Comparison with other social sciences[1]

The place and comparison of Sociology among the Social Sciences involves understanding the real nature and scope of sociology. It is one that has caused a vast deal of discussion among writers on sociology and one which, to a certain extent, is still unsettled. There is one group of writers who hold that sociology is a synthesis of all the social sciences, that the science is fabricated by running a thread through all the sciences and stringing them together in one mass.

Sociology and Psychology

Sociology has much in common as well as has many points of difference with Psychology. The basic point of similarity between the two is that both deal with human beings. The Sociologists want to seek the help of Psychologists in understanding the mood of the masses. Similarly the psychologists want to have basic data from the Sociologists for understanding the psychology of the people and society was a whole. The relationship between the two can be appreciated from the fact that psychological method is one of the methods for the study of Sociology. In the words of Maclver. “Sociology is special aid to psychology just as psychology gives special aid to Sociology”.

But in spite of this close resemblance, the two subjects differ from each other in scope. Psychology deals with the mental powers and habits of the individual. Its whole aim is to discover normal and abnormal action of the mind.

Psychologists studies individual, whereas sociologist studies as a whole. Thus the object of study of both the subject is quite different. A psychologist has individualistic approach whereas the approach of a sociologist is collective. To quote Maclver again, “In the last resort the difference between psychology and Sociology is difference of focus of attention in the social reality itself.”

Sociology and Political Science

Both the sociologists and political scientists study people in groups. State is subject of study of political scientists. The state gives laws to the society and in fact social welfare, advancement and removal of poverty of the people are the aims of the state. Sociologists provide data, which becomes the basis for law making process. Elections are fought taking social trends into consideration. The state protects and preserves social order and maintains social harmony. It is social consciousness, which brings political changes and revolutions. While discussing close relationship between Political Science and Sociology F.G. Wilson says, “It must be admitted of course that it is often difficult to determine whether a particular writer should be considered a Sociologist, political theorist or Philosopher.

But still there is difference between the two. The main stress and scopes of study of Political Scientist, is state whereas that of Sociologist is society. Political science generally purports to be, as its name indicates, — the science of government, — which would include the classification and study of the methods of local, state, and national governments. Thus whereas scope of the study of Political Scientist is limited, that of a Sociologist is wide and studies individual and society from all aspects.

While political science is seeking to set forth the principles of government, sociology, on the one hand, is seeking for the universal elements of social activity to be found in political development  and, on the other hand, is studying the effects of those principles on society. Here, as elsewhere, sociology uses as data the product of another social science. There may be times when it is difficult to draw a line dividing the field work of the two sciences, al-though the respective aims of these sciences and the social facts studied in each case are clearly distinguished from each other.

One also finds that Political Scientists, studies such problems, which have governmental approval such as democracy, elections, judiciary, legislatures, etc. On the other hand Sociology concerns itself not only with socially approved but also unapproved in situations, including crimes, immoral activities, unhealthy social trends and so on. Thus both differ from each other in approach as well as scope of the study. While discussing the difference between the two Gilchrist says, “Sociology is the science of society. Political Science is a more specialized science than Sociology.

Sociology and Economics

Sociology and Economics too have close relationship with each other. Both are interested in studying economic problems of the people and also their means of earning and method of spending. The relationship is so close that one cannot say whether unemployment, poverty, crime or corruption are exclusively economic or social problems. Sociologists and economists provide data and also help each other in findings out and solving social and economic problems Distribution and production of goods, which is the field of study of economists, must be studied after taking into consideration social needs. Thus both have very close relationship with each other.

But there is also difference between the two as well. The scope of the study of economics is very limited i.e., the subject concerns itself only with economics and with no other social problem. On the other hand scope of Sociology is very wide because it studies society not from the viewpoint of economists but also from many other angles and viewpoints. Thus both differ from each other in this respect.

Sociology and History

Relationship of Sociology with History is also very close. History tells as about our social institutions, social organizations and problems as these existed in the past. This information provides a very important basic and unavoidable foundation for the study of out today’s social institutions, organizations and problems. How close is the relationship between two is clear when one finds that historical method is one of the important methods for the study of Sociology.

However, certain treatments of history have approached nearer to the realm of pure sociology. Thus, for instance, recent philosophy of history, represented by Barth's writings in contrast with Hegel's, deals with the social causes and effects of nation building and furnishes general concepts concerning the development of single groups of known societies. A good deal that has been written under the title of sociology is nothing more than the philosophy of history interpreted in social and economic terms and frequently the philosophy of history has so broadened its scope as to be a social philosophy.

In the words of G.E. Howard ‘History is past Sociology, and Sociology is present History”.

But in spite of this, the differences between the two exist. History deals with she society as that was in the past whereas Sociology deals with the society as that existed in the past, is at present and most probably shall be in future.

History deals with the details of evidence, while sociology deals with general laws and principles.

Moreover, History deals with political and economic systems of the past, the dynasties of the rulers etc., with which Sociology has no concern. History thus deals with recorded events whereas Sociology primarily provides material for the recording of the events.

For example , History would be interested in the narration of the various facts attendant upon the rise and fall of the Roman Empire, but after giving a full and complete description of every movement its service would be finished; on the other hand, sociology cares nothing about all of these details except as they lead to some general truths relating to the origin or progress of society.

Sociology and Anthropology

Anthropology in its broadest sense is the science of man, — physical, intellectual, and social. There is a sociological aspect to some parts of anthropology; for example, that which refers to sociological characteristics and to the natural habitat of man. But anthropology in its limited view should really only include the natural history of mankind. It does not include such sciences as biology, psychology, sociology, political science, or economics. Its chief purpose is to view man as an animal possessed of mental and physical characteristics, and in his normal habitat in comparison with other animals. Its purpose is some-what different from that of any other social science,

but it very nearly approaches sociology in the fields of social origins, social population, and certain fields of social reform, like criminology, and this gives it a position among the social sciences. The data furnished by anthropology are the bricks from which is constructed in part the temple of sociology.