Abstract difference between sociology and social psychology. Lazareva O.A

SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

annotation
The article contains comparative analysis two closely related sciences: sociology and social psychology. In addition, the article shows how both sciences study the same problem (with concrete examples). Also, the contribution of sociology as a science to common system humanities.

SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY: SIMILARITIES AND DISTINCTIONS

Lazareva Oksana Aleksandrovna
Saratov State University of N.G. Chernyshevsky
Student of the 5th course of sociological faculty

Abstract
Article comprises the comparative analysis of two sciences closely connected among themselves: sociology and social psychology. Besides, in the article it is shown how both sciences study the same problem (with concrete examples). Also, the sociology contribution as sciences in the general system of the humanities is opened.

“Sociology is the science of society” is the most common definition you might ever hear. If you look at the word “sociology”, then from Latin it is literally translated like this: “socio” - society, “logos” - science. But in fact, sociology is not just a science, but one of the most important disciplines about man. Sociology is closely interrelated with psychology as well as social psychology.

Sociologists are interested not just in a person, but in an individual as an emerging personality, a member of a group or institution from birth. Personalities influence each other and interact with each other. The reasons for this interaction can be explained with the help of sociology, biology, psychology, and even philosophy.

Thus, sociologists and social psychologists share a common interest in the behavior of people in groups. However, while most sociologists study groups ranging in size from small to very large (such as societies and their inherent tendencies), social psychologists study the average person—how an individual simultaneously thinks about, is influenced by, and relates to others. (i.e., more special cases).

Let's look at a few examples to see the difference between the object of study of a sociologist and a social psychologist. In studying intimate relationships, a sociologist might be interested in the number of formal and common-law marriages and divorces and trends in this area, and a social psychologist would try to understand how people become attractive to each other and why they get married. The same can be said about the study of such a category as happiness: a sociologist would begin to find out how much happy people among students and which indicators are most often found in the concept of happiness, and a social psychologist would study psychological signs manifestations of a state of happiness and find out what happiness is after all - an emotion or feeling.

Although sociologists and social psychologists sometimes use the same research methods, social psychologists rely more on experiments in which they can manipulate a factor. For example, in order to understand whether an individual of the same gender, age, etc., has an influence on a person, a social psychologist can create experimental conditions under which it will be present or absent. A sociologist will most likely conduct an interview, focus group, or survey research using methods such as correlation. A sociologist cannot study each individual and assume a pattern of his behavior, but he can say or suggest how this or that group or the majority (the bulk of people) will behave. Research by sociologists is very important for marketing, management and advertising, as it allows them to identify the preferences of their main target audiences. But you can always go deeper and turn to psychologists in order, for example, to identify the buyer’s taste characteristics or motives for making purchases, but it will be difficult to call the psychologists’ data representative and in accordance with the law large numbers(i.e., extrapolate data to the bulk of buyers).

Anyone who has ever studied even the basics of sociology or psychology knows that we are shaped by nature and nurture. As evolutionary psychologists remind us, because of our inherited human nature, we are predisposed to behave like our ancestors who survived and reproduced. We carry within us the genes of those who had traits that allowed them to survive and reproduce, and whose children were able to do the same. Nature has also blessed us with a tremendous capacity for learning. We are sensitive to and responsive to our social factors. Sociology is precisely concerned with the management, prevention and influence of factors on the life of society and individual groups.

It is worth noting that sociology studies categories that are not studied in any other science (social memory, small group, social mobility, social institution, etc.). All the classics of sociology spent years of their work to get to the bottom of the truth of each concept. For example, M. Weber and his types of actions. After all, it is thanks to him that we can now distinguish between simply an action performed as a reflex or habit, and an action aimed at something or someone. And it is sociology that studies the motives, goals and results of such interactions. And without social interaction in modern world It’s no longer possible to get by, because we are exposed to daily influence from the media, friends, etc. .

Thus, I would like to note important role sociology in the study of the individual, its formation, interaction with other individuals, with groups, with institutions, as well as in the study of the influence of individuals, groups and institutions on each other. Any statistics can be useful in any of the four existing spheres of social life. And, of course, we should not forget about psychology and biology, which help sociology to study all these processes. Also, Special attention it is necessary to pay attention to such a science as social psychology, which is now becoming popular due to the combination of the methodology of two related sciences. It is useful in marketing, in advertising, in psychology and pedagogy, as well as in everyday life.

Understanding the essence of the relationship between sociological disciplines and social psychology

The theoretical boundaries between sociology, microsociology, psychology and social psychology are very arbitrary. And they become more specific if we consider historical sociology and historical psychology. Historical science itself contributed to this. Its influence on sociology and psychology in the 19th century gave an empirical basis to both sociology, with the help of history, which can study the changes and development of social reality, and psychology, which studies the changes and evolution of the psyche of individuals.

In his social theory N. Elias emphasized the empirical study of historical and sociological issues. And upon closer examination, you can see that the development of an idea historical development humanity is based on changes not only in social, but also in individual structures, and is also studied by psychological science.

Social psychology has been and is studying the development and changes of the psyche in a socio-historical context. It is very difficult to identify these changes when considering an individual. The socio-psychological context makes it possible not to separate the individual from his social nature and to study changes in the psyche directly in the social environment.

The famous psychologist I. Belyavsky in his works revealed the social essence of the psyche, while his colleague V. Shkuratov saw the goal of social psychology in the study of the stages of development of civilization. Both psychologists, forming a successful tandem, in their work described the idea of the development of the human psyche, ranging from mythological ideas to modern times. It is worth noting another psychologist, V. Druzhinin, who, referring to I. Bilyavsky, comes to the conclusion that social psychology studies not a static, but a dynamic subject. He's writing:

"Considering the individual in the context of history as a process of change, historical psychology deals with the dynamic aspects of the mental world and studies the historiogenesis of humanity and man."

Note 1

Since its inception in the 19th century, sociology has focused its attention on the study of macro objects - society, nation, civilization. However, the formation of sociology was accompanied by its theoretical division into macro and micro theories. Macro sociological theories view society in the context of large-scale social structures and processes, and microsociological theories - in the context of interpersonal interactions. According to sociology, it has the status of a multi-paradigm science. Moreover, unlike psychology, where multi-paradigmism is identified with a variety of theories, each of which performs an incomplete set of paradigmatic functions, in sociology there is a real paradigmatic split that runs along the object-subject line. At the same time, within both paradigms the principle of historical study of social reality is actively used.

Macro sociological theories focus on the study of structural changes, the continuous process of social development, using historical data. Sociologists have repeatedly turned to the consideration of social transformations in a historical context. The first attempt to combine social psychology and sociology belongs to the classics of sociology - K. Marx, M. Weber, F. Tjonnis and others. As Ch. Tilly notes:

"The sociology of the 19th century consisted of historical and psychological criticism - attempts to find The best decision dilemmas of time and the general direction of human development by placing the present within the framework of long-term large-scale social processes."

The vast majority of sociologists have studied problems social development precisely at the macro-objective level. For example, Marx studied civilization as a historical synthesis of many centuries, which began in primitive times and will end when humanity reaches communism.

But not all scientists are focused on studying only macro objects. There were also those who tried to correct the monostraightness of sociology in the study of social reality. At first it was the activity approach in Weber's understanding sociology, which introduced the acting individual into sociology and brought to light his importance and necessity for sociology. In his theoretical views, he explained the actions of people taking into account their motives, meanings and orientation towards another individual. Subsequently, synthetic theories appeared at the intersection of micro-macro approaches in sociology. The most prominent representative of such a synthetic approach in historical sociology is N. Elias.

Theoretical activity and methodology in the works of famous psychologists and sociologists

In his theoretical work, Elias identified two main lines of research - psychogenesis and sociogenesis. In the first case we are talking about changes in the structure of personality, in the second - about changes in social structures. For a scientist, the development of the psychogenetic and sociogenetic (the development of the individual and social structures) are interdependent things. Using the example of a child's behavior, Elias proves that he is given civilizational skills in an abbreviated temporary form, while humanity has been producing them for centuries. First, she assimilates them under the guidance of adults, and then without control from others; it carries out most of the rules automatically.

“The social standard to which the individual first adapts from the outside, under external coercion, is finally restored in him more or less unhindered thanks to internal coercion, which works up to a certain point even when the individual does not consciously desire it.”

The attention of the German researcher was drawn not to situational changes in the psyche of an individual, but to those changes that are long-term in nature, that is, formed and transmitted over generations. The formation of this point of view was influenced by Elias's friend, K. Mannheim. The latter wrote:

“Even gradual modifications in ways of thinking are not realized by members of the group who are in a stable situation until the process of adapting thinking to new problems occurs so slowly that it stretches over several generations. In such cases, representatives of one generation during their lives almost don't notice the changes."

In Elias's psychogenesis, affective states that are inherent in the “it” are studied. Elias's research proves that the more civilized a person is, the more subject to it emotional states, the more strongly it controls states of affect. By “civilized” is meant that individual who assimilates the existing social standards and norms that exist and are supported by the social structure and of which he becomes a part from birth. The process of transferring knowledge, socializing an individual, “imposing” social responsibility on him is sociogenesis. This area of research describes the psychological instance of the “Super-ego”.

Elias's sociological and socio-psychological ideas consist in his study of the long-term development of society and the changes of individuals in it, without limitation to short periods of the present. Sociology and society, in Elias’s understanding, is continuous, endless, as long as it is dealt with by objects and subjects, between whom there are social relationships and interdependence. Such interactions create more and more new connections, a network of interdependencies. Social psychology does not always “move forward”; development does not mean that in history there cannot be returns to the past ( shining example that's why it's fashion). Elias notes that “the peculiarity of history is its recurrence and cyclicality.” For him, society is a holistic, long-term process.

Norbert Elias, unlike other psychologists and sociologists, considered the individual and society as equal in importance, for this he used the concept of “figuration”. Elias writes:

"That which is signified by two different concepts"the individual" and "society" - as it is represented in modern usage - are not two separately existing objects, but distinct but inseparable levels of the human universe.

Note 2

Thus, Elias considered both the individual and society in civilizational development, in a transformation that changes both the psyche and social figurations.

For Elias, an individual can act as both a subject and an object when considered in relation to other individuals. He becomes an object when he becomes the cause of changes in another subject, when he is identified as a representative of another social group or institution. Being an object, an individual changes another object and changes himself.

Manifestation external factors- this is the rationalization of behavior by the individual, and internal - an increase in the threshold of shame (when a person violates his own prohibitions) and a feeling of grief. Rationalization of behavior refers to the orientation of individuals toward long-term strategic planning, calculations of risks and possible prospects, and attempts by individuals to act in a balanced manner, without succumbing to short-term emotional states. The more civilized an individual's behavior becomes, the more varied the feelings of shame and grief become.

Elias comes to the conclusion that the development of society leads to functional dependence between individuals, and therefore to greater control, to mutual supervision. A change in the way of existence gives rise to new patterns, new ideas about the causes of shame and grief.

Rational behavior and restraint, according to Elias, begins with the elite and spreads to the rest of the population. A combination of objectivism and subjectivism is present in Elias's work. He argued that the socio-historical process continues over centuries, and can be studied by studying empirical material that has been collected over several generations. In everyday life, not scientific level, the dynamics of changes in the cultural context can be seen when raising a child from the very first day of his birth.

Each individual person undergoes a “course” to understand others as they develop and mature. Just as in history, development has not always meant an improvement in the existence of mankind, so in the course of an individual’s life, development is not always identified with an improvement in her stay in social reality. Changes at the individual level, namely curbing the state of affect, increasing the level of shame, reducing emotionality - these are elements of historical and natural development, but this is not always development for the better, a happy future for each individual. Elias defines the engine of change as the mental apparatus of each person, which is endowed with its own natural laws.

Note 3

Within the framework of these laws, the historical process is formed. Natural and historical processes are inseparable. Although the beginning “moves away” from the natural process, it becomes interdependent with the historical and forms a balance between mental and social (civilizational) laws.

Elias writes that “there is no zero point in the history of human development, just as there is no zero point in the history of his social existence, public relations between people." The process of forming feelings of shame and grief, changing their boundaries - "represent human nature in social conditions of a certain form, and in the historical-social process, they are reflected, for their part, as one element." Describing court society, Elias shows that the desire for power, the assignment to material resources, leads to changes in the behavior of individuals, the use of strategic actions and curbing emotionality.

The process of adaptation to external circumstances and the regulation of one’s own behavior, in accordance with these circumstances, belongs to the theory of social change, which focuses attention not on a static consideration of the existence of social reality, but on a dynamic, constantly changing process that can be observed if one takes into account its long-term development for centuries. Elias, unlike Marx, who also viewed development as a long process and was a supporter of the objectivist line of development of society, believed that development cannot be explained taking into account only the economic component. In order to obtain the integrity of the picture, it is necessary to involve various sciences, such as history, political science, psychology, philosophy, cultural studies, economics and others.

Conclusion on the topic

In Elias's theoretical works one can observe a combination of teachings about sociogenesis and psychogenesis, that is, about social and mental life, its formation and changes in it. Civilizational changes at the structural level, population growth, differentiation of individual functions, lead to interdependence between individuals and faster circulation of behavior patterns. Social constraints model the behavior of individuals. Therefore, Elias tried to synthesize social and individual processes in his theoretical achievements.

Individual structures can only be understood when they are related to social context and changes in social networks. Taking into account Elias's ideas regarding the complications and interweaving of interactions between individuals, the procedural nature of changes in the psyche, the suppression of affective manifestations in behavior, social interdependence between individuals, the rationalization of individual structures will enrich psychological discourse.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

1. The difference between the subject of sociology andsubject of social psychology

One of possible definitions The subject of social psychology can be formulated as follows: social psychology is the science that studies how people think about each other, how they influence each other and how they relate to each other.

At the same time, it is important to distinguish between the subject of social psychology, on the one hand, and the subject of sociology and personality psychology:

Sociology and social psychology do have a common interest in studying how people behave in groups. However, each science places its own emphasis on studying the behavior of people in groups. Sociology studies groups(from small to very large - societies). Social psychology studies - individuals, the people who make up these groups - what a person thinks about others, how they influence him, how he treats them. This includes the study of the influence of a group on individuals, and an individual on a group. For example, when considering marital relationships, a sociologist would focus his attention on trends in marriages, divorces, etc., and a social psychologist, first of all, would investigate why certain people attract each other.

The similarity between social psychology and personality psychology is that both of these branches psychological science study the individual. However, personality psychologists focus on individual internal mechanisms and differences between individuals, asking questions such as why some people are more aggressive than others. Social psychologists focus on how in general people evaluate each other, how social situations can force most people to act humanely or cruelly, to be conformist or independent, etc.

Social reality, expressed in the totality of information about it, social factors form the objects of sociology. It is not separated from the object by an impenetrable wall. An object is a part of an object; it “grows” out of it, being a set of meaningful key problems. Let's say that society as a whole is an object of sociology. Studying it like organic system- item. The functioning of society is the object of sociological science, and the study of the functioning mechanism is the subject. Appeal to social institutions (state, property, family) is the object area of sociology. The study of the regulating, managing, and power functions of these instruments is one important element subject of our science.

Accordingly, the concept of the subject of sociology emerges as the science of modern society as an integral system, trends in its functioning and changes, the science of the formation and dynamics of social communities, institutions and organizations, the interaction between individuals and communities, the science of meaningful social actions of people, social processes and mass behavior . Accordingly, the main question of sociology can be formulated as follows: what is society as a functioning structural integrity? Answering it, we say that this is the interaction of social communities, personalities, social processes, and human behavior. We give the most general definition of the subject area of sociology, which, as it seems to us, is the leitmotif of various concepts regarding the nature of sociological knowledge.

Schematically, the structure of the subject of sociology can be represented in the form of concentric circles. At the center is the “Core” - social communities, which include the entire totality of human individuals and are “society” exact value this concept. Social communities are the source and driving force social actions and processes. Their interaction leads to institutionalization. The dynamics of social communities, groups, classes, strata, social institutions form the social structure of society. Society, characterized by stability, dynamism, openness, self-sufficiency, spatio-temporal existence, acts as an integral organic system.

2. Social consequences of state privatizationprivate property in Russia

In the 20th century privatization state property has become widespread, capturing almost all major countries. The first mention of privatization dates back to the 13th century. in England.

Privatization means the transfer of ownership rights from the state to private individuals on the terms of the complete sale of state-owned firms to private individuals or the sale of part of the assets and delegation of rights to dispose of state property.

In accordance with Federal law "On the privatization of state and municipal property » privatization of state and municipal property means alienation of property for compensation Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation or municipalities property in the ownership of individuals and legal entities. From these definitions it follows that the main feature of privatization is its remunerative nature. Some authors distinguish between the definitions of “privatization” and “denationalization,” the latter being understood as the transfer from the state to individuals and legal entities, partially or completely (including through privatization) of the functions of direct management of business entities. Privatization is of a paid nature, and denationalization can take different forms.

Privatization- this is the process of denationalization of ownership of the means of production, property, housing, land, Natural resources. This phenomenon occurs through gratuitous transfer or the sale of state property into the ownership of interested parties with the formation on this basis of private, joint-stock or corporate property.

Privatization in Russia- a more extensive and system-forming phenomenon, in contrast to the usual sale of state-owned firms. Russia is characterized by two complementary parallel processes: the gradual liberation of the state from certain functions of the regulator of property relations, which are not performed by it within the framework of a market economy (here we are talking about the process of reducing the capabilities of the state as a legal object of property legal relations) and the formation of new legal and economic structures and mechanisms , without which it is difficult to fully implement the private property system. It must be taken into account that the latter process is a complement to the first and occurs following the self-elimination of the state. The state, while reducing its property rights, must remain to control and regulate the transferred property and the market economy.

3. Social consequences of power

social privatization power organization

Organization and power are largely synonymous. When we talk about the results of the activities of organizations, we imagine organizations as an instrument of power in the hands of those in power. They are a tool for subordinating people to the rules established in the organization. In terms of resource allocation, they are political systems. Power is distributed between the privileged and the disprivileged. Mintzberg, dealing with issues of power “in and around” organizations (Mintzberg, 1983), developed the basic concepts and terminology that we will use. If we think of power as a consequence of an organization's design, then power arrangements will be another means by which an organization can achieve effectiveness.

In this chapter we will analyze the nature of power within an organization. The main focus will be on the development of power relations over time. In many ways, power is the most confusing phenomenon. On the one hand, power has stability and the ability to self-preserve. Those in power have the resources to maintain themselves in power. On the other hand, as events in Eastern Europe and in the USSR in 1989 and 1990, weakened power can be overthrown with alarming speed.

Power in an organization can be distributed in different ways. In Chapter 3, in our discussion of centralization, we learned that power can be concentrated in the hands of a few, or it can be decentralized throughout the organization. A good place to start when discussing ways to distribute power is Morgan’s classification of power relations, which consists of 6 types.

The first type includes autocratic organizations, in which absolute power is in the hands of a single person or in the hands of a small group. The second type is bureaucratic organizations, in which roles are outlined and power relations are clearly specified. The third type is technocratic organizations, in which the system is governed by erudition and competence. The fourth type of organization is managed by codedetermination (joint determination), in which opposition parts of the organization are included in the management system. The fifth is organizations of representative democracy, in which officials are elected and serve for a certain period of time or as long as they are supported by the members of the organization. This was the system in the former Yugoslavia, which collapsed so tragically. Finally, there are organizations of direct democracy, in which everyone has the right to participate and participates in governance. This system is characteristic of many cooperatives, as well as well-known kibbutzi in Israel. Many organizations are mixed types with more than one form of government. Bureaucracy is the predominant type and will be considered first.

Bibliography

1. Kravchenko, A.I. Sociology: textbook for universities / A.I. Kravchenko. - 8th ed. - M.: Academician. Project; Foundation "Mir", 2005. - 512 p.

2. Toshchenko Zh.T. Sociology. General course: Academic. allowance. - 2nd ed., add. and processed M.: Yurayt-Izdat, 2003. - 527 p.

3. Potapov V.P. Subject, object of sociology and its place in the system of social sciences. - M., 1999.

4. Rutkevich M.N. Society as a system. - St. Petersburg, 2001.

5. Sociology: Encyclopedia / Editorial Board: A.A. Gritsanov and others - Minsk, 2003

Posted on Allbest.ru

Definition

Sociology– a science that studies the processes of development of social consciousness and reveals the role of the individual in its formation. The subject of sociology is the functioning of social systems and institutions, features of human social behavior and society as a sociocultural whole.

Psychology– a science that studies human behavior as the implementation of motives hidden from external observation, establishing patterns of personality development and the formation of interpersonal relationships.

Comparison

The focus of sociology is the entire mechanism of self-regulation and self-development of society, as well as social behavioral stereotypes that develop in local groups at the level of personal or business communication.

Theoretical sociology deals with the analysis and generalization of the results of global studies of social phenomena in the context of their historical development. The state of modern society and the formation of trends in its development in the future are the subject of research in empirical sociology. It uses methods of direct observation of the behavior of members of social groups and experimental analysis of situational factors influencing social consciousness. At the same time, the character and characteristics of an individual are considered as a particular manifestation of the general features of a social group.

In psychology, the main object of study is the human personality and its inner world. Fundamental psychology studies the content and general patterns mental processes that determine personality traits and properties.

IN applied psychology the mechanisms of mental, mental and social activity of a person are identified, which are closely related to the type of his mental organization and little depend on the sociocultural environment.

In specific life conditions, any human activity manifests itself in a certain form of social behavior, therefore the task of psychology is considered not only to analyze the states and personal properties of the individual, but also to determine the specific patterns of their development under the influence social relations.

Along with the main direction in the field of research related to personality psychology, there are also scientific disciplines who study the psychology of small and large groups, psychology of communication, applied psychological technologies and methods of psychological analysis.

Conclusions website

The subject of study by psychologists is the personality of a person, his inner world and motives of behavior. Sociology studies not the individual, but society as a single sociocultural system.
Psychology connects personality traits with individual mental processes. Sociology views a person as a participant in the general process of social interaction.
In psychology, the relationship of an individual with society is analyzed from the point of view of personality psychology and communication psychology. In sociology - from the point of view of the influence of social consciousness on the formation of the type of behavior and worldview of an individual.
Psychology is closely related to pedagogy and medicine, sociology is closely related to general history and cultural studies.

Sociology and history

If history pays its main attention to inimitable unique historical events, processes and personalities, then sociology is more interested in typical in social relationships and events. On the other hand, a historian, by definition, is interested in “deeds long ago” days gone by”, the past, and the sociologist is primarily interested in modern society and its problems. The experience of the past is only one of the sources of understanding modern phenomena and processes.

The focus of psychology is the inner world of a person, the individual human “I”, and the focus of sociology is the problems of interpersonal interaction, i.e. "We".

There are connections between sociology and the natural and exact sciences. It was in the process of interaction with biology that the systems approach first found its specific expression, and social ecology and social medicine developed. The collaboration between sociology and mathematical science is growing stronger, because today it is difficult to imagine it without special mathematical methods, ensuring the effectiveness and reliability of empirical sociological research. Achievements are widely used in sociology systems theory, theories of synergetics, game theory and many other theoretical and conceptual models.

Important In the development of sociology, interdisciplinary connections are acquired. Social psychology and conflictology have emerged on an interdisciplinary basis, sociolinguistics and socionics are developing, and some other disciplines are in their infancy. For all these new directions, the contribution of sociology consists, firstly, in defining their problematics from the problem field that is traditionally associated with structural social group carriers of special interests, and secondly, in the widespread use of specific research methods and techniques, which make it possible to significantly expand the factual base of all humanitarian knowledge.

So, the meaning of isolating sociology from the entire system of sciences, and, of course, first of all, social science, is to go to the analysis of the consciousness and behavior of people in the unity of objective and subjective factors. This is possible due to the fact that sociology has the following advantages, features and properties.

Signs and properties of sociology:

1. study of society as concrete reality , in real conditions of space and time, i.e. study specific connections, interactions, institutions, interests of people involved in social processes;

2. analysis of society in general, as a system , in the unity of all its mechanisms and structures, institutions and relationships. This shows up:

Ø in the study of societies as a system of connections and relationships;

Ø in the analysis of all private social phenomena and processes from the point of view of their inclusion in the social whole;

Ø in the study and identification of universal social properties, connections, institutions, communities. Sociology seems to contain a certain universality, which distinguishes it from other social sciences;

3. research both specific and first typical mechanisms, conditions and connections social life;

4. learning orientation motives social behavior and interaction of people, features of their perception and understanding of social phenomena;

5. the use of research methods not only theoretical, but also quantitative, empirical plan .

SOCIOLOGY – This theoretical and applied humanities about the characteristics, trends and patterns of formation, development and interaction of various social communities and systems, about the mechanisms and forms of manifestation of these patterns in the actions of individuals, social groups and society as a whole in the totality of certain social relations in certain historical conditions.

Question 3. Structure and functions of sociology

Modern sociology is a complexly structured system of scientific knowledge, within which there are many theoretical approaches and concepts. None of these concepts are Marxist, structural-functional, field, ethnomethodological, phenomenological, structural, etc. – is not fully adequate and generally accepted. Therefore, at the turn of the 20th – 21st centuries, attempts were made to develop a general sociological metatheories, i.e. a second-order theory that summarizes the main provisions of existing sociological theories.

When clarifying the essence and content of sociology as a science, in addition to defining its object and subject, it is required, firstly, to characterize its structure, levels of sociological knowledge and other differentiating features, which together make it possible to present this discipline as a specific, logically consistent system, especially if we take into account that the structure can be built on various grounds.

Secondly, it is impossible to imagine science without an appropriate conceptual apparatus, categories that would reflect the degree and depth of knowledge of social reality. Categories must, on the one hand, in a generalized form reflect some aspects of social reality, on the other hand, be an expression of general scientific theories and at the same time (this is on the third hand) characterize those specific features of cognition that are inherent specifically in sociology.

Thirdly, any science does not have qualitative certainty unless its functions are precisely isolated and formulated, including those that are characteristic only of it.

There are several ways to structure sociology. First option - By the nature and level of sociological knowledge and research.

The most widespread and generally accepted division of sociology into theoretical and empirical. Within theoretical knowledge, sociological theories are developed, typology and classification of available sociological information are carried out. It also includes hypothetical knowledge, which must later be confirmed or refuted. The competence of theoretical knowledge includes identifying connections and relationships (causal, functional, etc.), patterns (laws), trends and prospects for the development of both the social phenomena and processes being studied, and sociological science itself. A large place in sociological theory is given to the conceptual apparatus, clarifying its interpretation both in the light of accumulated data and new theoretical and methodological approaches.

Accordingly, sociological research is divided according to the nature of the knowledge obtained into two large, relatively separate groups:

1. methodological research that forms knowledge about knowledge, i.e. about the means and methods of researching the subject of sociology (methods, procedures);

2. non-methodological research, the result of which is knowledge about the subject of sociology, i.e. about society and public relations.

Due to the great complexity and diversity of social reality, disabilities carrying out social experiments and the use of instruments, the study of most social phenomena in sociology is carried out primarily at the theoretical level.

Theoretical knowledge is ambiguous and therefore does not exclude the existence of different concepts, views, approaches and paradigms. This, in fact, reflects current situation in sociology, which is characterized by a variety of conceptual approaches to the study of the same problems. Moreover, the existence various theories leads to controversy, which ultimately enriches sociology as a whole.

The structure of sociology at its theoretical level includes:

ü general sociological theories: theory of socio-economic formations (K. Marx), theory of social action (M. Weber), structural-functional theory (T. Parsons and R. Merton), theory social stratification(P. Sorokin), theory of the social field (P. Bourdieu and N. Luhmann), theory of social action (P. Sztompka).

ü Along with them, they develop special sociological theories, for example, theory social interactions(G. Simmel and P. Sorokin), theory of social movements (G. Blumer, A. Touraine).

ü Are widely used sectoral sociological theories, which are formed at the intersections of sociology with other sciences and study the features of the development of social processes not in society as a whole, but in its various spheres - economic sociology, political sociology, sociology of culture, sociology of religion, etc.

Concerning empirical level knowledge, then it is represented by all types and forms of specific social information, including a set of statistical and documentary data, sociological indicators and indicators of the development of the social processes and phenomena being studied.

IN Lately began to gain increasing popularity middle level theories, the concept and justification of which was proposed by the American sociologist R. Merton. In his opinion, these theories are necessary for the sociological analysis of a specific group of facts in certain areas knowledge. Middle-level theories are relatively independent and at the same time closely related to both empirical research and general sociological theories. This intermediate position allows middle-level theories to play the role of a bridge between “high” theory and empirical (practical) data. Today in our country, to a greater or lesser extent, there are over 30 special sociological theories. Some of them received the status of theoretical, others - applied, and still others - theoretical-applied disciplines. Their situation is still not fully understood both from the perspective of sociology and from the point of view of social needs.

Middle level theories can be divided into three groups:

1) theories of social institutions (sociology of family, army, politics, labor, etc.);

2) theories of social communities (sociology of small groups, organizations, classes, crowds, etc.);

3) theories of special social processes (sociology of conflicts, urbanization, communication processes, etc.).

Second option structures of sociology – by orientation and function of research. In other words, this division of sociology answers the question whether this research solves only scientific or practical problems. For fundamental sociology the purpose of the study is to build scientific theory, explaining in general concepts social reality, for example, the theory of social systems, the theory of social crisis, the theory of social development, the concept of culture. And for applied sociology The purpose of the study is to develop specific recommendations and proposals for improving and transforming social reality.

Ideally, applied sociology should be based on fundamental sociology, and that, in turn, should use and correctly explain materials from specifically sociological research. But this is only ideal. It is rarely possible to do this (in particular, one of the few examples of a successful combination of theory and practice is a series of publications by I.M. Klyamkin in the journal “Political Research” for 1993 - 1996). In fact, in certain periods there is a passion for either abstract theories or narrowly applied research, for example, surveys and ratings, as in modern Russia.

At the same time, the obvious lack of development of the sociological theory of transition processes has a bad effect on solving various practical problems Russian society, on the establishment of the rule of law and effective democracy.

Some Russian scientists confuse "theoretical" and "empirical" sociology with "fundamental" and "applied" sociology. The division into theoretical and empirical sociology is determined by the level of knowledge (theoretical and empirical), while the division into fundamental and applied is determined by the orientation (function) of sociology, the focus on scientific or practical tasks. Thus, empirical research can be carried out within the framework of both fundamental and applied sociology. If its goal is theory building, then it belongs to fundamental sociology; if its goal is to develop practical recommendations, then it belongs to applied sociology. The research, being empirical in terms of the level of knowledge gained, can be applied in the nature of the problem being solved - the transformation of reality. The same applies to theoretical research.

Third option structures of sociology – according to the scale of the object under study. Macrosociology studies society as an integral social organism, its structure, social institutions, their functioning and changes. A microsociology addressed to the social behavior of specific individuals and groups, interpersonal communication, motivation of action and reaction, socialization and individualization of the individual, incentives and forms of group actions and group behavior.

Fourth option structures of sociology – on the subject of research. This is the so-called functional sociology. The basis for the functional structure of sociological knowledge is the division of the life of society into various spheres: economic, social, political and spiritual. In accordance with this, it is customary to distinguish economic sociology, political sociology, sociology of social life, sociology of spirituality (culture) and sociology of management.

Fifth option structures of sociology – according to the research approaches used. When studying and explaining various social phenomena, five basic ones are used: research approaches:

Ø demographic approach involves the study of society and social development through the prism of the processes of fertility, mortality, and migration. For example, the socio-economic backwardness of the third world countries is explained, in particular, by the fact that they have to spend most funds to feed a rapidly growing population. Hence, the demographic structure of the population and its dynamics are the key to explaining social processes in these countries;

Ø communicative approach involves the study of social life as a system of human relationships. Here the forms and mechanisms of relationships between people are analyzed, determined by their statuses and social roles, as well as methods and difficulties of communication;

Ø collectivist approach used in studying the characteristics and mechanisms of interaction between people in groups and organizations. Within the framework of this approach, collective behavior (audience, crowd), the influence of sustainable organizational structure on people’s relationships, their actions and motivations (for example, analysis of relationships in a family, company, team, study of conflicts, etc.);

Ø psychological approach involves explaining social behavior and relationships through the prism of its subjective significance for people as individuals. At the same time, motives, thoughts, skills, value orientations and social attitudes, a person’s ideas about himself and the surrounding society ;

Ø cultural approach comprehends the dependence of interaction and communication between people on the sociocultural characteristics, traditions and mentality of a given society. Within the framework of this approach, the specificity of rules of behavior, norms and social values as factors regulating the actions and relationships of people in groups is analyzed. .