INTRODUCTION:

In the family of social sciences, Sociology is comparatively a new entrant. But because of its
dealing with social problems, social relationships and social interactions the importance of the
study of this subject has considerably increased. It has considerably developed in methodology,
scope and approach. Attempts are now being made to study every social problem scientifically
and objectively, eliminating subjectivity to the extent possible a distinctive way of examining
human interactions. Sociology is the systematic study of social behavior and human groups. It
focuses primarily on the influence of social relationships upon people’s attitudes and behavior
and on how societies are established and change. As a field of study sociology has a very broad
scope. It deals with families, gangs, business firms, computer networks, political parties, schools,
religions, and labor unions. It is concerned with love, poverty, conformity, technology,
discrimination, illness, alienation, overpopulation and community.
1.2. DEFINITION:
Sociology is being defined differently by our sociologists and other’s each one of course, has its
own news about the nature and scope of the subject, as he conceives it.
According to Ward “Sociology is science of society”.
George Simmel opines that it is a subject which studies human inter-relationship.
Giddins is of the view that “Sociology is scientific study of society”.
Max Weber has viewed sociology as “Science which attempts imperative understanding of social
actions”.
Sorokin is of the opinion that sociology is a study first of all the relationship and correlations
between various classes... second between the social and non social aspects of life and third it
studies general characteristics common to all classes of society.
Ogburn has said that, “Sociology is concerned with the study of social life and its relations to the
factors of culture, natural environment, heredity and group.”

Durkheim while defining sociology has said that, “It is the science of collective representation.”
We may thus conclude these definitions with the definition of E.S.
Bogardus when he says that, “Sociology may be defined as the study of the ways in which social
experiences function in developing, maturing and repressing human beings through inter-
personal stimulations.”
From all these definitions it becomes clear that sociology is concerned with social relationships
and studies society, human interactions, inter-personal and intra-personal relations. It tries to
study scientifically social institutions, organizations and systems.
These definitions also make it amply clear that sociologists view the subject differently and that
there is no unanimity in this regard.
while discussing its subject matter of sociologist, Sorokin said that, “It seems to be a study, first
of the relationship and correlation between various classes of social phenomena”
(correlation between economic and religious, family and moral, judicial and economic, mobility
and political phenomena and so on);
second that between social and non social (geographical, biological) phenomena; third the study
of general characteristics common to all classes of phenomena. Thus according to his view point
sociology studies social events, relationships between social and non social phenomena and
generalized study of facts common to all aspects of social life.
In his book ‘Society, Culture and Personality’ he has said that sociology is more or less
concerned with the working of human beings. In this study he covers the study of human
behavior, social organizations, social phenomena and social values. He is thus
altogether opposed to formal school of thought.

IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE?
There is a continuing controversy about the nature of sociology. According to some sociologists
it is a science, while others strongly refute this claim.
What is a scientific study?
For a scientific study it is essential that the whole study should be systematic and without
any subjectivity. A scientist is supposed to have a clear vision and a pointed approach. He should
have capacity to record unbiased decisions and properly classify data’s. He should also have
vision to collect only such data as is useful for his study. He should conclude his findings after
verification of data’s and not on morality or certain pre-supposed philosophies, nations and
ideas.
The most important element of a scientific study is that a scientist should deal with bear facts and
not with ideal situations. Thus this study should be both factual and systematic. Then another
element is that its results should have universal application. Then in a scientific study there
should be cause effect relationship and it should also be capable of making certain safe
predictions.
Is Sociology A Science?
Now a question arises as to whether sociology is science or not. Those who support the cause
of sociology as science plead that a present day sociologists must be methodological. He must
base his conclusions on impartially collected, analyzed and interpreted data. He should also be
willing to get his data tested anywhere to established its validity. They also argue that like
natural scientists, Sociologists are concerned with hard facts and not with ideal situations. They
try to analyses facts of social life as these are. They also believe that there are many social facts
and theories which the sociologists have developed after hard labor and these are universally
applicable, under similar circumstances. They also point out that like natural scientists, the
sociologists are very much concerned with cause effect relationship e.g. social stratification and
social disorganizations are the outcome of certain causes, which have their effects as well. As
with the natural scientists, so with the sociologists, it is equal true that like the former the latter
can make some safe predictions. They thus argue that “sociology is a science which attempts the
interpretative under-standing of social action in order to arrive at a casual explanation of its
causes and effects.”
Sociology- Not a Science:
There is other side of the picture as well. Many believe that society is not a perfect science. Like
the results of natural sciences, the results obtained by social scientists cannot be generalized and
these also cannot be same under all circumstances and at all places. The conditions always differ
from society to society and social changes are unavoidable. These are also very complex. Then it
is said that each human beings has his own limitations and he provides information keeping
those limitations into consideration. He is not prepared to disclose secrets and thus the
information provided is not factual. It is also said that the many situations are not within the
control of sociologists and repeat experimentation is almost impossible.
Each sociologist has subjective approach to the problem under investigation. There is no stage of
investigation in which there is no subjectivity. Each one has some secrets which he is not
prepared to disclose to the investigators. Unlike natural scientist, a sociologist has no laboratory
facilities and also has no control over material to be experimented i.e. human beings. Not only
this, but it is not possible to repeat experiments. It is more or less not possible to make the safe
predictions because nature of social problems with which the sociologists are not the same all
over the world.
SCOPE OF THE SOCIOLOGY
Sociologist and others differ what should be the scope of sociology. August Comte makes us
believe that sociology should try to study social phenomena on scientific lines. He has thus laid
stress on scientific approach. Emile Durkheim has tried to separate sociology from other social
science subjects and also tried to give an independent status to this subject. In his own way
Pareto has tried to give it scientific orientation. According to him in sociology there should be no
place for inferences. He is sure that there is basic unity among various social phenomena. He is
of the view that sociology is much of science and social problems should and can be
scientifically studied. Max Weber has however said that sociology should merely be
interpretative understanding of social actions and nothing beyond that.
Former or Specialist School of Thought:
There are two main schools of thought about the scope of sociology. Formal school of
thought believes that scope of sociology should not be generalized but confined to the study of
some specific aspects of society. The exponents of this school wish to keep the subject pure and
independent. According to them it should deal with social relationships, social activities and
processes of socialization.
Max Weber, who is the chief exponent of this school of thought, has said that sociology should
deal with interpretations of social behaviors only.
Vier Kandt, , who is another exponent of this school of thought, is of the view that sociology
should confine itself to the study of formal and not the actual behavior of the people in the
society.
Simmel has given an abstract concept of sociology, in which stress has been laid on social
relationship and social inter-actions.
For him, every society is the mix of this two. Social relations are nothing but social interactions
between two individuals. He has said that society is not collections of individuals but it is
essentially a psychic inter-action between the individuals. It is sum total of social relations
between the individuals living in it.
According to Simmel sociology should not be made a general science devoted to the study of
social relations in general.
It should be confined to the study of specific social relations because now these are being studied
in the context of social production and social heritage.

Vone Wiese is another exponent of this school of thought. He believes that subject matter of
sociology is different from other social sciences. He does not agree with the idea that sociology
is combination of social sciences but it is a subject which combines different social science
subjects. For him sociology as a special science has more importance than general sociology.
It should separate its subject matter from other social sciences.
Synthetic School of Thought:
The school of thought believes that sociology should study society as a whole and not confine
itself to the study of only limited social problems. Auguste comte believes that the scope of
sociology should be considerably widened.
According to him the study of one aspect of society can lead to misleading results because all
aspects of society, like parts of human body, are inter-linked. Hobb-House and Sorokin also
contribute to this view point. They too believe that Sociology should study society as a whole.
The supporters of this school of thought agree that in our modern times no social science subject
can remain isolated altogether ignoring other subjects of study.
The scope of sociology, they argue should be general and not narrow. Durkheim has gone to the
extent of saying that “Sociology is science of collective representation.”
Sorokin is the main exponent of this school of thought.
He is not satisfied with the traditional views about sociology and thus wants to give it a new
approach. According to him sociology is a systematic science and it has manifold inter-actions. It
is concerned with general facts of social life. He is keen to give systematic interpretation of
society.
THE SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION:
Sociologist C. Wright (1959 b) described sociological reasoning as the “Sociological
imagination- the ability to see the relationship between individual experiences and the larger
society. This awareness enables us to understand the link between our personal experiences and
the social context in which they occur. The sociological imagination helps us distinguish
between personal trouble and social (or public) issues. ( Kendall ; 2007).
A key element in the sociological imagination is the ability to view one’s own Society as an
outsider would, rather than from the limited perspective of personal experiences and cultural
biases.
Sociological imagination allow us to go beyond personal experience and in attempting to
understand social behavior, sociologists rely on an unusual type of creating thinking. C. Wright
Mills (1959) described such thinking as the sociological imagination- an awareness of the
relationship between an individual and the wider society. This awareness allows people (not
simply sociologists) to comprehend the links between their immediate, personal social settings
and the remote, impersonal social world that surrounds them and helps to shape them.
A key element in the sociological imagination is the ability to view one’s own society as an
outsider would, rather than from the limited perspective of personal experiences and cultural
biases.
Sociological imagination allows us to go beyond personal experiences and observations to
understand broader public issues. Unemployment, for example, is unquestionably a personal
hardship for a man or woman without a job. However, C. Wright Mills pointed out that when
unemployment is a social problem shared by millions of people, it is appropriate to question the
way that a society is structured or organized. Similarly, Mills advocated use of the sociological
imagination to view divorce not simply as the personal problem of a particular man and woman,
but rather as a structural problem, since it is the outcome of many marriages. And he was writing
this in the 1950s, when the divorce rate was but a fraction of what it is today. Sociological
imagination can bring new understanding to daily life around us.
DEVELOPING A SOCIOLOGICAL OUTLOOK
The sociological imagination require us, above all, to ‘think ourselves away from the familiar
routines of our daily life in order to look at them a new. Consider the simple act of drinking
Coffee.
What could we find to say, from a sociological point of view about such an apparently
uninteresting piece of behavior An enormous amount.
We could point out first of all that coffee is not just refreshment. It possesses Symbolic value as
part of our day-to-day. Social activities, Often the ritual associated with coffee drinking is much
more important than the act of consuming the drink itself. For many westerners the morning cup
of coffee stands at the centre of a personal routine. It is an essential first step to starting the day.
Morning coffee is often followed later in the day by coffee with others-the basis of a social ritual.
Two people who arrange to meet for coffee are probably more interested in getting together &
chatting than in what they actually drink. Drinking and eating in all societies, in fact, provide
occasions for social interaction and the enactment of rituals- and these offer a rich subject matter
for sociological study.

Second, coffee is a drug, containing caffeine, which has a Stimulating effect on the brain. Many
people drink coffee for the extra lift it provides. Long days at the office and late nights studying
are made more tolerable by coffee breaks. Coffee is a habit forming substance, but coffee addicts
are not regarded by most people in Western culture as drug users.

Third the individual who drinks cup of coffee is caught up in a complicated set of social &
economic relationships stretching across the world. Coffee is a product which links people in
some of the wealthiest & most impoverished parts of the planet, it is consumed in great
quantities in wealthy Countries, but is grown primarily in poor ones, and it provides many
countries, with their largest source of foreign exchange. The production & transportation
of coffee require continuous transactions between people thousands of miles away from the
coffee drinker. Studying such global transactions is an important task of sociology since many
aspects of our lives are now affected by worldwide social influences and communications.

Fourth, the act of sipping a coffee presumes a whole process of past social & economic
development. Along with other now familiar items of western diets – like teas, bananas, potatoes
& white sugar – coffee became widely consumed only from the late 1800s. Although the drink
originated in the Middle East , its mass consumption dates, from the period of Western
expansion about a century & a half ago. Virtually all the coffee we drink today comes
from areas (South America & Africa) that were colonized by Europeans, it is in no sense a
‘natural’ part of the Western diet. The colonial legacy has had an enormous impact of the
development of the global coffee trade.
Fifth coffee is a product that stands at the heart of contemporary debates, about globalization,
international trade, human rights & environmental destruction. As coffee has grown in
popularity, it has become ‘branded’ & politicized; the decisions that consumers make about what
kind of coffee to drink & where to purchase it have become life style choices. Individuals may
choose to drink only organic coffee, natural decaffeinated coffee or coffee that has been ‘fairly
traded’ through schemes, that pay full market prices, to small coffee producers in developing
countries. They may opt to patronize ‘independent’ coffee houses, rather than corporate
coffee chains such as starbuch which is a brand in UK . Coffee drinkers might decide to boycott
coffee from certain, with poor human rights & environmental records. Sociologist are interested
to understand how globalization heightens people awareness of issues accruing in distant corners
sof the planet & prompts them to act on new knowledge in their own life.