
• Social values contribute to social change and significantly influence its rate and direction.
• Pre-literate societies resist changes, while modern Western societies tend to welcome most changes.
• In modern American society, there is enthusiasm for new gadgets and mechanical devices, but resistance to changes in political and economic ideologies.
• Democratic values are deeply rooted, leading to opposition to state intervention in many areas.
• Ideological values resist and limit social change, but vary in the degree of resistance.
• In America, ideological values on race relations, education, and religion have been less resistant to change than those on politico-economic matters.
• In India, values related to caste relations, education, and religion are more resistant to change than those concerning politico-economic issues.

ROLE OF GREAT MEN IN SOCIAL CHANGE

• Great men and their leadership are an important source of social change.
• Genius, revolutionary thoughts, extraordinary talents, and efficiency of great men sometimes bring about revolutionary and long-lasting changes in society.
• The “great-man” theory of history states that human history is the biographies of great men, and social change occurs through their achievements rather than mass movements.
• Key questions related to this theory include:
  • Do men make history or does history make the man?
  • To what extent do great men make social change or are they influenced by social forces beyond their control?
• Sociological theory emphasizes the role of social forces in social change, rather than individual actions.
• Example: The greatest American presidents, Washington and Lincoln, were war presidents, raising the question of whether their greatness would have existed in different circumstances.
• Gandhiji’s significance would have been minimal without British rule in India.
• Tolstoy argued that great men are merely labels for historical events, with minimal direct influence on the events themselves.
• Sociologists tend to agree with Tolstoy, emphasizing the social forces and historical context in shaping individuals’ influence on social change.
• Personality is shaped by culture and historical circumstances, and social change is interpreted through deeper, underlying phenomena.
• Social change is driven by individuals who break from tradition, introducing new ideas, discoveries, or methods, whether they are “great men” or not.
• Such changes, once introduced, may ripple through society, affecting various compartments of culture and sectors of society.
• Great men like Buddha, Mahavira, Shankaracharya, Jesus Christ, Prophet Mohammed, Napoleon, Gandhiji, Hitler, and others caused revolutionary changes in the realms of religion, politics, and other fields.
• Writers, scientists, and philosophers also contributed to social changes.

SOCIAL EVOLUTION

Meaning of ‘Evolution’

• The term evolution originates from the Latin word ‘evoluere’, meaning “to develop” or “to unfold.”
• The concept of evolution closely corresponds to the Sanskrit word ‘Vikas’.
• Evolution literally means gradually “unfolding” or “unrolling”.
• It signifies changes that come from within, not from without.
• Evolution is spontaneous, but not automatic; it must occur on its own accord.
• It implies continuous change, especially in the internal growth of an organism.
• The concept of evolution applies more precisely to the internal growth of a structure.

Meaning of Social Evolution

• The term ‘evolution’ is borrowed from biological science to sociology.
• ‘Organic evolution’ in biology is replaced by ‘social evolution’ in sociology.
• ‘Organic evolution’ refers to the evolution of organisms, while ‘social evolution’ refers to the evolution of human society.
• Social evolution implies the evolution of man’s social relations.
• The theory of social evolution was hoped to explain the origin and development of man.
• Anthropologists and sociologists sought a satisfactory and significant explanation of how society evolved.
• They aimed for an explanation rather than a mere description.
• They were influenced by the concept of organic evolution, which explains how one species evolves into another, and wanted to apply it to the social world.
• Social evolution is a popular concept in sociological discussions.

The Concept of Social Evolution

• The explanation of social evolution revolves around two questions:

  1. How does society evolve?
  2. How did our civilisation come to be what it is today?
• The common assumption is that society evolves because of man, who makes society evolve.
• Men who had not evolved far would have a crude culture, while more evolved men would have an advanced society.
• Society is understood in terms of social behavior, which is a function of biological structure.
• Men with superior and more evolved biological structures could give rise to a more complex society.
• A key question is, what is evolving in the social world?
• The answer is usually ‘society’, but something other than the biological element is undergoing change.
• For anthropologists like R.H. Lowie and A. Kroeber, the evolving element is culture.
• Social evolution then becomes cultural evolution, with the evolution of groups being part of the evolution of culture.
• The factors that have caused the great evolution of culture from crude beginnings to its magnificence are:

1. 1. Accumulation
   2. Invention
   3. Diffusion
   4. Adjustment

Use of This Concept to Understand Social Change

The concept of social evolution is useful in explaining the changes and growth of society for the following reasons:

1. Internal growth: Evolution helps us understand the nature of a system by showing how it “unfolds” itself. It explains not just what happens to a thing, but what happens within it. It reveals what is latent becoming manifest and what is potential becoming actual in society’s structure, including social roles, positions, and relations.

2. Time succession: The evolutionary principle allows us to arrange a multitude of facts in significant orderaccording to time succession, giving coherence to successive stages. For example, it helps explain how the functions of the modern family have become more limited to those rooted in sex over time.

3. Classification of societies: The evolutionary principle provides a simple way to classify and characterize diverse social systems. Societies can be classified based on their degree and mode of differentiation, revealed by customs, creeds, techniques, devices, thoughts, etc.

4. Direction of change: The evolutionary clue helps us understand the direction of change, which is always the result of persistent forces at work. By identifying these forces, we can ascertain the direction of social change.

Social Evolution Vs Organic Evolution

• Social evolution is inspired by organic evolution introduced by Charles Darwin, but the two are not the same.
• Organic evolution involves differentiation in bodily structure, often through the development of new organs for different purposes, accompanied by the knowledge to use them.
• Man, at the center of social evolution, does not need to develop new organs to adapt to changed life conditions because he has the ability to invent tools, create instruments, and devise techniques to control natural forces.
• In organic evolution, only the descending generation is affected by structural changes, but in social evolution, both old and new generations are impacted. For example, the invention of new techniques influences both present and future generations.
• The transmission of changes differs: in organic evolution, qualities are passed down through biological heredity(genes), while in social evolution, changes occur through ideas, discoveries, inventions, and experience, often initiated by the mental abilities or genius of man.
• Organic evolution is continuous, driven by the internal pressures of the organization, environment, and natural forces, whereas social evolution can experience breaks and is not always continuous. It is subject to disruption.

Application of the Concept of Social Evolution in Sociological Studies

• The concept of social evolution suggests that all societies pass through certain definite stages, transitioning from simple to complex forms.
• The analogy between the growth of an organism and the growth of human society has been used to explain social evolution.
• Saint Simon agreed that all mankind must pass through an evolutionary sequence and distinguished three stages of mental activity: the conjectural, the non-conjectural, and the positive.
• Auguste Comte synthesized previous theories and proposed that all societies pass through three stages: the theological, metaphysical, and positive/scientific.
• Comte viewed society as a social organism with a harmony of structure and function.
• Herbert Spencer developed many of Comte’s ideas in his Principles of Sociology, although he did not acknowledge Comte. Spencer believed in the change from simple to complex forms, homogeneous to heterogeneous, and the integration of the whole and differentiation of parts in society.
• Sir Henry Maine in Ancient Law (1861) argued that societies evolve from relationships based on status to those based on contract.
• L.H. Morgan in Ancient Society (1878) proposed a sequence of family forms evolving from promiscuity to monogamy.
• E.B. Tylor in Primitive Culture (1871) linked observations of various societies to an evolutionary framework, particularly focusing on the sequential development of religious forms.
• Tylor’s work influenced scholars like Sir James Frazer and Emile Durkheim.
• The evolutionary doctrine provided a broad framework to conceptualize human society’s progress but was rejected in the early 20th century.
• The rejection of evolutionary doctrine led to the development of the structural system of analysis, especially in social anthropology.
• Structural-functionalists in sociology later revived the idea of social evolution, making it more scientific and less imaginary.

THE CONCEPT OF PROGRESS

• Human society has evolved into a demonstrable certainty, but progress cannot be demonstrated with equal certainty. Social changes can be viewed differently by different people, with some seeing them as progress and others as decadence.
• The idea of continuous progress was widely accepted in early modern times, reflecting man’s growing confidenceand belief in his control over his own destiny.
• Progress is defined differently by various scholars:
  • Ogburn: Progress is a movement towards an objective deemed desirable by the group for the visible future.
  • Maclver: Progress implies direction toward a final goal, determined ideally, not just by objective considerations.
  • Ginsberg: Progress is development in a direction that satisfies rational criteria of value.
  • In simple terms, social progress means a change or advance toward a desirable end.
• Social progress always involves value-judgments. It signifies improvement, betterment, and an upward trend, aiming towards human happiness.

Nature of Social Progress:

• Change is inherent to progress. There can be no progress without change.
• Progress moves towards a desired goal. Not all changes imply progress; a change is progress if it fulfills or is fulfilling a beneficial end for human welfare.
• Communal nature: Social progress is concerned with the welfare of the entire society, not just individual happiness.
• Progress is defined in terms of values, influenced by societal value systems that determine whether a change is moving toward the ideal goal.
• Progress is subjective. There is no definite measuring rod for progress; it differs among people and can change over time.
• The concept of progress is subject to diverse interpretations as values differ across societies and eras. Goals and ideals change, and so does the idea of progress.

Haridas T and Majumdar’s Points on Social Progress:

1. Enhancement of dignity of man
2. Respect for each human personality
3. Increasing freedom for spiritual quest and truth investigation
4. Freedom for creativity and aesthetic enjoyment
5. A social order that promotes these values
6. Promotion of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness with justice and equality for all.

Development of the Concept of Progress:

• In the 17th century, Francis Bacon defended continuous change as progress.
• In the 18th century, Turgot and Condorcet believed human society was advancing gradually towards desirability.
• Auguste Comte saw the positive attitude toward life as progressive.
• Herbert Spencer believed society progressed automatically, driven by cosmic forces, beyond human control, identifying social progress with social evolution.
• After the Renaissance, the concept of progress gained importance, with the American Revolution marking a new epoch of progress.
• French Encyclopaedists promoted the doctrine of progress and human perfectibility.
• Lester F. Ward (American sociologist) advocated for social progress through his doctrine of Teleology or Telesis, relating it to society (Social Telesis).
• Modern writers today speak of social progress, though they do not believe society moves linearly toward perfection. They have largely abandoned the idea of inevitable improvement.
• Social progress is abstract, immeasurable, and undemonstrable, making it socially significant despite its lack of scientific measurement.