SUMMARY PAPER - I CLASSICAL SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY SUBJECT CODE: 73430

CONTENTS Unit No. Title Page No 1. Philosophical Ideas And Economic Concepts 1 2. Political Ideas And The Legacy of Marx Today 11 3. Methodological Contributions And The Division of Labour 19 4. Theory of Suicide, Religion And Legacy of Durkheim Today 25 5. Methodological Contributions And Theory of Social Actions 34 6. Dialogue With Marx And The Legacy of Weber Today 48 7. The Three Levels of Social Reality, Individual Consciousness 56 8. The Philosophy of Money And The Legacy of Simmel Today 64 ***** Syllabus Semester-I, Paper-I CLASSICAL SOCIOLOGICALTHEORY Course Rationale: The course aims at conceptualizing the emergence of sociology within the Enlightenment period. By focusing on the contributions of the founding figures of the discipline, the course aims to highlight the challenges and the debates of the time. Further the course aims to critically analyse the relevance of classical sociology today. The course also aims to establish linkages between classical and contemporary sociology. Students will be expected to read texts in the originals. Unit I: Karl Marx in the context of Western Modernity • Philosophical Ideas: Human Nature, Human Potential and the Place of 'Work',Alienation, Historical Method • Economic Concepts: Critique of Capitalism, Labour Theory of Value, Fetishism of Commodities, Class and Division of Labour • Political Ideas: Materialist Origins of state, Historical stages of the state, The state and civil society • Legacy of Marx/Marx Today Unit II: Emile Durkheim in the context of Western Modernity • Methodological Contributions: The legacy of Comtean Positivism, Society as sui generis, Characteristics of a Social fact, Observation of social facts, Rules of Sociological Method o The Division of Labour: Definition of Division of labour, social solidarity and cohesion, Mechanical and Organic Solidarity, Systems of law • Studyofanomie and suicide, shift from psychological to sociological explanations,, social Integration and suicide, forms of Suicide, (reduce) • Theory of Religion , Sacred and profane,, Elementary Forms of religious life, the totem, Civil Religion • Legacy of Durkheim/Durkheim today Unit III: Max Weber in the context of Western Modernity • Methodological Contributions: Theory of knowledge in the social sciences, Natural Science vs. social science debate, Verstehen, the Ideal Type • Theory of Social Action: rationalisation, bureaucratisation, the iron cage, disenchantment, action and rationality, interpretive theory of Social action, four types of social action o Dialogue with Marx: Religion and the economy, Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of capitalism, the case of Calvinism, Capitalism in China and India. • Legacy of Weber/Weber Today Unit IV: George Simmel in the context of Western Modernity • Three levels of Social Reality: psychological components, Social components and cultural/historical components, Fashion • Individual consciousness, Forms and types of Social interaction, Study of Social Structure and objective culture- Case study of secrecy. • The Philosophy of Money: Money and value, Reification and rationalisation, Tragedy of Culture • Legacy of Simmel/Simmel Today Essential Readings: Morrison, Ken (2006) Formations of Modern Social Thought (2nd. Edition), New Delhi: Sage Publications. Ritzer, George (2007) Sociological Theory (5th Edition). New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill. Adams, Bert and Sydie, R.A. (2001) Sociological Theory. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Turner, J.H. (2013) Contemporary Sociological Theory. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Scott, J. (2006) Social Theory: Central Issues in Sociology. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Further Readings: Giddens, A. (1971). Capitalism and Modern Social theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cuff, E.C., Sharrock, W.W. & Francis, D.W. (2006). Perspectives in Sociology. Oxon: Routledge. Skinner, Q. (1990). The Return of Grand Theory in the Human Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Texts in the original: Marx,K. and Engels,F. The German Ideology. http://www.M Durkheim, E. (2001). Elementary Forms of Religious Life. New York: Oxford University Press. Durkheim, E. (2006). On Suicide. London: Penguin. Durkheim, E. (1996). Division Of Labour. London: Free Press. Weber, M. (2003). Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York: Dover. Simmel,G. (1903). Fashion. New York: Fox, Duffield & Co. Simmel, G. (1978). The Philosophy of Money. Oxon: Routeldge. Simmel, G. (1906). The Sociology of Secrecy and of Secret Societies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ***** 1 PHILOSOPHICAL IDEAS AND ECONOMIC CONCEPTS Unit Structure 1.0 Objectives 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Marx’s Conception of Human Nature and Human Potential 1.3 Alienation and Critique of Capitalism 1.4 ‘Work’ and Labour Theory of Value 1.5 Historical Materialism 1.6 Fetishism of Commodities 1.7 Class and Division of Labour 1.8 Summary 1.9 Unit End Questions 1.10 References and Further Readings 1.0 OBJECTIVES • To understand ‘human nature’ and ‘human potential’ in the philosophical ideas of Karl Marx. • To familiarize students with Marxian concepts such as ‘work’ and ‘alienation’. • To know the ‘historical method’ • To understand Marx’s economic concepts of ‘Critique of Capitalism, and ‘Labour Theory of Value’ • To explore Marxian understanding of ‘Fetishism of Commodities’ and ‘Class and Division of Labour’. 1.1 INTRODUCTION Karl Heinrich Marx (5 May 1818 – 14 March 1883), a German, was a philosopher, sociologist, historian, economist, besides being a political theorist and renowned social revolutionary. He is famous for his contributions to the socialist movement as well as the school of thought known as Marxism. Marx was highly influenced by the theoretical writings of the famous German philosopher Georg Hegel. His contributions remain the guiding ideology, from the which the social, political and economic thought is derived in Marxism. 1 Karl Marx’s parents were Jewish by birth, but were known to have converted to Protestantism. Notwithstanding this change of faith, the Jewish background continued to influence Marx in a long way. In fact, his critical thinking about the prevalent significance of religion was due to the social discrimination he faced within the Jewish society. Not just religion, his opinion on every social, political and economic aspect of society was shaped by his critical thinking, for instance, his theories of alienation, class struggle, exploitation, labour and so on. More than anything else, Marx was truly a secular intellectual, because of which and his theoretical contributions, he continues to remain one of the most widely read, contested and followed intellectuals till date. Some of his famous theoretical contributions include A Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right and ‘On the Jewish Question’ in 1843, The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts in 1844, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy in 1859, Das Kapital first published in 1867; and in collaboration with Frederick Engels, The Holy Family in 1845, The German Ideology in 1845-7, The Communist Manifesto in 1848 (Morrison, 2006), amongst many others. His theoretical contributions, spanning many years, such as historical materialism, alienation, class struggle, wage-labour, surplus, and so on continues as the political and economic legacy of Marx. As there are many philosophical, economic and political concepts and ideas of Marx that this syllabus intends to elaborate and explain, these are not neat compartments and continue to remain overlapping. For instance, Marx’s philosophical assumptions and ideas governed his economic and political understanding. And therefore, Marx’s concepts and ideas are put forth in this unit appropriately. 1.2 MARX’S CONCEPTION OF HUMAN NATURE AND HUMAN POTENTIAL With his initial and critical readings of the philosophy, Marx became deeply engaged with the concept of human nature. For Marx, humanity is objectified by its own subjectivity in a dialectical manner, in the universe which is an ultimate process by itself (Tabak, 2012). Therefore, Marx argued that human nature predominantly existed in dialectical and determined by the forces of the existing economic systems. The prevalent economy governs the ways in which humans act and think. As the economy changes, human nature also undergoes a drastic change. There lies the dialectics of human nature – a product of society and economy, instead of biology. In 1847, Marx published a book titled The Poverty of Philosophy, within which he argues with the philosophical and economic notions of French anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon through latter’s book on ‘The Philosophy of Poverty’. While analyzing this work, Churchich (1990) highlights that it is here Marx states “all history is nothing but a continuous transformation of human nature” (p. 46). There is constant change in our societies, resulting in changing human nature, and this remains the essence of our history. Marx was in deed greatly influenced [critically] by the German materialist Ludwig Feuerbach, to the extent that Marx rejected Feuerbach’s sociobiological understanding of essential human nature. In his ‘Theses on Feuerbach’, Marx argues why Feuerbach’s idea, of human nature being shaped by material or objects only, should be rejected, and that rather the social and economic relations which are constantly changing should be considered important (Karl Marx & Engels, [1845-7] 1998). The whole society, with its economy and production systems tend to shape and re-shape human nature. In fact, production remained very crucial in Marx’s understanding of human nature. For Marx, humans are essentially driven by their socially productive tendencies and that humans constantly strive to produce things that can give them satisfaction for having produced something (K. Marx & Engels, [1894] 2007). Therefore, it is human potential and human nature’s need to produce something constantly and that it also results in the production of newer needs. So it remains a continuous process, whereby a need to produce a product eventually can also result in the production of newer needs, further resulting in a satisfying experience. The whole idea of ‘alienation’ that Marx talks about, also derives from this understanding, which will be dealt in the following sections. Therefore, instead of materialistic basis of human nature, Marx argues for an social and economic foundation that is driven by the human potential as well as the human need to produce. The creative and intelligent capacity of the humans is something that differentiates them from the animals. Thus the modern economy guides the human potential and human nature to produce certain products and newer needs. It is human nature to realize its innate potential by actively involving in the creation and production of things that can result in satisfaction. Check Your Progress: 1. What is ‘human nature’ according to Marx? 1.3 ALIENATION AND CRITIQUE OF CAPITALISM As it remains obvious from Marx’s work, he was highly critical of the prevalent capitalist mode of production was the foundation on which the lives of the people were laid. It was within this system, that labourers were considered as mere commodities, that have no feelings. Capitalism gave rise to a small class of individuals that controlled the masses by virtue of ownership of means of production. The workers instead had nothing but their labour to offer in exchange of money for a livelihood. Capitalism thus becomes the root cause of suffering of the working class. Thus, in developing a critique of capitalism, Marx also put forth the theory of alienation. Alienation is an historically created phenomenon with its origin and continuity in civilized society arising from the alienation of labor which characterizes all systems of private property from slavery to capitalism (Mandel & Novack, 1973). As wealth remains in the hands of the few, and as workers starve even for their basic needs, the capitalist mode of production creates an unequal, unjust and meaningless society, resulting in the alienation of the workers. As human nature is seen as being creative and productive, capitalism however hampers this urge by transforming workers into machine-like beings. Thus, capitalism is essentially evil as the human nature loses control over itself, and it comes to be governed by the means of production. The theory of alienation is therefore dependent on the idea of human nature and human potential. The theory of alienation also further derives from Marx’s critique of capitalism. Nevertheless, theory of alienation is much more that the essence of human nature itself. Alienation is the manipulation of the workers by the ruling class, for the benefits of the latter. And this manipulation vehemently results in, Marx argues, alienation from one’s own product, alienation from the act of producing (human nature), alienation from the other workers or producers and alienation from one’s own self (Ollman & Bertell, 1976). The huge profits by the ruling class creates wide gap between themselves and the working class persons. Under this capitalist system of production, it is ensured that the working class continue to remain poor and unimportant. Even if the workers put more efforts at improving their conditions, the capitalist systems does not allow them to climb up the social and economic ladder. They are used like commodities to increase the profits for the ruling class. Poverty and alienation thus increases amongst the working class persons. Not just that, the capitalist market conditions encourage competition amongst the fellow workers, resulting in the alienation from one’s own class people. Capitalist mode of production is a witness to the abject poverty of the working class and thereby their unprecedented alienation. Labour thus becomes an ‘alienated labour’. It is within the system of capitalism to categorically suppress the creative need of human beings to the extent of presenting them as commodities that have meagre value in exchange for their labour. And therefore, Marx professed abolition of capitalism to end this system where a small minority owns and controls the means of production and replacing it with a more just system – a socialist revolution. Check Your Progress: 1. What is ‘alienation’ in a capitalist society? 1.4 ‘WORK’ AND LABOUR THEORY OF VALUE The labour theory of value grew out of the ideas of the natural law philosophers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries such as Grotius, Pufendorf, Hobbes, Locke, Quesnay, Hutcheson and Adam Smith, among others who shared a common research agenda, tracing back to antiquity (Dooley, 2005). The labour theory of value predominantly talks about labour and value – the value of labour or how the labour leads to its value. Thus, the classical school, particularly that of Ricardo and Adam Smith, greatly influenced Marx’s approach to labour theory. The place of work also becomes the place of massive exploitation and that the labour is exploited and highly undervalued by the capitalists, is what Marx’s theorization states. As apparent from the discussion on Marx’s views on ‘human nature’, creativity and production remain central to human beings’ sense of fulfillment. Therefore, ‘work’ and ‘labour’ are extremely crucial in understanding human existence. For Marx, value of an object is nothing but the amount of the labour utilized to produce it. Labour remains significant for Marx and his economics, also because labour is something that is exploited the most under the capitalist system, yet it remains the backbone of any production. As such, Marx’s theory of labour and his critique of capitalism are deeply connected. As the value of a product is because of the labour, Marx proposed that profits derived from such products should necessarily be held by the workers, not by the capitalists. For Marx, commodities have ‘use value’ and ‘exchange value’ (Morrison, 2006). While the use value of the commodity is determined by unique characteristic of that commodity that creates its demand for giving certain satisfaction, the exchange value of the commodity, usually predominant in the capitalist societies, simply refers to the its quality for being able to command a value in its exchange with a another commodity. Therefore, the use value is said to be the qualitative aspect of labour, whereas, the exchange value is said to be the quantitative aspect – the two- fold character that Marx sees in labour being responsible for the two-fold character he attributes to value (Ollman & Bertell, 1976). Marx stated that the labour has a ‘dual character’. Marx’s inclusion of this dual character of labour – useful labour and abstract labour - is a diversion from the political economy proposed by Smith and Ricardo (Morrison, 2006). While the useful labour is interconnected with the use value of commodity, the abstract labour is interconnected with the exchange value of the commodity. Thus, labour and its intrinsic worth remain central to Marx’s arguments against the capitalist mode of production. Check Your Progress: 1. Explain Marx’s approach to labour. 1.5 HISTORICAL MATERIALISM Very crucial to Marx’s theorization of political economy, was the importance of history. Historical materialism implies that human societies should be understood by studying their history. History is considered as having stages, with varying material conditions. As such, it is the material condition within the historical stages that influence human societies in all matters. The evolution of human societies, thus, takes place due to their material evolution. Marx and Engels were the first to present a scientific theory of society, based on history and as such created historical materialism by extending and applying philosophical materialism and materialistically revised dialectics to the revolutionary practical activities of the working class, in order to interpret the society (Lorimer, 2006). Karl Marx and Engels ([1845-7] 1998) in The German Ideology, thus proposed their ideas on historical materialism – which, according to them, was not a theory of specialized social aspects of life, but rather it dealt with the most general laws of existence for the historically determined socioeconomic formations. Marx was deeply influenced by Georg Hegel, as the latter was famous for his philosophical doctrine known as philosophical idealism – significance of ideas in history. However, for Marx, while human transformation throughout history was crucial, the materialist perspective that he added became a new interpretative framework for understanding history (Morrison, 2006). Simply put, the material conditions define human existence, throughout history. Thus, Marx rejected ‘idealism’ and promoted ‘materialism’ to argue that the basic material needs of the human beings drive them to produce, which in turn accounts for its development and evolution. Marx’s materialistic theory of history remains the antithesis of the Hegel’s idealistic theory of history. There are four fundamental concepts that are central to the materialistic theory of history: (a) the means of production, (b) the relations of production, (c) the mode of production, and (d) the forces of production (Morrison, 2006). These concepts remain the foundation of this theory. Marx also identified four different economic stages of ownership – (a) tribal or primitive communism, (b) slavery, (c) feudal society, and (d) industrial capitalist society (Bober, 1950). The human society is believed to have evolved from these stages of historical and material significance. Marx also proposed ‘socialism’ to be the next stage of the human society in order to overcome all the fallacies of the previous stages, particularly the adversaries of the woring class in the capitalist society. Check Your Progress: 1. Explain Marx’s contribution to the theory of history. 1.6 FETISHISM OF COMMODITIES Karl Marx and Engels ([1845-7] 1998), in their Critique of Political Economy formulated ‘commodity fetishism’ to show that commodities’ exchange value is derived from its economic value and not the social relations that are utilized to produce it. There are no social relationships between the people, but there are economic relationships between the commodities and its economic worth in terms of money, that matter in the market situations. The ‘fetishism of commodities’ refers to the misconception of the people for the products of labour once they enter exchange (Ollman & Bertell, 1976). As a reification, the exchange value of the commodity, in monetary terms, gets personified so as to have an equivalent for the exchange, by negating its use-value. Commodity fetishism thus remains a cognitive illusion arising from market transactions (Elster, 1986). As capitalism takes on a life of its own, through fetishism of commodities, human ‘reify’ their social interrelationships upon the commodities, in economic terms. Check Your Progress: 1. What is ‘fetishism of commodity’? 1.7 CLASS AND DIVISION OF LABOUR Marx’s theory of class is based on the relations of domination and exploitation in production and therefore, look upon the class struggle. As there are classes of people with conflicting interests, there arises a situation to combat it. For Marx, class is an actual group of persons with a common interest and economic condition. Marx argued, classes are not differentiated merely by income and occupations of their members, but instead what constitutes class is the work context, and not the work itself (Elster, 1986). The dominant class is the owner of means of production and the working class only serves the dominant class. In Communist Manifesto, published in 1848, while outlining the concept of class, class struggle and class formation, Marx gives several characteristics for describing the concept of class: (a) all societies have the historical tendency to divide themselves into two unequal social classes, (b) all classes are structured in a hierarchy with superordinate and subordinate socio-economic privileges, (c) classes are always engaged in a ‘historical struggle’ resulting in a ruin of these classes, (d) in each economic stage, a given population transforms into a class depending upon the prevailing economic conditions, and (e) the transformation of people into a class thus creates a common set of interests that define their class situation finally leading to a class struggle (Morrison, 2006). In the Communist Manifesto, Marx writes the disastrous effects of machinery and the division of labor how owing to the extensive use of machinery and to division of labour, the work of the proletarians has lost all individual character, and consequently all charm for the workman (Wendling, 2009). For Marx, the division of labour, within the capitalist society, creates enmity amongst the people by creating and upholding massive class differences. For Marx, due to division of labour, the capitalist society is able to separate workers from their final products as the labour required to produce it is itself broken down and thus the workers lose control over their products as well as the markets where these are exchanged for money. This division of labour influences the way workers experience their work, their creation, resulting in ultimate alienation from the work, the product and fellow beings. Marx emphasized that modern production more and more required cooperation, division of labour, and social production; and that the expression “the division of labour” can be interpreted either as division of labour in general or as a particular division of labour in a specific historical and social period. (Ware, 2019). However, division of labour eventually becomes a standardized method of exploitation.