a) http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Introduction_to_Sociology/Introduction
1. summary:
What is Sociology? Sociology is about understanding social world by using practical data. Sociology is deeply related to societal changes. There were important societal changes in history such as an industrial revolution. The founders of sociology developed this area as an attempt to understand the changes in their own way. They used Mills societal imagination which helps you to surpass the armchair sociology. In armchair sociology, they don't use scientific methods to know how social world works. However, after sociologists create their theory, they are demanded to test their theory using scientific methods and this kind of process can't come from armchair sociology. While doing their research for their theory, sociologists, like anybody else, may have preconceived notions. But Peter Berger, a sociologist, said what makes differents from sociologists to others is an act of pure perception that made by sociologist's efforts to try to see what is there. One of the early sociological thinkers founded sociology Auguste Comte argued that sociology must go with observation. He stresses positivistic approaches to sociology. Thus he thought that sociological theories are based in natural science. In a similar vein, many of researchers had a theory that methodology used in natural science is perfectly fit for sociology. This early sociological approach led to positivism. Positivism's purpose is a prediction of human behavior. On the other hand, there was also sociologists who don't agree with that idea. They thought that natural world and social world are different because human society has its own unique culture. As a result, sociology becomes to have new purpose called verstehen except for the prediction which sociology originally had. The two different purpose of society made a difference between quantitative and qualitative. Qualitative sociology focus on depth, so they use in-depth interviews to understand human behavior. On the contrasts, quantitative sociology uses numerical data. In nowadays, sociology has become a specific perspective for researching human social life. Compare to the past, these days sociologists study a wider range of points. Some of them research macro-structures or micro-processes.
2. What was interesting/what did you learn:
Honestly, to me, most of this article was new. I learned a little bit of philosophy in high school but not sociology. Of course, I knew some basics of sociology like there is quantitative and qualitative research in sociology. But except that, I knew nothing. So I found most of this article was interesting. Especially the explanation of the Comte. Comte argued that there are three steps of social development what he called The Law of Three Stages. From the article that I read, Comte thought that all phenomena are subject to invariable "natural laws" since he was impressed with the Newtonian revolution. At Comte's The Law of Three Stages, the second stage called theological stage is where people understanding society as "natural". Why did he say that second stage as known as the metaphysical stage is the second stage, not the final stage? Isn't he the one who said that all phenomena are subject to natural laws? Aren't natural laws existing if we see our society as natural? Or did the word "natural" used as different meaning between -"natural" laws- and -society as "natural"-? And I was wondering why Comte said that first stage is where people took a religious view of society. Anyway, I was confused, but Comte's idea was still interesting to me. And I learned that sociology is relatively new academic discipline. I always thought that sociology is old discipline like philosophy but it was not true.
3. Discussion Point:
I was fascinated when I read the part of armchair sociology and societal imagination. In this article, societal imagination defined as "the ability to situate personal troubles within an informed framework of social issues". Societal imagination helps people to go beyond from armchair sociology. So, yes. Societal imagination is important. So what can I do? I don't even know how to improve my societal imagination. "Let's take a seat and think about how to situate personal troubles within social issues for an hour". I don't think that's going to work well. How about seeing events in the different perspective? According to Wikipedia, drinking coffee can be seen as a form of self-care and also custom. So except that, how can we improve our societal imagination?
1. summary:
What is Sociology? Sociology is about understanding social world by using practical data. Sociology is deeply related to societal changes. There were important societal changes in history such as an industrial revolution. The founders of sociology developed this area as an attempt to understand the changes in their own way. They used Mills societal imagination which helps you to surpass the armchair sociology. In armchair sociology, they don't use scientific methods to know how social world works. However, after sociologists create their theory, they are demanded to test their theory using scientific methods and this kind of process can't come from armchair sociology. While doing their research for their theory, sociologists, like anybody else, may have preconceived notions. But Peter Berger, a sociologist, said what makes differents from sociologists to others is an act of pure perception that made by sociologist's efforts to try to see what is there. One of the early sociological thinkers founded sociology Auguste Comte argued that sociology must go with observation. He stresses positivistic approaches to sociology. Thus he thought that sociological theories are based in natural science. In a similar vein, many of researchers had a theory that methodology used in natural science is perfectly fit for sociology. This early sociological approach led to positivism. Positivism's purpose is a prediction of human behavior. On the other hand, there was also sociologists who don't agree with that idea. They thought that natural world and social world are different because human society has its own unique culture. As a result, sociology becomes to have new purpose called verstehen except for the prediction which sociology originally had. The two different purpose of society made a difference between quantitative and qualitative. Qualitative sociology focus on depth, so they use in-depth interviews to understand human behavior. On the contrasts, quantitative sociology uses numerical data. In nowadays, sociology has become a specific perspective for researching human social life. Compare to the past, these days sociologists study a wider range of points. Some of them research macro-structures or micro-processes.
2. What was interesting/what did you learn:
Honestly, to me, most of this article was new. I learned a little bit of philosophy in high school but not sociology. Of course, I knew some basics of sociology like there is quantitative and qualitative research in sociology. But except that, I knew nothing. So I found most of this article was interesting. Especially the explanation of the Comte. Comte argued that there are three steps of social development what he called The Law of Three Stages. From the article that I read, Comte thought that all phenomena are subject to invariable "natural laws" since he was impressed with the Newtonian revolution. At Comte's The Law of Three Stages, the second stage called theological stage is where people understanding society as "natural". Why did he say that second stage as known as the metaphysical stage is the second stage, not the final stage? Isn't he the one who said that all phenomena are subject to natural laws? Aren't natural laws existing if we see our society as natural? Or did the word "natural" used as different meaning between -"natural" laws- and -society as "natural"-? And I was wondering why Comte said that first stage is where people took a religious view of society. Anyway, I was confused, but Comte's idea was still interesting to me. And I learned that sociology is relatively new academic discipline. I always thought that sociology is old discipline like philosophy but it was not true.
3. Discussion Point:
I was fascinated when I read the part of armchair sociology and societal imagination. In this article, societal imagination defined as "the ability to situate personal troubles within an informed framework of social issues". Societal imagination helps people to go beyond from armchair sociology. So, yes. Societal imagination is important. So what can I do? I don't even know how to improve my societal imagination. "Let's take a seat and think about how to situate personal troubles within social issues for an hour". I don't think that's going to work well. How about seeing events in the different perspective? According to Wikipedia, drinking coffee can be seen as a form of self-care and also custom. So except that, how can we improve our societal imagination?
Your writing is interesting! (*´▽`*)
ReplyDeleteI think 'Finding the cause of an individual's behavior in his / her society' is a sociological imagination.
Like C. Wright Mills's coffee metaphor, when we study human behavior,
the biography, history, and social structure of an individual must be seen together.
I really appreciate your comment. :)
DeleteLike you said, thingking about the cause is going to be a good first step to improve siciological imagination.When we see things, we don't just look what they are. We also try to think about the causes making that happen. Again, thanks for your opinion.