The Evolution of Sociological Perspectives
[The idea of this article was launched at my sociology
classes at the college. It was only my second day at the class and the
atmosphere was worth mentioning. (Hadn’t it been an article on a subject in society,
I would have had it mentioned.) One of my classmates introduced herself and
notified that her purpose of taking up Sociology beside Biological Sciences was
to furnish her knowledge on evolution of society and consequently that of human
beings in the brief history of time. The teacher had a beautiful response to
the introduction and that is what attracted my attention. Let us go ahead.]
“No doubt what you just said was interesting that you are
trying to find a link between the evolution of human beings and the evolution
of society, but I would like to make a small correction to the entire class- We
have used the word Primitive for the society that was existent before us but
have we the necessary information to judge that?? Can we be judgemental about
whether our ancestors were primitive, that their society was worse off than
what it is today? No, we cannot. It is because of the fact that the way of
expression was not right. The society has changed, but whether it has evolved
or not, we cannot say because we are walking in our shoes, not on theirs. “–
was the teacher’s response and I, on my part, definitely appreciate it.
The idea is very precise and
noteworthy. Before we take to criticism, we must have our subject experienced
at least once. Similarly, we cannot brand our ancestral society as bad or good
because we don’t have most of the idea of how it worked (excepting the
historical references). I have titled this article as THE EVOLUTION OF … but I
admit, it was unfair on my part to do so. But let me bring to account why I
completed the title using ‘SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES’ rather than just
‘SOCIETY’. The society has just changed, not really evolved. The mind-set and
the approach is what matters and these are what that changed.
The
human race has evolved quite a bit from yesterday-physically, mentally, technologically
and psychologically. [Mentality and psychology are taken as two different
things]. The origin of these changes is yet unknown to us, how it happened,
where it happened, why it happened and so on- we do not know either of these
answers with utmost perfection. What we can say about it is that the society
has Changed not really evolved. The instincts have remained the same, just that
they have become more furnished.
Have we
stepped into and walked on their shoes??? Do we actually know how the society
worked at that time?? Do we have the adequate information so as to brand them
as underdeveloped or PRIMITIVE? Think deeply on the first question that has
been raised. The answer should be a negative. Why is it so?? The answer is
simple and pretty reasonable. It is because they lived in a world we did not
live in and howsoever historians try to figure out , we will be nowhere close
to what and how they have had experienced. They used a different pair of shoes
than what we us today-We won’t fit into them. But mere changing of shoe doesn’t
depict evolution. Does it? No is what I suppose. We know the elements of their
society but we are unaware of what ideals were followed at that time, what
education was provide to youngsters, and so on. The engravings on stones or
rocks tell us quite a lot but not all that’s required to prove the hypothesis
that we have evolved, not just changed. We cannot justify ourselves or
criticize them till we find out what their perspectives were.
Now if I
take a different approach to the topic then it would be something like this-
There were murders at the time. Yes? Yes. They killed the general public to
satisfy their needs or attain vengeance. An evolved society would have this
genre of people removed but has it been possible. Are there no murderers now?
There are, and the number has even increased. The quality of murder has
enhanced. Its economic murders now beside bloodshed. Almost all the developing
countries are experiencing some monetary blunders or market crashes. Isn’t that
murder? Not on flesh, that’s right but economy is equally important. All I’m
trying to capture in this paragraph is that the human instincts, the basic
human nature, the basic emotions have remained quite the same. It’s the taste
of music that has changed. It’s the style of conquering that has changed. It’s only
the outlook that has changed, perspectives that just changed, not EVOLVED.
