Relationship Between Enlightenment and Sociology

Relationship Between enlightenment and SociologyThe possibility of cordial development and progress was the key nonion of the enlightenment Ray,13. The puzzle of Renaissance recovery from the dark ages, rediscovery of antique philosophy, the expansion of colonialism and exploration of non-European cultures, go against established order and wind to expansion of upstart bringing close togethers doubting customs duty. The sagacity recognized that charitablee history converts, that societies experience real(a) and mental, moral, or philosophic progress. That modernity is nevertheless a nonher stage of development, that does not forget the peculiarity of history, but might be as nearly a spring of some better, new parliamentary procedure. Eighteen century thinkers considered reason as the ahead(p) force of change, believing, that human friendship and consciousness may develop linearly. Since the Enlightenment was an age of perception and reason, philosophers t c losing curtain to split upify and order possessed knowledge. That lead to a few theories of diachronic stages development of societies that arranged historical periods in progressive order, as Turgot and Condorset did Ray, 13-15.The Enlightenments attachment to the idea of progressive development of societies lead to the ideas of future utopia final, goal stage of well-disposed evolution. It was a very rosy concept of history, pencil lead from dark, oppressive periods in the past, through and through ambiguous and jumbled modernity, to some enlighten, better, just future. Such utopian vision was described by Condorcet, for whom future inn would prevail tyranny by changing tradition and superstition into reason Ray, 15. Delany wrote of the Enlightenment as characterized by a authentic utopianism, which was a reflection of the belief in the promises of modernity to bring closely freedom. Unlike earlier societal thought, it displayed a enormous belief in the power of huma n action to shape the future Delany, Blackwell, 23. The same was accredited for Marx, who saw communism as the perfect and approximately of completely just sociable system. For Marx the end stage of human history communism equal the most desired and final phase of human development. As Sideman wrote Marx never gave up his Enlightenment faith in the coming of a new era Sideman, 1998, 36.But contrary to the Enlightenment philosophers, for Marx the utopia was not to be obtained through evolution and development of reason, but through gyration of organiseing class. The idea of revolution was not present in eighteen century onwards the experience of French revolution. Though it is sad that the Enlightenment prepared the account for the revolt in France, works of eighteen century thinkers did not spell to force or violent change. Marx shared the romantic vision of with adduce-controlled thinkers and activists supporting French strife. Moreover, unlike his eighteen century a ncestors, Marx desire freedom in proletariat the working class of modernity. The Enlightenment was an age of intellectuals, fully grown special role to philosophers in the process of development of association Szacki. In eighteen century thought reason had the emancipatory force. Marx violent vision of revolution did not reserved place for intellectuals, though Marx was one of them. .Ideologies and religious beliefThe end of the Middle Ages ended the era of gods laws and theo lawful explanation of affable order. The Enlightenment splitd religion blueprint politics. Eighteen century brought to intent the concept of habitual private studys. Religion became private matter of citizens. Gods rights no bimestrial decided on policy-making questions and societal relations. Secular baseball club was establish on temporal rules. The Enlightenment believed in reason and science, and through them sought emancipation from religion and superstition. Social change required that cu ltural traditions be weakened to allow for new ideas and attitudes favoring sociable progress Seidman, 1998, 34. Religion and tradition constrained social change and overruled the utopian vision of future. It does not besotted that the Enlightenment was a truly secular area. Rejection of religion covered notwithstanding public, political sphere. None of the great philosophers of the period Becon, Diderot, Locke postulated atheism Ray, 13. The issue was to separate religion from science, theology from logical reasoning. Religion intruded cognition, so had to be prone in the sphere of knowledge.Marx also shared with the Enlightenment the concept of secular society. Though he brought the idea of secularization moreover. For Marx all ideology and meta-narration of society in every stage of its development was a product of menstruation economical relations, so was the religion. Religion, internalized rules, regulations and prohibitions, served justification of the conditions of fruit and hence the justification of exploitation. In this gumption religion was a mechanism of oppression. That is wherefore, harmonize to Marx, emancipation not only required rejection of theological order of the world, but also arrant(a) rejection of religion. Once again this emancipation required revolution dramatic and sudden change of economic conditions that would change social relations, including execution of religion. In this awareness religion was not a private issue, but a political one, that justified bourgeois order. As in the eighteen century religion obstructed change this time, though, it was not suppose to be withdraw from public life, but destroyed absolutely. Revolution guaranteed changing social order not only in the sphere of production, but also in the sphere of religion.The role of scienceThe Enlightenment was the era of development of sciences. A great expand of sciences such as mathematics, medicine, natural sciences changed the view of modern philos ophers on the world and human chassis. recognition revealed mystery of existence and the order of nature. That is why science become one of the ways to obtain singular freedom. Science lead to discovery of logical, rational order of human and societal relations. For Marx science also had an important role in revealing the rules of organization of society. Marx knew that in order to change, it is necessary to understand the social forces institutions, cultural traditions, social sorts Seidman, 1998, 34. In Marx surmise science held the explanatory role by revealing the real nature of social order, gives information about social classes, modes of production and rules of historical development. According to Marx, science should be establish on rational assumptions, logical laws, it should reject habitual virtuoso and superstitions.Economic perspectiveThough Marx possible action shares materialistic perspective, he was not the one to introduce economic variant of social life. Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson and others eighteen century thinkers saw the leading role of economy in social life. Those early economists wrote about dehumanisation of work and disintegration of society through modern specialization of production and technical development of the production process Ray, 15. Capitalist revolution of eighteen century brought new phenomena that were not overlooked by present-day thinkers. shun effects of industrialization, demographic explosion and urbanization were thoroughly discussed by that time.As we can see, the importance of material conditions for human individual and collective life was not the Marx invention, though he also observed that technology destroys social relations. Innovations, machines and devices used in the process of production serve the dominant class for exploitation of workers Ray, 65. Nevertheless, with his materialistic view on society, Marx went further, with the idea that the reproduction of material life precedes the produc tion of culture Seidman, 1998, 37. For Marx material conditions of existence were the floor for all other characteristics of life. According to Marx, living conditions determine social body structure, policies, rules and morality. Marx showed that certain social conditions shape certain forms of consciousness. That was a great contribution of Marx thought to social sciences. Since Marx, social scientists began re hunting on the role of material conditions on human thoughts, believes and attitudes, giving a start to many disciplines of social sciences, as sociology of thought, sociology of knowledge or sociology of religion Szacki, 231. Moreover, since Marx, social scientists consider development process and self-command relations of societies as the most important criteria of social studies analysis.The concept of stateEnlightenment to find such origins of social order not to plant freedom. How to reconcile freedom and social order. Enlightenment the idea of individual in societ y free form state, church and other collective forms of organizations. cultivated society idea freedom through civil rights. In search of order based on rational assumptions.The role of philosopher as a leading role in creating social order, morality. Intelectuals Szacki, 84, Ray, Enlightenment, 11.All stages of development according to Marx were different social formations. Those formations were direct creations of economic relations within society. The most thorough fully described formation was bourgeois one. It was contemporary, most real and differentiated mode of production. Capitalism stage of development was characterized by binary star class structure, where one class was the group of society that sold their work and did not own other means of productions the workers, while the other was the group of owners of means of production that benefited from workers work the capitalists.Individualism and collective actionIn earlier philosophy status of human being in society was constant and determined not by human himself but by external forces the world order, gods will, some kind of justice and internal sense of social existence. Enlightenment and especially the French revolution, brought the idea of civil society and civil rights Szacki, 85. The Enlightenment claimed that all human beings share some common characteristics that are independent of external, historical or natural conditions. It was a kind of individualism, that claimed that human nature in general have some common characteristics inherited form the state of nature. That is what makes society egalitarian differences between human status in society are merely secondary. In this sense that all (male) human beings are equal and share the same civic rights. Emancipation in this context was a political emancipation of citizens form feudal, traditional relations.Marx connected human position in social structure with material conditions and idea of work and ownership. For him the idea of s ociety was not based on the idea of civil rights but on the idea of economic relations between different social groups classes. It was dichotomous vision of society made of workers and capitalists the owners of means of production. Emancipation was possible not on the cornerstone of civil rights but on the basis of changing economic relations. This was a revolutionary perspective leading to turnover of social order. Unlike the Enlightenment, Marx did not perceived emancipation and concept of freedom in individual actions. He clearly rejected individualism both in terms of individual social actions and as the method of inference about human conditions. Marx claimed that every individual is rooted in his collective history and society, and his consciousness, as well as beliefs, goals and needs are shaped through that heritage. That is why not only analysis of human conditions, but also the projected change of social relations, has to take into consideration collective baggage and collective effort. That is why Marx shared the belief that individuals do not act on ideas in the main because they are true of have been proven correct, but on the basis of their self-interest. Ideas may shape our actions, but our social interests determine which ideas we adopt.CLASS AND sectionalization OF SOCIETYCritical theoryMarx is perceived as the father of overcritical theory. As Bryan wrote it classical sociology is a critical discipline, because it represents typically an attack on the taken-for-granted assumptions of bourgeois, utilitarian liberalism. This critical tradition is conventionally associated with Marxism Bryan s. Turner, Blackwell, 9. But one cannot misrepresent that critical attitude was characteristic for the Enlightenment thought. XVIII century philosophers questioned traditions, religions, authorities, beliefs, metaphysics and everything else that was not perceived rational. Marx theory gave basis for future revolutions, but it was the Enlightenment th ought that was a mother of French Revolution. In this sense the Enlightenment theories were the world-class revolutionary theories, revolutionary through their critique, doubt and rejection. Marx only developed further this critical perspective, but he was not the first one to disuse contemporary, well established order.our social interests are determined by our social position, in particular our class status Seidman, 1998, 34Marx and Engels aimed to shift the focus of social criticism from the analysis of consciousness and the evolution of ideas to that of the development of social institutions and conflicts Seidman, 1998, 37historic materialism class dynamics shape the organization of socioeconomic systems which in turn, determine the structure and direction of the whole society S, 38Class theory of society, class strugglePower comes from the ownership of means of productionsocial theory becomes the critique of political economy, Delany, Blackwell, 25New constructs commodificati on, class-struggle, profit, surplus valueMarxs social theory was a critical one. Critique does not try to explicate or simply interpret society for its own sake, but is inherently critical of the prevailing social order and seeks to reveal the system of domination. Delany, Blackwell, 25Karl Marx, efficaciously replaced philosophical analysis with an advanced social theory of modern society. Delany, Blackwell, 23Conclusions power vs. modes of productionReason vs. false consciousnessReason vs. ownership