Sociology is a critical social science concerned with the study of society and human behaviour and relationships.

                       Auguste Comte was the first to develop the concept of Sociology. He believed that all societies develop and progress through the following stages:-

• Religious
• Metaphysical
• Scientific

Auguste Comte referred to Sociology as the 'Queen of Social Sciences' because it embodies the basics of all the other Social Sciences. According to him, 'Sociology is the scientific study of society.'

It will be better to say; there are as many definitions of Sociology as there are Sociologists.

According to Max Weber, 'Sociology is the study of social action.'

According to Simmel, 'Sociology is the study of social groups based on social interaction.'

According to Tonnies, 'Sociology is the study of human living together.'

We can say, Sociology is the study of social life, social change, social causes and consequences of human behaviour.

LOOKING BACK INTO LIFE THROUGH THE LENS OF SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION

It is quite fascinating for any individual to look back into certain events of life and discover the broader impacts of one’s own experience and vice versa. As sociologists, we often hear that we need to look at the social realities in a sociological way rather than in a commonsensical way.  But how do we look in the so-called sociological way? To elaborate on this, I would take the help of C Wright Mills model of sociological imagination to link my personal experiences and the wider society.

What is all about C Wright Mills sociological imagination? 

C Wright Mills, an American sociologist has authored the book ‘sociological imagination’ in 1959, which is supposedly the Cold War era during which capitalism made America an ascending power, and it had its set of social problems which made Mills connect the biography and history. But why history? Because we are all products of our history. For instance, today, women can exercise their right to vote because someone in the past had fought for these rights and today we are enjoying the fruits of it. Hence, understanding history and linking it to our events becomes very significant. 

He brought back the significance of theory and social responsibility into the light of social sciences. The theory is essential because it helps an individual to make a way out of commonsensical understanding. If we look into commonsensical theory, it is interesting to note that any individual generally makes sense out of things by taking the reference of their immediate small world such as family. But, a sociological way of looking at it, would be looking beyond our more miniature worlds. For instance, as a child I used to believe that, students with bright academics would excel in life. Still, as I grew up, I met and also read about many people out of my societal purview who made it big in life, without essential degrees, and that made me understand that academics are not criteria for success.

Mills also emphasises that the responsibility of a social scientist is not to find solutions to the problems, but rather to define the social issues. It makes sense to me as I believe that the primal approach to any problem is to recognise that there is one. This is why problematizing becomes very important for a social researcher. He further goes on to discuss two major setbacks of the social sciences. One being, an ocean of grand theories and ability of such theories to easily ignore micro units of the social structure. The other setback is his very well known concept, Abstract empiricism; which throws light on adapting the ways of natural sciences or maybe sticking to specific methodologies and methods that the funding client wants the researcher to adhere to. This restricts the researcher to connect to the broader society. 

Linking personal experiences to broader society

As I introspect into my life, the strongest memory that comes to me first is what I used to hear from my grandparents. They often used to say, “Back in those days, we did not have enough food to eat.” Now, this was their problem and in a commonsensical way, one can associate it with accessing to food grains or maybe the economical background. But, as I try to apply the lens of sociological imagination of Mills, I roughly calculated that they belonged to the 1950s and it was the time India was going through chronic poverty. The country was not self-reliant with food grains as it was post-independent era. It was during the same time, India started to experiment with High yield variety (HYV) of seeds to make agriculture commercially viable, and this is what we called as Green revolution. And even in the 1970s, India was still fighting poverty which reminds me of Mrs.Indira Gandhi’s ‘Garibi hatao’ slogan. Connecting history and biography helped me debunk that, the issue my grandparents mentioned was not just their issue, but it was a larger social issue for the entire country.

Moving onto my parent’s generation, who were born in the 1970s, I heard them say that they did not have access to television growing up as it was costly to buy. Looking back into history, though Television came to India in the 1950s, it was restricted only to elites. It was not reached to every nuke and corner of the country until BPL began manufacturing in the 1980s with the inception of liberalisation in the Indian economy. Access to Television, was again a more extensive public issue, not just a personal problem as it was not available for a possible price to the typical person.

Being a millennial, as a child, I had pleased memories of the growing up days. From owning mini doctor equipment, playing video games, watching all kinds of kids related shows such as Disney cartoons, power rangers, to finally accessing the Internet, it still feels like yesterday. Though these were my personal experiences, there is a broader social background to it. All the things mentioned above were possible for me because I grew up during the peak of LPG reforms in the country. Hence, there was access to a variety of International products and services.

Conclusion

As CW Mills rightly quotes that, Sociological imagination promises to enable us to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two in the society. Also, in my view, sociological imagination should not be restricted to social researchers alone, instead it is a concept which enables any individual to be able to look beyond the superficial aspects of our social structures. On the other hand, there are some relevant questions that sociologists should often ask, according to CW mills. They are - What is the structure of this particular society as a whole? What are its essential components, and how does it differ from other varieties of social order? And so on.

The French philosopher Auguste Comte (1798–1857)—often called the “father of sociology”—first used the term “sociology” in 1838 to refer to the scientific study of society. He believed that all societies develop and progress through the following stages: religious, metaphysical, and scientific.Auguste Comte is called the father of sociology because he coined the word 'Sociology' in 1830, for that branch of science which studied human behaviour. In fact, he created a hierarchy of sciences in which he put sociology at the top. He argued that sciences dealing with simple phenomena were first to arrive.

G.S. Ghurye has proposed six main characteristics of caste system. 1. Segmental ... Many theories have been put forward regarding the origin of caste system but, so far, no solid proof has been collected in this regard. The records of the Hocart and Senart are the two main advocates of religious theory.

1. Segmental division of society:

The caste system divides the whole society into various segments or sections. Each of these castes is a well developed social group, the membership of which is fixed by birth. So change from one caste to another caste is not possible.

2. Hierarchy:

The caste system is characterized by hierarchical order. Dumount believes that the hierarchical order of caste system is based on the concept of purity and pollution. At the top of this hierarchy are the Brahmins and at the bottom is the Shudras.

3. Restriction on feeding and social inter-course:

In caste system there are several restrictions which are related to food, drink and social inter-course. The members of the upper caste cannot take food or water from the lower caste members, even not interact with the members of the other castes but the vice-versa is permissible.

4. Civil and religious disabilities:

In caste system, there is an unequal distribution of privileges and restrictions among its members. Generally, the higher caste people enjoy all the privileges and the lower caste people are put to all kinds of restrictions.

5. Lack of unrestricted choice of occupation:

Under caste system, each caste has its own traditional occupation. Occupation is fixed at the time of birth and the members of a caste are forced to follow the occupation of that caste.

6. Restriction on marriage:

In caste system the principles of endogamy is strictly followed. That means, marriage within the own caste on sub-caste is purely followed.

Religion and Economic Growth

"For given religious beliefs, increases in church attendance tend to reduce economic growth. In contrast, for given church attendance, increases in some religious beliefs -- notably heaven, hell, and an afterlife -- tend to increase economic growth."

Some researchers argue that explanations for economic growth should be broadened to include cultural determinants. Culture may influence economic outcomes by affecting such personal traits as honesty, thrift, willingness to work hard, and openness to strangers. Although religion is an important dimension of culture, economists to date have paid little attention to its role in economic growth.

But in Religion and Economic Growth (NBER Working Paper No. 9682), authors Robert Barro and Rachel McCleary analyze the influences of religious participation and beliefs on a country?s rate of economic progress. The authors use six international surveys conducted between 1981 and 1999 to measure religiosity -- church attendance and religious beliefs -- for 59 countries. There is more information available about rich countries than poor ones and about countries that are primarily Christian. Barro and McCleary consider first how religiosity responds to economic development, government influences on religion, and the composition of religious adherence. They find that their measures of religiosity are positively related to education, negatively related to urbanization, and positively related to the presence of children. Overall, religiosity tends to decline with economic development.

The presence of a state religion is positively related to religiosity, probably because of the subsidies that flow to established religions in those countries. However, religiosity declines with greater government regulation of religion and with the religious oppression associated with Communism. Greater diversity of religions -- that is, religious pluralism -- is associated with higher church attendance and stronger religious beliefs. Countries in the sample that had low levels of pluralism include some that are predominantly Catholic (Spain, Italy, Portugal, Belgium, Ireland, and much of Latin America), as well as Protestant Scandinavia, Orthodox Greece, and Muslim Pakistan and Turkey. Countries studied that exhibit high levels of pluralism include the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Australia, Malaysia, Singapore, and South Africa.

The authors turn next to the assessment of how differences in religiosity affect economic growth. For given religious beliefs, increases in church attendance tend to reduce economic growth. In contrast, for given church attendance, increases in some religious beliefs -- notably heaven, hell, and an afterlife -- tend to increase economic growth. In other words, economic growth depends mainly on the extent of believing relative to belonging. The authors also find some indication that the fear of hell is more potent for economic growth than the prospect of heaven. Their statistical analysis allows them to argue that these estimates reflect causal influences from religion to economic growth and not the reverse.

Barro and McCleary suggest that higher rates of religious beliefs stimulate growth because they help to sustain aspects of individual behavior that enhance productivity. They believe that higher church attendance depresses growth because it signifies a greater use of resources by the religion sector. However, that suppression of growth is tempered by the extent to which church attendance leads to greater religious beliefs, which in turn encourages economic growth.

The term social order can be used in two senses. In the first sense, it refers to a particular set or system of linked social structures, institutions, relations, customs, values and practices, which conserve, maintain and enforce certain patterns of relating and behaving.