BC

Notes on Chapter 1.4: The Early Years

Ameliorism

  • Definition and context
    • Ameliorism is a defining characteristic of British sociology: a desire to solve social problems by reforming individuals rather than restructuring the larger society.
    • Related to, but separable from, political economy; scholars aligned with government policy interests, aiming to preserve the system and forestall violence or revolution.
    • Overall orientation: conservatively oriented, aiming to prevent the coming of a socialist society.
  • Methodological consequence
    • Because British sociologists tended not to trace problems like poverty to society-wide structures, the source of problems was located within individuals (individual pathology rather than social pathology).
    • This produced an early form of blaming the victim, a label later popularized by William Ryan (1971).
    • Focused attention on a long list of individual problems—"ignorance, spiritual destitution, impurity, bad sanitation, pauperism, crime, and intemperance"—with intemperance (alcoholism) often framed as the primary culprit.
    • Key limitation: lack of a robust theory of social structure or the social causes of these problems.

Social Evolution and the Comte–Spencer debate

  • Rise of social evolution as a core concern in late 19th-century Britain
    • Built on influences from Auguste Comte (translated into English in the 1850s by Harriet Martineau), emphasizing larger social structures, a scientific/positivistic orientation, comparative study, and evolutionary theory.
    • British thinkers used Comte to mount opposition to some of the excesses of Comtian theory (notably the elevation of sociology to a quasi-religious status).
    • Herbert Spencer emerged as a dominant figure in British sociological theory, especially in evolutionary theory; Abrams (1968) emphasizes Spencer’s influential role and his later controversial claims.
  • Spencer and Comte: two profiles within the same broad project
    • Spencer often categorized alongside Comte, but there are important differences: Spencer began as a political liberal and retained liberal elements, yet grew more conservative over time; his influence was nonetheless conservative in spirit.
    • Spencer’s liberalism coexisted uneasily with his laissez-faire stance: he argued that the state should intervene only to protect individuals, not to reform society.
    • This placed him in the camp of social Darwinism: an evolutionary belief that society grows progressively better if left unimpeded by external intervention; social life evolves as institutions adapt to their environment.
    • Spencer advanced an organismic view of society and applied Darwinian logic (e.g., natural selection) to social life, including the famous phrase often attributed to him: "survival of the fittest" (which predates Darwin’s own popularization of the phrase).
    • Key contrast: Spencer emphasized the individual; Comte emphasized larger units like the family; both shared a commitment to a science of sociology and an organismic, holistic view of society.
    • Spencer and Comte both influenced later theorists (e.g., Durkheim, Parsons) through their structural/functional outlook and the notion of society as an interdependent system.
  • Spencer’s evolutionary theory: two major strands (per Haines 1988; Perrin 1976)
    • Evolutionary growth of societies through size and complexity: increasing population and the unification of adjoining groups (compounding) lead to larger, more differentiated social structures and functions.
    • Militant to industrial evolution: militant societies prioritized warfare; industrial society emphasizes friendship, altruism, specialization, achievement-based recognition, voluntary cooperation, and strong, shared morality.
    • Government’s role in industrial society is restricted to prohibiting what people ought not to do; social cohesion rests on voluntary contractual relations and a powerful collective morality.
    • The possibility of regressions remains: societies can revert to more militant forms despite an overall directional trend toward industrialization.
    • Ethical/political stance: the idea that the world progresses toward a morally better state, privileging the “fittest” societies to survive and allowing less fit societies to die off; this justified limited intervention and promoted a competitive, selectionist view of social change.
    • Reception and revival: Spencer’s ideas enjoyed early popularity, faced rejection during later periods, and have seen revival in neoevolutionary sociological theories (Buttel 1990; Sanderson 2007).

The Reaction Against Spencer in Britain

  • Core concern: the threat posed by Spencer’s survival-of-the-fittest framework to ameliorist reform.
    • Although Spencer later repudiated some extreme formulations, his overall stance argued against government intervention and social reform, which clashed with ameliorist aims.
    • A notable quotation capturing the harsh logic of Spencer’s stance:
    • "Fostering the good-for-nothing at the expense of the good, is an extreme cruelty. It is a deliberate stirring-up of miseries for future generations. There is no greater curse to posterity than that of bequeathing to them an increasing population of imbeciles and idlers and criminals…. The whole effort of nature is to get rid of such, to clear the world of them, and make room for better…. If they are not sufficiently complete to live, they die, and it is best they should die." ext{Spencer, cited in Abrams, 1968:74}
  • Resulting influence on British sociology: a strong tension between evolutionary/individualistic explanations and the reformist, social-structure–based approaches favored by ameliorists.

Harriet Martineau (1802–1876)

  • Background and contributions
    • Renowned author and writer who connected political economy with social morality; translated Comte’s Positive Philosophy into English; public educator and interpreter of scientific doctrines.
    • As a public intellectual, she aimed to make political-economic arguments accessible to academics, workers, women, and children.
  • How to Observe Manners and Morals (early sociology methodology)
    • One of the earliest sociology methods books; uses a traveling observer model to study a wide range of social practices, institutions, discourses, and the objects of a given society.
    • Advocated scientific neutrality in line with Comtean positivism: the social scientist should suspend biases and sympathetically understand a society from its members’ point of view.
  • Morals vs. Manners; anomaly analysis
    • Morals: the values a society professes to hold in common (e.g., national constitutions, laws, and public narratives).
    • Manners: everyday behaviors and practices (domestic routines, social gatherings, recreational activities).
    • Anomalies occur when manners diverge from morals; sociologists describe these anomalies to assess social alignment.
  • Society in America (1834–1836)
    • Systematic, empirical study of American society across politics, government, media, economy, slavery, class, gender, race, religion, and social institutions.
    • Martineau identified four anomalies in American morality: slavery, unequal status of women, pursuit of wealth, and fear of public opinion.
  • Feminist and standpoint implications
    • Offered an early model for feminist sociology: studied marriage, women’s education, violence against women, fashion, prostitution, and women’s work inequalities.
    • As Lengermann and Niebrugge-Brantley note, she acknowledged her own gender as a lens for sociological inquiry, anticipating standpoint theory decades later.

The Key Figure in Early Italian Sociology: Pareto

  • Vilfredo Pareto (1848–1923) and his stand in relation to Marx
    • Pareto’s legacy is often framed as a refutation of Marx; his ideas diverged from Enlightenment rationalism and from many Marxian assumptions by emphasizing nonrational factors and elite rule.
    • Zeitlin (1996) argues Pareto’s ideas include a critique of Marx and Enlightenment rationalism, and his emphasis on nonrational impulses and instincts.
  • Pareto’s theory of social change: elite theory
    • Society is predominantly governed by a small elite acting on enlightened self-interest; the masses are driven by nonrational forces and are unlikely to be revolutionary.
    • Social change occurs when an elite degenerates and is replaced by a new elite drawn from the nongoverning elite or from higher elements of the masses.
    • Thus, Pareto’s theory is cyclical: elites rise, degenerate, and are replaced, with the masses largely unchanged.
    • This framework contrasts with Marx’s mass-driven, teleological transformation toward a utopian end.
  • Pareto’s systemic conception of society
    • He sought to model society as an interconnected system in which a change in one part affects the whole, aligning with an organic/structural view of social life.
    • This systemic, holist view—shared by Comte, Durkheim, and Spencer—helped shape Parsons’s later structural-functionalism.

Non-European Classical Theory

  • Rationale for non-European thinkers in the classical canon
    • Contemporary sociology emphasizes including non-European theorists to capture perspectives often absent from Euro-American theory and to critique colonial/imperial perspectives.
    • Alatas and Sinha (2017) highlight five non-European classical theorists: Ibn Khaldun, Pandita Ramabai Sarasvati, José Rizal, Said Nursi, and Benoy Kumar Sarkar.
  • Ibn Khaldun (premodern sociological thought)
    • Earlier emphasis (as discussed elsewhere in the chapter) on cyclical theories of social change and the foundation for later evolutionary thinking.
    • Khaldun’s ideas are used to illustrate non-European contributions and to show how they interface with or precede later European sociological concepts.
  • Pandita Ramabai Sarasvati (1858–1922)
    • Indian social reformer focusing on the status of women within caste society; integrated feminist critique into social reform debates.
    • Employed personal experience as a basis for sociological analysis, aligning with a feminist standpoint approach: she uses memoirs to critique gendered and religious structures.
    • Traveled to England and America; published The Peoples of the United States, evaluating Western society from a colonized, gendered vantage point.
    • Ramabai’s work foregrounds patriarchy, education, and legal rights for women; she analyzed how caste and religious orthodoxy constrained women’s autonomy.
  • José Rizal (1861–1896)
    • Filipino writer who critiqued colonial rule (Spain and the Catholic Church) and analyzed how colonialism shaped Filipino culture and social life.
    • Discussed the concept of indolence, arguing that perceived laziness among colonized populations was a product of colonial oppression and disruption of indigenous knowledge—an argument that challenges justifications for domination.
    • Advocated Enlightenment principles in the Philippines as a path to reform rather than dependence on church structures.
  • Said Nursi (1877–1960)
    • Turkish theologian who blended science with religious knowledge; promoted a social theology integrating faith and social justice.
    • Critiqued European naturalist science for fostering aggressive nationalism and racialism; argued that naturalism could lead to despair and disenchantment (a historical parallel to Durkheim and Weber).
    • Proposed a pathway to modernity that preserves spiritual and moral traditions while advancing scientific understanding.
  • Benoy Kumar Sarkar (1877–1949)
    • Indian social scientist with a background in English, history, and economics; contributed to social science discourse and political thought.
    • Opposed European colonialism and American imperialism; promoted Indian nationalism from a critical, non-Western perspective.
    • Engaged with Comte’s positivism but proposed Asiatic positivism to emphasize that positivism, materialism, and activism are present in Hindu tradition as well.
    • Rejected Comte’s evolutionary theory in favor of history as creative disequilibrium: history is a series of conflicts between the haves and have-nots, but never reaches a utopian equilibrium; rather, it is perpetual, indefinite, and evolving (creative disequilibrium).

Summary of Chapter 1: The Early Years

  • The chapter sketches the early history of sociological theory
    • Premodern sociology theories are highlighted with Ibn Khaldun as a foundational figure.
    • Modern sociological theory emerges through the interplay of political revolution, the Industrial Revolution, capitalism, colonialism, socialism, feminism, urbanization, religious change, and the growth of science.
    • The discussion then moves to the influence of intellectual forces across countries, beginning with France (Enlightenment, conservative and romantic reactions) and examining figures such as Tocqueville, Saint-Simon, Comte, and Durkheim.
    • Next, Germany’s role is explored via Marx (and the roots in Hegelianism, materialism, and political economy) and the roots of German sociology, including Weber and Simmel.
    • The rise of British sociology is discussed, with emphasis on political economy, ameliorism, and social evolution; key figures include Spencer and Martineau.
    • Italian theory is represented primarily by Pareto; non-European and other regional theories are briefly acknowledged.
  • The section closes with a note on the broader canon and the integration of non-European voices.

Notes (footnotes and reflections)

  • Ibn Khaldun’s cyclical theory has been incorporated into contemporary evolutionary theories of social change, notably in the work of Peter Turchin (see Turner and Machalek, 2018:86).
  • This section follows Irving Zeitlin (1996) as a coherent organizing framework, though Zeitlin has limitations; there are stronger analyses of the Enlightenment and broader factors shaping sociology.
  • Some scholars (e.g., Björn Eriksson, 1993) challenge the idea that Comte is the progenitor of modern scientific sociology; others (Hill, 1996; Ullmann-Margalit, 1997) emphasize the role of Ferguson and Adam Smith, or cast doubt on continuity between Marx and mainstream sociology.
  • The term dialectical materialism was first used by Joseph Dietzgen (1857) and later central to Plekhanov (1891); Marx himself did not use the term, despite practicing dialectical materialism (Beamish, 2007b).
  • Smith is often considered part of the Scottish Enlightenment and one of the Scottish Moralists, contributing to the foundations for sociology (Chitnis; Strydom).
  • Tocqueville and Martineau both traveled to America; both criticized certain American practices (e.g., slavery and Indigenous treatment); by contrast, Spencer was broadly critical of colonialism and colonial violence (though he held racially essentialist notions at times).
  • Marx’s analysis of colonies emphasizes primitive accumulation; Du Bois offers the most extensive colonial-analysis among Euro-American scholars, expanding the discussion to race and imperialism.