Talk:History of sociology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article History of sociology, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Old talk
I've added quite a bit of information regarding the history of sociology to History of science#Sociology but I'm really bad at trying to work information into an article that already exists. But if someone else wants to work what's there into here, I'd appreciate it. Sarge Baldy 01:09, May 13, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Comte?
An argument on this page is that Comte thought human society could be studied as if it is no different from the rest of the natural world. It seems to me that this is plainly untrue because Comte's social/historical theory is centred on the three stages of human thought: theological, philosophical and scientific. Unless the rest of the natural world thinks in these three stage, Comte has clearly distinguished human society from the rest of nature. I think the problem is that (at this point) the page is trying to contrast positivism with understanding sociology. But to do so, it misrepresents the French positivists of the 19th century. Studymore 21:43, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
- Well, he might have distinguished it, but nonetheless the principles of sociological positivism, a sociological paradigm he founded are based on the assumption that there is not much difference between natural and social sciences - or at least, this is how I understand it. Please, be bold, cite your sources and improve the Comte-related content.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:13, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Theories?
Theres almost nothing mentioning the different theories, or even linking to a list of the different Sociological Theories that exist.
- Few are mentioned. But this is a small history of... article, and certainly needs expantion.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removed passage
This passage is all questionable because the first sentence is patently ridiculous—Preceding unsigned comment added by RedHouse18 (talk • contribs) . Ibn Khaldun (732-808) recognized as the founder of scientific Sociology and historiography,
"emphasized the necessity of subjecting both social and historical phenomena to scientific and objective analysis. He noted that those phenomena were not the outcome of chance, but were controlled by laws of their own, laws that had to be discoveblue and applied in the study of society, civilization and history. He remarked that historians have committed errors in their study of historical events, due to three major factors: (l) Their ignorance of the natures of civilization and people, (2) their bias and prejudice, and (3) their blind acceptance of reports given by others."(Zahoor 1996) For more information on Khaldun and his sources see http://sociology.rationalreality.com
[edit] Subsection in "Sociology"
Seems like it has some strengths vis a vis this article. Somehow we should make sure improvements in one get made in the other. - Mike 8/31/06 —Preceding unsigned comment added by RedHouse18 (talk • contribs)
[edit] Khaldun: Father of sociology?
Rubbish metaphor, whiggish history - should be changed to the first systematic social thinker. As a father, he requires some sons and then a timeline to 18th century sociolgists who labelled themselves as such, cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_genealogy Robat (talk) Robat
