(b) Those emphasising exogamous factors such as economic, cultural or historical. In the opinion of some critics, however, their very emphasis an,,social order and stability has prevented them from giving an adequate theory of social change. It was due to the ruthlessness and greed of those who controlled these great inventions. They can be grouped into for main categories: evolutionary, cyclical, functional, and conflict theories. This progress is forced through the development of human mind, and increasing application of thought, reasoning and logic to the understanding of world. Parsons views social change as a process of ‘social evolution’ from simple to more complex form of society. Q.5 What is social change? Their analysis of cross-cultural data was based on three assumptions: Theorists usually measured progression (that is, the difference between one stage and the next) in terms of increasing social complexity (including class differentiation and a complex division of labor), or an increase in intellectual, theological, and aesthetic sophistication.
Those theories had one common factor: they all agreed that the history of humanity is pursuing a certain fixed path, most likely that of the social progress. And because each society is unique, we must be hesitant about using the experiences of one society as the bails for confident predictions about change in another. Likewise, Emile Durkheim, one of the founders of functionalism, saw societies as moving from simple to complex social structures. Sociology, 1984, (5th ed.
A classless society would result. The term "classical social evolutionism" is most closely associated with the 19th-century writings of Auguste Comte, Herbert Spencer (who coined the phrase "survival of the fittest") and William Graham Sumner.
But, eventually, as a result of forces that are inherent in the culture itself, there will be shift of direction and a new period of development will be ushered in. Heraclitus said that it is impossible for a man to step into the same river twice. Theories of Saint-Simon, Comte, Morgan, Marx and Engels, and many other anthropologists and sociologists come under the category of unilinear theories of social evolution because they are based on the assumption that each society does, indeed must, pass through a fixed and limited numbers of stages in a given sequence. It may be that certain technological conditions are necessary before other factors can produce certain changes, but these need not precipitate social change. The most important aspect of technology in that a man thinks rationally and objectively about things and events. Even though the server responded OK, it is possible the submission was not processed.
Later on, the views of Leslie White and Julian Steward were named as neo-evolutionism. The essential point is that Marx and other conflict theorists after him see society as fundamentally dynamic, not static. 6. Nearly all important changes involve both social and cultural aspects. Technological Theory. He considers the course of history to be continuous, though irregular, fluctuating between two basic kinds of cultures: the ‘sensate’ and the ‘ideational’ through the ‘idealistic’. All rights reserved. Everything which exists comes into being on the basis of material course, arises and develops in accordance with the laws of motion of matter. Conflict theorists assert that conflict is a necessary condition for change.
Since the history is the history of the class struggle, history would now end. These developments took place in a wider context. All these theories are referred to as unilinear theories of social evolution.
But he holds to the position that the economic situation is the foundation of the social order and this is the gist of Marxian theory. The automobile has brought number of social changes which have altered individual lifestyles. Tönnies was also one of the first sociologists to claim that the evolution of society is not necessarily going in the right direction, that the social progress is not perfect, it can even be called a regress as the newer, more evolved societies are obtained only after paying a high costs, resulting in decreasing satisfaction of individuals making up that society. The ‘technology’ refers to the application of knowledge to the making of tools and the utilisation of natural resources (Schaefer and Lamm, 1992). In the ‘Preface’ of his monumental work Capital: A Critique of Political Economy Marx’s whole philosophy of social change is summarised: “At a certain stage of their development, the material forces of production in society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or with the property relations within which they had been at work before. leaving no historical documents) peoples is entirely speculative and unscientific. Technology helps in realising of our goals with less effort, less cost and with greater efficiency. History is the story of conflict between the exploiting and the exploited class. Changes occur in one part of society, there must be adjustments in other parts. Things come into being, exist and cease to exist, not each independent of all other things but each in its relationship with others. If this were not so, the social and physical world would be unintelligible to us. All these assumptions can be summarised as under: 1. In the nineteenth century, it was generally accepted that “change” meant “progress,” and that progress was inevitable. The cyclical theorists also see a series of stages through which societies must pass. It is said that growth may create social problems rather than social progress. Auguste Comte, the French sociologist, who coined the term ‘sociology’ described society as starting from the ‘logical’ stage, passing through a ‘metaphysical’ stage and finally reaching a ‘positivistic’ stage. Now, all members of society would share the same relationship to the forces of production.
Marx believed that the basic contradictions contained in a capitalist economic system would lead to class consciousness.
The present observed condition of the society is presumed to be the result of change in the past. There are other causes also which are as important as the economic factor. Similarly, many labour saving devices in the home have also contributed to the emancipation of women. Durkheim believed that this second type always evolved from and succeeded the first as the degree of specialisation, the division of labour, increased. Cyclical change is a variation on unilinear theory which was developed by Oswald Spengler (Decline of the West, 1918) and Arnold J. Toynbee (A Study of History, 1956).
Computers have affected almost all aspects of our life from reservations at the railway ticket window or registration for hospitals or colleges to the maintenance of accounts in banks and large business corporations. Then, after life develops, there is biogenesis. Functionalism, as a new approach of study of society, developed mainly as a reaction to evolutionism, in the early years of twentieth century. Lewis H. Morgan, an anthropologist whose ideas have had much impact on sociology, in his 1877 classic Ancient Societies differentiated between three eras: savagery, barbarism and civilisation, which are divided by technological inventions, like fire, bow, pottery in savage era, domestication of animals, agriculture, metalworking in barbarian era and alphabet and writing in civilisation era.
Among the general theoretical explanations offered for understanding social change are geographical, biological, economic and cultural. Morgan, who sought to prove that all societies went through fixed stages of development each succeeding the other, from savagery through barbarism to civilisation. Society may change, but it remains stable through new forms of integration. Because of the above shortcomings, the evolutionary theory is less popular today. If human beings had evolved from some primitive states, it followed that at some time in the past they must have been entirely within culture. Multilinear evolutionary theory holds that change can occur in several ways and does not inevitably lead in the same direction. But these problems are not impossible to overcome; they are merely difficult. According to him, in simple societies, institutions are undifferentiated: that is, a single institution serves many different functions. Tylor and Morgan elaborated upon, modified and expanded the theory of unilinear evolution, specifying criteria for categorizing cultures according to their standing within a fixed system of growth of humanity as a whole while examining the modes and mechanisms of this growth. Instead, they believe that conflicting groups struggle to ensure progress (Coser, 1956). Despite the wide variety in the possible directions change may take, various generalisations have been set forth. This view, known as “social Darwinism”, won wide acceptance in the late nineteenth century. Emerging theories of social evolution reflected a belief that the changes in Europe wrought by the Industrial Revolution and capitalism were obvious improvements. Dorthy S. Thomas (1925) commented that “it is not difficult to establish correlation between social changes and economic changes, though it is harder to interpret them”. Man may be master as well as the slave of the machine. Horton and C.L. When events outside or inside the society’ disrupts the equilibrium, social institution makes adjustments to restore stability. Marx believed that the class struggle was the driving force of social change. Change has a crucial significance, since it is needed to correct social injustices and inequalities. There were however notable differences between the work of Lester Frank Ward's and Tylor's approaches. Emerging theories of social evolution allowed Europeans to organize their new knowledge in a way that reflected and justified their increasing political and economic domination of others: colonized people were less-evolved, colonizing people were more evolved.
Ogburn's theory. He created a hierarchy of evolution processes. The pace of this change may be swift or slow. While Marx emphasised economic conflict. Ogbum, in his article, ‘How Technology Changes Society’ (1947), writes: “Technology changes by changing our environment to which we, in turn, adapt. Before publishing your articles on this site, please read the following pages: 1. And it is commonly a great obstacle to certain types of change.”. Additionally, they rejected the distinction between "primitive" and "civilized" (or "modern"), pointing out that so-called primitive contemporary societies have just as much history, and were just as evolved, as so-called civilized societies. Conflict between the states, as they strive for dominance, security or better prospects are the result of competition.