Chapter 15 postscript

Sociology is the youngest of the social sciences.It has only been nearly a hundred years since Comte adopted this name in his Positive Philosophy, and the science that Comte used this term to predict to study social phenomena should be equivalent to what we call "social science" today. collectively.The same is true for Spencer, who called sociology a general study of social phenomena.It is not what the early scholars who created this name intended to reduce sociology to a discipline that is juxtaposed with social sciences such as political science, economics, and law. Whether sociology can become a special social science is still an unresolved problem.This involves the division of the field of social sciences.If we admit that political science and economics have their special fields, we also admit that social science can be divided according to social system; political science studies political system, economics studies economic system, etc.There can be as many social sciences as social phenomena can be divided into systems.From this standpoint, current sociology is just a home of social science that has not matured.Once it grows up and has plump feathers, it can split up and go on its own.This metaphor does illustrate a trend in modern sociology.

Friends who ridicule sociology once coined the nickname "residual social science" for it.Early scholars like Montesquieu.Like Adam Smith, it is not too much to be called a sociologist, and famous works like "Fa Yi" and "Original Wealth" cover everything, but it is too much to say that it is political science and economics.But soon their disciples carried on the remaining threads of these masters, and formed a number of families. They were all proud of being independent, and sometimes even hated the origin of their hometown.Since political science and economics have become independent, only some less popular ones remain in the field of "sociology".Although not unimportant social systems, it seems to include family, marriage, education, reproductive systems, and religious systems.There was a period when sociology was relegated to the study of "secondary institutions".In this way, it still can't keep its hometown, and the ones that haven't grown up will still grow up.In the past decade or so, this "remaining field" has begun to diverge again.

In the years before the Great War, various sociology of a specialized nature emerged, such as Karl Mannheim’s Sociology of Knowledge, Joachim Wach’s Sociology of Religion, Yelin Eugen Ehrlich’s Sociology of Law, Even anthropologist Raymond Firth called his We the Tikopia survey a sociology of kinship.If this trend continues, it can independently become the science of knowledge, religion, law and kinship.They are still willing to drag the brand of sociology. In fact, it is not that they think highly of their hometown and are softer than political science and economics, but because if they are called knowledge or religion, it is not easy to be confused with the old knowledge that has already occupied these fields. .The science of knowledge and the theory of knowledge are too similar literally, and the science of religion and theology make it difficult for people to distinguish clearly at first sight.The noun of "sociology" means "scientific method to study the system".

The term sociology is superficially lively in this trend, but in fact it is not even qualified for the nickname of "residual social sciences", and what is left is almost zero. Let's go back to the earlier situation and have a look.After Comte and Spencer, there was a period of time when many other sciences were inspired by sociology, and carried out research on "interrelationships between social phenomena and other phenomena", which we might call "marginal sciences". This kind of research once occupied a very important position in Chinese sociology.I remember that about fifteen years ago, the World Book Company published a series of sociology books, the main ones were: the geographical basis, psychological basis, biological basis, and cultural basis of society.Comte has long pointed out the levels of cosmic phenomena, and what is at the upper level must be based on the lower level, so the lower level can also be used to "explain" the higher level.The social phenomenon is at its peak, so it can be explained from any other phenomenon.From explanation to "determinism", it means that social phenomena are determined by other phenomena.This has attracted many scholars trained in other sciences to enter sociology to discuss social phenomena, thus leading to many schools in sociology; the school of mechanics, the school of biology, the school of geography, the school of culture, Su Luojin Sorokin once wrote I published a "Contemporary Sociological Doctrine" to introduce these many schools.There is already a Chinese translation of this book, so I don't need to repeat it here. (Translated by Huang Lingshuang, Business Press) Although Su Luojin is very critical of the prejudices of various theories, we have to admit that the nature of "marginal science" cannot but be "one-sided".He who focuses on social phenomena and the margins of geographical contact cannot hope that he will return to other margins.As for many scholars who must compare which edge is "important" and thus have disputes, it is really superfluous.Speaking from the margins, relationships are numerous, and they can also be multilateral, and the formation of prejudice is the result of insisting on doing nothing.It is difficult to say how much sociology itself has benefited from these "marginal sciences", except for some superfluous controversies, but it has caused many new developments in other sciences, such as human biology, human geography, etc. , has made important progress in the early part of this century, which cannot but be said to be influenced by sociology.

It is undeniable that social phenomena have their basic principles; it is also a fact that other phenomena have an impact on social phenomena; but it is also self-evident that sociology cannot be monopolized by "foundationalism" or be self-sufficient in various "determinisms". reason.Sociology's retreat to the fringe is related to the trend of division of social sciences I mentioned above.Since Tang Ao is occupied by various special social sciences, sociology can only retreat to the threshold. Standing at the door and fighting each other who is the door, how can we not say that it is pitiful?

Sociology may only take a comprehensive route, but how?After criticizing the prejudices of the various factions, Su Luojin proposed a formula of X+1, which means that although each faction emphasizes the fringes of each faction, there is always a full circle.In fact, his formula is "synthesis" rather than "summation".Always add up the edges, and is a mediation bias.But what new contribution does it add up?The status of a peacemaker is not enough to serve as the foundation of a science. How can the characteristics of sociology be thoughtful in every aspect? It is true that social phenomena can be divided into various institutions in terms of content, but these institutions are not isolated.If sociology is to become a comprehensive science, it is better to start from the deep than to start from the margins.From the perspective of social phenomena themselves, if sociology does not become a general term for various social sciences and is satisfied with retaining an empty term, allowing various special social sciences to conduct specialized research on various social systems, it can be carried out on two levels. Comprehensive work: First, explore the relationship between various systems.

For example, the form of a certain political system often matches the form of a certain economic system, or a certain change in the religious system will cause certain effects on the political or economic system.From the perspective of the interrelationships of various institutions, we can see the pattern of the overall social structure.Here, sociology can obtain the field left by various special social sciences, and it is also the field that they cannot cover. Taking the format of the overall social structure as the research object, this object cannot be generalized, but must be a specific community, because what connects various social systems is people's lives, and people's lives are located in time and space, which is the community.Every community has its own set of social structures and the ways in which various systems cooperate.Therefore, a trend in modern sociology is community studies, also known as community analysis.

The initial work of community analysis is to describe the social structure on which the people of a place live in a given location.At this level, it can be said that it is connected with the work of history.Although community analysis often takes the current community as the research object at present, this is only for the sake of convenience. If the historical materials are sufficient, communities in any era can also be used as the object of analysis. The second step of community analysis is comparative research. When comparing the social structures of different communities, it is often found that each social structure has its own matching principles. Different principles lead to different forms of the structures.Thus the concept of "format" was born.In Anglo-American anthropology, the trend of this kind of research is already very obvious. It seems that nouns like Pattern, Configuration, and Integration are all aimed at the research of this kind of structure. We might as well call it "structuralism". Structuralism is "functionalism". Continuation of Functionalism.But there is no consensus on what determines the "format".It is unavoidable to roll up the aftermath of "marginal science" here, some of which focus on geographical factors, and some focus on psychological factors.But this aftermath is not exactly the same as the situation of the early years of the distribution and criticism, because the object in the study of community structure is concrete; with this comprehensive center, various factors affecting this center will not become abstract theories, but can be observed and measured role.

In terms of community analysis, modern sociology has a part of anthropology.Anthropology was originally a very broad science, and it has generally undergone a differentiation process like sociology, and a part of the research culture has also undergone a trend of community research.So the two sciences converge at this point.For example, Lynd's Middletown and Malinowski's investigation report on Trobriad Island are similar in nature.Later, anthropologists began to study the communities of civilized people, such as Warner's Yankee City Series, Embree's "Suye Village" (Japanese Rural Areas) and my books Peasant Life in China and Earthbound China. It is even more difficult to distinguish whether it is anthropology or works of sociology.Mr. Park, a master of American sociology, said very early on that sociology and anthropology should be combined. The Chicago Urban Studies he presided over is the method of applied anthropology, which is what I called "community analysis" above.Radcliffe Brown, an advanced British anthropologist, used "comparative sociology" to call his courses when he was lecturing at the University of Chicago.

What has been said above is just a route for sociology to maintain its comprehensiveness.The other route is not seeking synthesis from specific research objects, but starting from the universality of social phenomena.The social system is a unit separated from the function of social activities; politics, economy, religion, etc. refer to the different needs of people met by these activities. Political activities and economic activities, if their functions are removed, are originally the same, and they are all mutual behaviors between people.These behaviors can be classified according to their forms, such as cooperation, conflict, mediation, separation and other different processes.Formal sociology occurred very early in Germany, and Simmel is a representative of this school of scholars.Von Wiese's systematic sociology, introduced by Becker, also had a great influence in American sociology.Park and Burgess' "Introduction to Sociology" also fully demonstrates that this so-called "pure sociology" standpoint is beyond all kinds of special social sciences, but from social behavior as Objects, putting aside the functional standpoint, and starting from the form of research, can not help but enter the scope of psychology.This reminds us of Comte's hesitation about the status of psychology when he established his scientific hierarchy theory.He does not know whether to place psychological phenomena below or above social phenomena.His hesitation stems from the duality of psychological phenomena, one is what is now called physiological psychology, and the other is what is now called social psychology.In fact, these two kinds do not belong to the same level, but two slices of bread sandwiching social phenomena.Pure sociology can be said to take the top slice as its object.

To sum up, modern sociology has not yet reached a clear field commonly accepted by all so-called sociologists.But in terms of the development trend, it can be said that sociology is not easy to get an independent scope from political science, economics, etc. on the same plane.It can only obtain a comprehensive standpoint for the study of social phenomena from another level. I have pointed out two routes here, pointing in two directions.It is very likely that these two directions will be divided into two disciplines; community analysis will be handed over to the emerging social anthropology, and "sociology" will develop the study of social behavior forms.The name is of course unimportant, but the constant change and complexity of sociological content is indeed the cause of many misunderstandings.
According to my understanding of sociological trends, Fertility Institutions can represent an attempt to study an institution in a sociological way, which falls within the scope of comparative research in the second step of community analysis.In comparative research, it is first necessary to establish a number of comparable types, that is to determine the formats formed by them according to the principles of different structures.Last spring, I wrote a book "American Character" based on Ms. Mead's The American Character, and discussed the meaning of the so-called cultural format in the afterword of this book.I won't repeat it here.These two books can be read together, because in this book I explain the characteristics of the rural society based on the facts of China, and Ms. Mead explains the characteristics of the immigrant society based on the facts of the United States in the same way. I have long wanted to sort out the materials taught in the "Rural Sociology" class, but I always feel that I am not yet mature, so I have been hesitant to write.During the last summer vacation, Mr. Zhang Chunming asked me to write for the "Century Review" for a long time. His kindness was hard to refuse, so he decided to write as he lectured, post as he wrote, and publish as he posted. There are a total of more than a dozen articles.Mr. Chu Anping’s I added a copy to the Observation Series, and then decided to re-edit it. Several articles were re-written and generally revised.Without their urging and encouragement, I would not have written this book, but it was also because of their deadlines that I could not wait for many concepts to be mature before publishing them, and many of them are still worthy of deliberation.This is not a final draft, nor can it be said to be a finished draft. It is just a record of attempts.