Ideology and Theory in

Indian Sociology

Yogendra Singh

RAWAT PUBLICATIONS
Jaip u r • N ew D elhi • Bangalore • H yderabad • G uw ahati
ISBN 81-7033-831-X (Hardback)
ISB N 81-7033-832-8 (Paperback)
© Author, 2004

R e p r in t e d , 2 012

Contents

P reface 7
In trodu ction 9
N o part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy­
ing, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, 1 Worldview o f Sociology and the 21
without permission in writing from the publishers. Challenge o f Post-Modernity

2 T h e C o ncep t of M an in Sociology 41

Published by 3 Ideology, T h e o ry and M etho d s in Indian Sociology 95

Prem Rawat for R aw at Publications
4 Indian Sociology: R etrospect and Prospect 135
Satyam Apts., Sector 3, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur - 302 004 (India)
Phone: 0141 265 1748 / 7006 Fax: 0141 265 1748 5 Functional M e ta p h o r in Indian Sociology 1 67
E-mail : [email protected] 6 T h e Relevance o f Social Sciences in India 185
Website: raw atbooks.com
7 Challenges o f Globalization, Identity and 205
E c o n o m ic D evelopm ent: An Indian Perspective
New Delhi Office
4858/24, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, N ew Delhi 110 002
Phone:011-23263290 B ibliog rap h y 221
Also at Bangalore, H yderabad and Guwahati In dex 237

Typeset by Rawat Computers, Jaipur

Printed at Chaman Enterprises, N e w Delhi
3
Ideology, Theory and Methods in
Indian Sociology

A review o f the grow th o f sociology in India fro m the perspective o f

d o m in an t theoretical innovations, changes in m e th o d o lo g y and
te ch n iqu e, its interactions with o th e r social sciences, its ow n
infrastructure as a profession, and the co n trib u tio n th at all these
te nd encies have made to the ‘universalization’ o f this discipline
during the period o f a quarter o f a century— 1 9 5 2 - 7 7 — ca n n o t be
un dertak en meaningfully w itho ut a fram ew ork o f analysis that
would be o f a sociology o f know ledge (cf. Singh, 1 9 7 3 ; M u k h e rje e ,
1 9 6 5 ; Jo sh i, 1 9 7 5 ) within the co n t e x t o f history. C o lo nialism , and
its im p act on the intellectual and cultural traditio ns in India, o f
which sociolog y and o th er social sciences are at a certain level
m anifestations, provides an im p o rtan t historical b ack d ro p for its
th e o r etic, ideological and professional evaluation. T h e cognitive
and paradigm atic tensio ns o f Indian sociology during 1 9 5 3 - 7 7 bear
deep im prints o f the socio-historical forces released during the
freed om struggle which shaped the responses o f Indian intellectuals
to the categories and structures o f ideas in social sciences and
sociology.

T h e first tw o decades o f the 2 0 t h century w h ich m a rk the

beginning o f sociology in India set out several o f its orientations,
such as descriptive and evolutionary studies o f caste, social customs,
96 | Id eo lo g y , T h e o r y a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y Id e o lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y \ 97

fo lk lo re , land systems and the village com munity; and their throug h large-scale migration o f scholars. Its centre o f gravity
com parison with similar institutions in the west (cf. Singh, 1 9 6 7 ; shifted to the United States o f America where sociology evolved a
M u k h e rje e , 1 9 6 5 ) . Its most im portant m eta-theoretic contribution strong empirical-positivistic orientation, and led to phenom enal
was in engendering an ethno-socio lo gical awareness about Indian innovations o f m ethods and techniques o f ‘scientific so c io lo g y ’. At
sociology which has continu ed to persist. It needs to be highlighted the beginning o f the fifties in India, it was this dominant tradition o f
as the quest for ‘un iv ersalization’ o f sociological categories. Indian sociology, with its th e o retic package and empirical style, which had
sociology has significantly been refracted by this cognitive made a headway in the traditio n o f Indian sociology. It also
o rie n tatio n . W h e t h e r sociology is a science with accom panyin g harm oniz ed with the objectives th at the national g overnm ent had
universalistic package o f categories and techniques o f research or it for systematic planning and investment o f resources for social and
is a specific cognitive style marked by a mode o f apperception or e c o n o m ic grow th. T h e need for developmental planning in the
reflexivity in observation and com parison o f structures o f social villages, cities and tribal areas initiated a series o f empirical studies.
relationships and ideas, are questions which have b een debated T h is becam e a dominant tradition in sociology, but some
rig h t from the inception o f sociology in India. philo sophical orientations that pre-existed, continued to persist.
Sociology was in the beginning less professionalized, most of its T h e th e o r e tic directions in Indian sociology can be analyzed
patrons cam e fro m outside this discipline and were not initiated through the basic tensions which have existed in this discipline since
into its logic o r methodology. M o s t o f them treated sociology as a its inception. T h e s e tensions are theoretical as well as ideological.
style o f cultural critique or reform ative ratiocination. Its character Theoretically, the im portant tension in sociology exists, on the one
was thus defined by its responsive yet critical note on the western hand, b etw een the ‘master th e o r y ’ or ‘general th e o r y ’ and
interpretations o f Indian society, its institutions and cultural ‘conceptual sch e m es’ and on the other, betw een ‘universalism’ o f
pattern s. R adha Kamal M u k e r je e , B.N . Seal and B.N . Sarkar conc epts and propositio ns and their ‘particularism’ or contextuality.
constantly refu ted the efforts o f western Indologists and social It w ould seem th at sociologists’ c om m itm e n t to one or the other
anth ropologists to try to interpret Indian reality in the evolutionary stand point ab o u t ‘th e o r y ’ in sociology have fluctuated n ot only
red uctionist m atrix. Seal thought institutions could only be because o f the nature o f its discoveries or successes or failures in
c o m p a re d when they were historically coexistent and parallel, and theory construction, but also in the light o f the changing historical
M u k e r je e thought Indian social institutions to be unique. H e found circum stances o f the ‘calling’ o f sociology (cf. G ouldner, 1 9 7 0 ).
the sociological categories o f the west inadequate for the T h is brings sociology face-to-face with another critical tension
interpretation (cf. M u k h e rje e in Barnes and Backer, 1 9 6 1 ) o f the within its cognitive structure— that o f the role o f ideology in theory
Indian reality. con stru ction . The significance of universalization or
F ro m 1 9 2 0 onward s, sociology slowly became a teaching particularization o f concepts and categories in sociology is derived
discipline in universities and its professional character began to from the bases o f these tensions.
em erge. T h e im pact o f the British and Continental sociology and Sociology in India has been experiencing these cognitive
social a nthrop o log y was very significant in shaping the sociological tensio ns from the very beginning o f this discipline, but during
orien ta tion s o f researchers and teachers o f this time. T h e teaching 1 9 5 2 - 7 7 these tensions have fluctuated significantly in response to
o f m e th o d o lo g y as a separate discipline was still not prevalent; the force o f history and existential coordinates o f knowledge. To
a n th ro p o lo g ica l field w ork traditio n on the British pattern or review its th e o retic directions and its changing structure o f ideas, it
historical research methods were the tw o skills which sociologists w ould be useful to review sociology in four periods: 1 9 5 2 to 1 9 6 0 ,
were generally initiated into for their researches. If they used other w h ich primarily was a period o f adaptive changes and innovations:
em pirical devices, these were to be individually fabricated based on I 9 6 0 to 1 9 6 5 , which was a period o f significant shifts in theoretic
the nature o f research problem. T h is trend changed during the priorities and the beginning o f some critical tensions in theory and
S e co n d W orld War period as sociology declined in the C o n tin en t ideology o f Indian sociology; 1 9 6 5 to 1 9 7 0 , which was a period of
98 | Id e o lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y
Id eo log y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 99

m arked sociological self-awareness and growth o f new directions in

sociology during each o f the four periods outlined above in term s o f
theoretical and substantive contributions; and finally 1 9 7 0 to 1 9 7 7 ,
innovation and universalization o f concepts and categories,
a period when Indian sociology moved towards a n e w maturity and
particularistic tensions in their form u lation and the related interface
e x p lo red both th eoretically and substantively n e w horizons o f
o f ideology, with specific reference to each o f these four m a jo r
knowledge. theoretic orientations.
T h e four-fold periodization o f Indian sociology, from 1 9 5 2 to
1 9 7 7 , could probably be identified with certain pred om inant
Philosophical Theoretic Orientation
th e o retic and ideological systems for each period , but Indian
sociology during this period, like sociology in general, does not
T h e philosophical orientation in Indian sociology is associated with
show succession o f paradigms as we move from one period to
L u ck n o w School o f Sociology, in the contributions o f R adha Kamal
another. W h a t obtains is the co-ex iste n ce o f co m p etin g paradigms
and th e o retic orientations. Indian sociologists throughout this M u k erje e, D.R M ukerji and A.K. Saran. M o s t o f its contributio ns
belong to the 1 9 5 2 - 6 0 period, as in the subsequent years only A.K.
period have been less co n c ern e d with constructing ‘master theories’
Saran remains its proponent. It does n ot seem to have made a m ajor
or general theories, but m ore prone to using conceptual scheme for
impact on the theoretical nature o f Indian sociology. T h e reason
analysis o f social problems. W ith the exception o f Radha Kamal
probably lies in the lack o f an integrated or unified perspective in
M u k e r je e , who in his T he P h ilo sop h y o f S ocia l S cien ce ( I 9 6 0 ) and
the philosophical th e oretic contrib utio ns o f these sociologists. T h e
his presidential address to the third Indian S ociolog ical C o n fe re n ce
th e oretic tensions in their writings are n o t h om ologou s. Radha
in 1 9 5 8 , proposes a general integrated social science model for
Kamal M u k erje e finds it possible to talk o f universal series o f
e xp la n atio n and understanding o f social realities (cf. Singh in
concepts and general categories, which n o t only integrate sociology
Unnithnn et al., 1 9 6 7 : 2 2 - 2 3 ) , no other systematic theoretical
internationally, but also include other disciplines b oth in the natural
form u lations have been made. M o s t sociologists have remained
and the social sciences. D.P. M u kerji, on the o th er hand, is
satisfied with using conceptual schemes or where they have used
ambivalent about the questio n o f the ‘universal’ and ‘particu lar’
general theoretic systems such as in dialectical or M a r x ist sociology,
nature o f the sociological categories. H e is affectively oriented
their writings do not show its awareness, as the emphasis
towards M arxism , but leans heavily on the ‘particularistic’ m odel of
th rou g h o u t remains on the com prehensiveness o f substantive
Indian sociology with emphasis on tradition and history. His
analysis fro m an ideological position, rath er than on the relative
writings bear deep influence o f Dilthey as well as o f M a r x — the two
power o f theoretical systems.
rather contradictory orientations in meta-theory. H e n c e , his notion
S om e o f the m ajor th e o retic orientations in Indian sociology
o f dialectics, which he recom m ends as an im portant analytic device,
which have shown varying degrees o f ups and downs during the
never takes on the universalistic meaning which it has in popular
quarter o f a century are philosophical, culturological, structural and
interpretations o f M a rxist theory. A.K. Saran, on the other hand,
dialectical-historical approaches. O n the formalization criteria o f
takes a m o re logically rigorous and consistent stand on the
theory none o f these orientations has existed in a systematic form.
philosophical and ideological nature o f the social sciences and
M o s t o f them have operated as styles o f analysis or have been
sociology. H e propou nd s an approach to Indian sociology which
evolved into quasi-formal systems o f conceptual schemes. All the
tends to render it entirely particularistic. H e n ce , one may find that
fo ur th e o retic orientations, however, have existed in Indian
ideologically the three sociologists can be placed on a continuum
sociology from 1 9 5 2 or even before, and have continu ed to operate
where R adha Kamal M u k erjee would re present the e x trem e of
in varying forms. Only the philo sophical orientation seems to have
universalistic orientation, A.K. Saran the extrem e o f particularism
weakened because it did not have its organic linkages with the
in sociology, and D.P. M u k erji would fall som ew h ere in the middle
substantive problem s as dom ains o f sociological enquiry. We shall
o f the tw o positions.
review, however, the changes in the th e oretic structure o f Indian
100 | Id eo lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o cio lo g y
Id eo lo g y , T h eo ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 101

Rnclha Kamal M u k e r je e ’s systematic statement about

philosophical foundations o f sociology and other social sciences is through interplay o f opposite forces to higher and higher planes o f
con tain e d in his T he P h ilo sop h y o f S ocial Science ( 1 9 6 0 ) . He ethical and cognitive awareness. T h is transcendence is mediated
postulates for each order o f reality, fro m physical to meta-physical, through society. “M a n ’s transcendence is mediated through society
a unified triadic principle o f dialectical interaction which links one which is a constan t tension inside” , says M u k erjee. He adds: “It is
level o f reality with other, and which also renders one level of the nature o f man to transcend himself because o f the immanence in
concepts or categories significant and meaningful to other levels. himself o f the not-self, the neighbour, the whole universe” (ibid.: 5).
H e n c e , his plea for n on -com p artm entalization o f knowledge into In terms o f social models o f solidarity, M u k herjee finds both the
the narro w grooves o f disciplines. Dialectics, w hich is a western liberal d em ocratic pattern and the M a rx ist models
fundamental process linking one level with another and also inadequate. He suggests the alternative o f the ‘third w ay ’ or the
e nd ow ing it with quality and pow er o f self-transcendence, which ‘middle way’. T h is imbibes the principles o f individual freedom and
M u k h e rje e treats as the essential feature o f man as h o m o dignity o f co m m o n man from the liberal ideology and access to and
sy m h o licu s , is not merely a process o f conflict and encapsulation sharing o f societal resources by the working classes, as advocated by
but m ore p rom inently o f harm ony and freedom . It is here th at he M arxism .
differs from M a r x ist uses o f the notion o f dialectics. He writes: T h e alternative ‘middle w ay ’ that M u k erje e proposes as a
solution for the planning o f the future social systems is supported
The philosophy of dialectical materialism today promotes the by his postulate for an integrated social science model which will be
universal notion of an inevitable pattern of social development united at a ‘m eta-scien tific’ and ‘m eta-anthrop olo g ical’ level. It
through struggles and conflicts o f global revolution and war and would resolve the con flict betw een the philo sophy o f science and
subsumes all human progress within the dialectic of the economic philo sophy o f values, would integrate into one system the diverse
movement. Modern evolutionary naturalism, Spencerian, Marxian form ulations in social sciences on the nature o f man, values and
or Bergsonian, reduces man’s mind and values as passive entities society and would lead to the con stru ction o f a “human general
manipulated mechanically by a vast process that he cannot theory o f relativity” which “comprises a comprehensive system o f
intelligently direct or control. Evolution as revealed to modern universal norms that belong to the nature o f existence or reality or
thought has its many levels or dimensions in which persons, values eternal goals o f the cosm ic process, including human history and
and societies develop in nature. Values are creative and not merely civilization” (ibid.: 1 75 ). M u k e r je e ’s philosophy o f social science
means of adaptation to the environment. The environment also thus derives its frame o f analysis from a n o tio n o f dialectics that is
changes, acted upon by human goals, values and ideals (cf. meta-physical. As contrib utio n to sociological theory, its place
Mukerjee, 1 9 6 0 : 118). remains very much at the level o f ax iom atic meta-theory. It is based
on a system o f deductive reasoning which is exegetic and
M u k erje e draws from Hegel, Vedanta, Buddhism and Taoism to
speculative, hence different kinds o f operationalizatio ns o f this
form ulate his n o tio n o f dialectics. N o t only he says that “man thinks
m eta-theo ry are possible for sociological studies. Attempts to
and lives dialectically. All social relations and behaviour and the
undertake empirical studies on this m odel have not been made,
values th at he deep seated in them embody polar principles and
although M u kerje e has to his credit several empirical studies in the
tend encies” but also that “through the dialectic o f the Vedanttc neti-
fields o f econom ics and sociology (cf. B o tto m o r e , 1 9 6 2 : 1 02 ).
n eti Buddhist su n yata and Taoist namelessness, the self identifies
itself with the reality and the supreme value” (ibid.: 4 ). H e is D.P. M u k erji, on the other hand, does not attem pt to construct
opposed to all varieties o f reductionist logic about human behaviour a general system theory or moral philosophy for global social
and values, be it biological, psychological or e conom ic transform ation. He uses a notio n o f dialectics which is M arxist ir
fo rm u lation (he calls it ‘M a r x o lo g ic a l’) but still leaves it to
(m aterialistic). D ialectic means to him capacity o f man to transcend
individual social scientists to innovate upon its categories
com m ensu rate with their own cultural traditions. In his D iversities
102 | Id e o lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y
Id eo lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 103

( 1 9 5 8 ) which contains m ost o f his th eoretical papers, M u k erji

response to m e e t the historical challenges o f its ow n disintegrating
strongly pleads for the uses o f history in social analysis. For Indian
worldview, fo llowing the industrial revolution and eclipse o f its
sociological practice the notio n o f ‘trad itio n’ occupies an important
traditional society. Weak and inadequate as is sociology as a cultural
analytic place a ccording to M u k e r ji, because the dialectics o f class
alternative, according to Saran, even for the west, to save it from
form ation, class conflict and the structural tensions in Indian society
the fo rm idab le challenges in the wake o f the disintegration o f its
bear the stamp o f the historical co n tex ts o f its traditions and
past traditional sacred worldview, its b orro w in g by non-w estern
symbols. T h e sociological model that D.P. M ukerji puts forward is a
nations, particularly India, am o unts to a double self-deception. It
synthesis b etw een D ilthey and M a r x : for him history matters in
first lies in the neo-colonial roots o f sociology. Sociology essentially
sociological analysis, the modes o f production and related social
inheres an ideological package which is o f the western origin and
relationships constitute essentials o f historical forces, but its
alien to Indian ethos. Secondly, it is a bad alternative as a worldview
o u tcom e is tem pered also by tradition which provides these
to replace the traditional Indian worldview. T h e solution according
processes a specific contextuality. To this e x te n t history also does
to Saran lies in total re]ection o f sociology. Its concepts and
not repeat itself.
categories, w h eth er form ulated in M a rx ian term s or in positivistic
D.P. M u k erji prefers historical-dialectical mode o f sociological term s (o f m etho do lo g ical individualism or social organicism),
analysis rath er than empirical-positivistic one. H e rejects the a m o u nt willy-nilly to safeguarding a false p ro p o sitio n — a
atomism as a relevant n otio n for sociological analysis on which pro positio n o f naturalistic reductionism and evolutionism.
empiricism is anchored . H e specially refutes the values o f empirical
In critique o f D .P M u k e r ji’s D iversities, Saran evaluates the
m etho ds such as surveys and quantitative-m athem atical models as
n otio n o f ‘planned social o r d e r ’ implicitly equating it with the
they essentially violate the phenom enolog y o f Indian social reality
foundation o f sociological theory o f knowledge. H e writes:
which is devoid o f the n o tio n o f individual, and has as its
unit-category the collectivity or the sangha. T h is renders most Th e historic roots of the idea of a planned social order go back to
models originating from the west, with the exception o f an adapted the breakup o f the worldview founded, among others, on the idea
and Indianized version o f M a r x ism irrelevant for Indian sociology. o f the Great Chain of Being. The immediate positive reaction to
Th is has a direct im plication to the question o f the universalism or the traditional worldview was to substitute the transcendental
particularism o f categories in sociology. D.P. M u kerji does n o t rule intuition o f order by an immanentist conception o f the social
ou t the possibility o f com p a riso n betw een historically distinct system. This was the logic-philosophical basis o f the competitive,
societal forms or systems or the relevance o f objectivity in social individualistic society which supplanted the traditional order in the
sciences, but he strongly pleads for an awareness in form ulation and West. ...The implicit auto-apotheosis (of Man) which characterizes
uses o f sociological categories which are derived fro m the native modern thought on planned socio-economic systems is the result
tradition. T h is introduces a n o tio n o f levels in the concept o f this effort. With the addition of the idea of a collective secular
fo rm a tion in sociology from the contextu al to the comparative, Providence to the competitive worldview, there arises an inner
fro m the particular to the universal and from the historical to the tension between the notion o f self-adjustment and the notion of
general, which has not been systematically dealt with by M ukerji, planning (Saran, 1 9 6 5 : 1 2 9 -3 0 ) .
but is implicit in his sociological formulations.
A.K. Saran, who was M u k e r ji’s student, and later his colleague, Saran has continu ed to develop his ideas in this direction of
though inspired by his writings, takes on a logically m o re extrem e m eta-so ciologica l reasoning since early fifties. In an essay on
standpoint on the theoretic form ulation o f sociology and its “ Sociolog y in India”, he rejects Radha Kamal M u k e r je e ’s effort
meta-theory. In his writings (cf. Saran, 1 9 5 6 , 1 9 5 7 , 1 9 6 1 ) he to w ards sublimating social sciences through a dialectical reasoning
pro ceed s to exam ine the m eta-theo ry and underlying premises of on to the plane o f moral freed om for man in a social system based
sociology as a fu ndamentally w estern cultural and cognitive on the alternative ‘middle path ’. He characterizes it as logically
104 | I d e o lo } y, T h e o r y a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y
Id e o lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y \ 105

inconsistent. : Ie also critically assesses D.P. M u k erji and says: “ If the

here is little more than an attribute o f power. While artha is
im plications o f his (M u k e rji’s) largest views are seriously follow ed
opposed to kam a as deferred satisfaction to immediate, dharm a is
up, they will lead us far beyond Professor M u k e r ji’s present
opposed to both as ultimate ends to particular ends, as the sacred
position, for its direction is towards tra d itio n a l s o cio lo g y n o t far
to the profane. In the language o f Parsons, ka m a is expressive
rem oved from that o f Coom arsw am y and S ch u o n ” (Saran, 1 9 5 7 ) .
action, artha instrumental action, and dharm a moral action. The
In his writings o f the sixties and the seventies Saran has continued
triology gives an exhaustive classification o f the types o f action and
to build upon his earlier ideas in tw o directions. Firstly, he has is based upon a system of oppositions (Dumont, 1 9 6 6 : 41).
refu ted m ost w estern alternative constructions for sociology in
India, particularly o f Louis D u m o n t and David Pocock, and Saran in his review o f D u m on t objects particularly to his
secondly, he has m o re sharply tried to expose the neo-colonial attem pt to interpret the notio ns o f H ind uism , viz., d h arm a, arth a
elem ents in the ties o f Indian sociology with that o f the West. His and k a m a through western categories, especially through the
contrib utio n o f sociological reasoning thus leads directly n ot only to Parsonian transform ation, overlookin g the antinom y betw een the
re je ction o f universalization o f sociological categories but also o f tw o distinctive value systems and worldviews. D u m o n t defends his
sociology.
e ffo rt to com pare through ou tsid er’s point o f view which he
Saran, along with D .N . M aju m d ar and o th er colleagues at the postulates, is an essential m ethodolo gy o f social anthropology and is
L u ck n o w University, had com e out in the sixties with warning based on the assumption “that man is not a m ere word, although
statem ents ab out Am erican projects in India to study Indian society men are such throug h their belonging to one or o th er particular
as harmful for national security (Saran, 1 9 5 7 ) . In the mid-seventies, society or cu ltu re” (D um ont, 1 9 6 6 : 2 3 ). Saran is basically skeptical
he refuted Edward Shil’s ‘c entre’ and ‘periphery’ thesis on the o f this position when he writes: “...social reality q u a reality has no
g row th o f social sciences, calling it ‘magisterial’ in style. But his yet ‘outside’ ... the only outside is its interpretation in term s o f an alien
sharper com m e n ts on Indian sociology can be seen in his culture ...” (Saran, 1 9 6 2 : 6 8 ). H e fu rther criticizes D u m o n t for
observations on D u m o n t’s essay on the “W orld R e n u n cia tio n in “taking in the name o f science, m odernity or objectivity, a firmly
Indian R eligions’’ ( 1 9 5 7 : 33-62) where an e ffort is made by provincial standpoint for the study of traditional or
D u m o n t to show the com parability o f fundamental notio ns o f tradition-haunted societies”. Saran has constantly been criticizing
Hinduism , such as d h a rm a , arth a and k a m a with principles o f duty, w estern sociology and social science fo r its ‘positivistic’ fallacy
profit and pleasure respectively, each coinciding with the n o tio n o f (cf.Saran, 1 9 6 2 ) ; he finds D u m on t to o being involved in the same
uarna hierarchy. T h e particular passage to which Saran takes ‘positivistic hybris’.
ob jection is as follows:
T h e com m e n tary o f Saran has provok ed D u m o n t to write an
angry note clarifying his position (D u m ont, 1 9 6 6 ) . H e attacks Saran
T h e analogy with the hierarchy o f varna is apparent: dharm a
for taking a position which logically fo recloses the possibility o f a
corresponds to be Brahman or priest, artha to the king or
universal language o f sociology and leads to a position o f cultural
Kshatriya, the temporal power, and kam a to the others. This is not
solipsism. T h is controversy has n ot evoked response fro m Indian
all, and one can go further with the help of Talcott Parsons’
sociologists on a scale that it deserves. Indeed, D u m o n t-P o c o ck
method of structural analysis. First, kam a is opposed to the two
publication o f the series C o n trib u tio n s to In d ian S ociolog y ( 1 9 5 7 ,
others as an action flowing immediately from affective impulses is
I 9 6 0 , 1 9 6 1 , 1 9 6 2 , 1 9 6 4 , 1 9 6 5 and 1 9 6 6 ) have evoked rather a
opposed to an action submitted to intellectual and moral
self-consciousness am ong Indian sociologists which has n o t entirely
considerations. Then, while dharm a is moral universalism, artha is
b een in tune with the ‘universalistic’ postulates they have intended
calculating egoism, something after the manner o f ‘rational action’
to pro ject. Its main impact has been one o f retroactiveness rather
in our economic theory— but extended to politics, since wealth
than o f approval or acceptance. D u m o n t ’s H o m o H ierarch icu s
106 | Id e o lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y Id eo log y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 107

( 1 9 7 0 ) falls also in the same category. Although C o n trib u tio n s to to interpret changes observed in the ritual practices and life-ways o f
In dian S ocio lo g y : N ew Series organized a high level review the lo w e r castes through intensive and careful field study T h e
symposium on this b ook , it failed to make an impact on Indian n o tio n o f B rahm a niz ation, how ever, had im plicit possibilities o f
sociology. fu rth e r ab straction into a higher level concept, sanskntization
O n the Sa ra n -D u m o n t controversy, T.N . M a d a n , editor o f the which Srinivas introd u ced because his ow n field data and those o f
C o n trib u tio n s to Indian S ocio lo g y : N ew Series has this to write: many oth ers indicated limitations o f using only B raham anic model
as fram e o f reference (see Shahand and Shroff, 1 9 5 9 ; C o h n , 1 9 5 5 ;
But I am not wholly satisfied with the Dumont-Pocock argument Pocock , 1 9 5 7 , etc.). Sanskritization as a co n c ep t thus replaced
regarding the external point o f view which they say the sociologist B rahm anization at a m ore abstract level.
shares with the natural scientist. I am not convinced that such a
Srinivas achieved this through enlarging the meaning o f
point o f view exists. (If we accept that it exists, then their and
sanskritization and by distinguishing it from a nother concept,
Bailey’s positions are not opposed to one another). If it did, it
w esternization, using b oth term s in a systematic m ann er to explain
should have been possible for us to study social life through
the processes o f social change in India. T h is conceptual scheme
observation by communication with the observed people...I want
though referring mainly to the processes o f cultural imitation, has a
to go further and question if an observer can acquire any
built-in structural notion, that o f hierarchy and inequality o f
understanding of an alien culture, of the context, purpose and
privilege and power, since the im itatio n is always by the castes or
meaning o f human action, without communicating with the actors
categories placed low er in social hierarchy and o f castes and
through their, his, or some other language, directly or through
categories placed higher up in social and e c o n o m ic status. T h e
intermediaries. Once this happens, the external observer ceases to
concep ts sanskritrzation-w esternization soon b ecam e a matter o f
occupy the position of an outsider (Madan, 1 9 6 6 : 12).
lively debate and exegesis m sociological circles and also o f a series
o f m in o r innovations by field w orkers in different parts o f the
T h e issues raised throug h this debate which is still going on in
country, as also by historians, political scientists and Indologists.
Indian sociology have both ideological and theoretic significance.
Ever since the issue o f the C o n trib u tio n s to In d ian S o cio lo g y — T h o u g h introd u ced as a heuristic device, the tw o con c ep ts also
1 9 5 7 , w here D u m o n t-P o c o c k first formulated the problem o f what implied a system atic logic. Sanskritizatio n characterized a change
they called ‘For a Sociology o f India’, through the seventies the within the fra m ew o rk o f the Indian tradition, while westernization
debate on this question has been going on. Since its implications are was a change resulting from the con ta ct with the British
wider and deeper related to several types o f theoretic orientations s o c io -e c o n o m ic and cultural innovations. B oth processes,
o f Indian sociology, we shall exam ine it at the end o f our treatm ent nevertheless, fo rm a continu ou s series in term s o f relative power o f
o f various theoretic orientations in sociology. the g roups, castes or categories placed within the traditions
co n c ern e d . T h e low castes imitate the ritual styles and cu stoms o f
the up per (tw ice-born) castes, and sanskritize; the upper castes
Culturological Orientation imitate the cultural styles and institu tions o f the British or other
w estern traditio ns, which leads to westernization. We find a
T h e m o st im p ortan t landm ark in the beginning o f what we have
system atic form u la tion o f the tw o concepts in Srinivas' S ocia l
heuristically called the ‘culturological o rientation’ in the theoretic
C h a n g e in M o d ern In d ia ( 1 9 6 6 ) where he defines sanskritization as
natu re o f sociology is Srinivas’ w ork, R eligion a n d S ociety A m on g
“the pro cess by which a ‘l o w ’ caste or tribe or other group takes
th e C o org s o f S ou th In dia ( 1 9 5 2 ) . T h is w o rk led him to form ulate
over the custom , ritual, beliefs, ideology and style o f life o f a high
the c o n c e p t o f ‘B ra h m a n iza tion ’ to represent the process o f the
and, in particular, a ‘tw ic e -b o rn ’ (d w ija ) caste. T h e sanskritization
im itation o f life-ways and ritual practices o f B rahamanas by the
o f a group has usually the e ffect o f im proving its position in the
lower-caste Hindus. T h e co n c e p t was used as an explanatory device
local caste hierarchy. It norm ally presupposes either an
Id eo lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 109
108 | Id eo lo g y , T h e o r y a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y

appeal for the Indologists, historians o f Indian culture and

im p ro v e m en t in the e c o n o m ic or political position o f the group
sociologists and social anthropologists. It also satisfied those who
c o n c e rn e d or a higher group self-consciousness resulting fro m its had a special fondness for developing Indian concepts for analyzing
co n ta c t with a source o f the ‘G reat T rad ition’ o f Hinduism such as
n ational social cultural p h e n o m e n a ” (Singh, 1 9 7 7 : 99 ). These
pilgrim ce ntre or m onastery or proselytizing sect” ( 1 9 6 6 : 6 7 - 6 8 ) .
c o n c ep ts have b een debated in Indian sociology both for their
Along with the concepts o f sanskritization and westernizatio n, viability as well as lim itations to interpret social changes in society.
Srinivas has used the term ‘secularization’ to denote the processes o f S o m e debate has also ranged on the possibility o f linking these with
institutional innovations, and ideological fo rm u lation after m o re abstract concepts such as ‘re ference g ro u p ’ and ‘social
independence to deal with questions o f religious groups and m o b ility ’ in order to universalize them (Singh, 1 9 7 3 ).
m inorities in India. Secularization is a process which as normatively
A n o th e r a tte m p t to analyze the cultural processes o f change in
stated in the C o n stitu tion o f India and codified through various
India has b een made by M ilto n Singer and M cK im M arrio tt
types o f legislations, attempts to stabilize the foundations of
follow ing R e d fie ld ’s model o f ‘social organization o f traditions and
religious tolerance and ideological co-existence am ong sects and
civilizations’ based on the d ichotom y o f the little and great
com m unities in India. This, as a national ideology, was given a
traditions (see, Singer, 1 9 5 9 , 1 9 7 0 , 1 9 7 2 and M arrio tt, 1 9 5 5 ). T h e
fo rmal shape after independence.
gre a t tradition is that o f the elite, urban centres and has a formal
T h e conceptual schemes that Srinivas has form ulated to analyze ch aracter, w hereas the little tradition belongs to those o f the folk in
the ph e n o m en o n o f social and cultural change have made the the villages and the unlettered many. Each tradition has its social
outstanding impact on Indian sociology. It offered an analytic frame org anization, and there is a continual flow o f themes, ideas or
to many village studies conducted from 19.52 to 1 9 6 8 particularly symbols fro m one to the other level, universalizing some and
(cf. Srinivas, 1 9 5 5 ; M arrio tt, 1 9 5 5 ; M ajum dar, 1 9 5 5 , 1 9 5 8 ; parochializing o th e r traits o f the tradition. This process is triggered
C hauhan, 1 9 7 4 ) and later on in the discursive treatm ent o f Indian b o th through o rthog enetic and heterogenetic factors.
sociology. It inspired historians and Indologists to re-evaluate their Sanskritization as a process could also be incorporated in this
perceptions and premises on the processes in Indian society and process as well as westernizatio n or m odernization. Som e field
culture (see, Raghavan, 1 9 5 9 ; Chanana, 1 9 6 1 ; Harper, 1 9 5 9 ; Staal, studies in villages and cities have been conducted by Singer,
1 9 6 3 ) and to critically e xam ine the m erits o f this c o n c ep t in the M a r r io t t and their colleagues follow ing this model, but it has not
analysis o f social and cultural change (Thapar, 1 9 7 5 ) . It also led m ade a wide im pact on Indian sociology as Srinivas’ concepts of
some sociologists to study its latent merits which could th r o w light sanskritization and westernization. T h e reason is that except ful­
also on structural changes in India society (see, G ou ld, 1 9 6 8 ; Singh, som e advantages o f formalization and abstraction this model does
1 9 7 0 , 1 9 7 3 ) and others to com pare it with ‘reference group th e o r y ’ n o t add m u ch to the analytic advantages in studies with uses o f its
in sociology (see, D am le, 1 9 6 8 ; Lynch, 1 9 6 6 ) . D eb a te was also categories. M o re o v e r, sanskritization and westernization can also
generated on Sriniv as’ con cep t o f ‘d om in a n t ca ste’, which, lend historical and structural-analytic insights whereas the concepts
according to him, in m ost cases, served as reference m odel for the o f Singer and Redfield are devoid o f possibilities o f observing
castes low er in position to b o rro w or imitate its custom s and structural tensions in social processes both o f modernization and
practices through sanskritization (Dube, 1 9 6 5 ; O o n im e n , 1 9 7 0 ) . traditionalization.
Finally, sanskritization also generated through e xa m in a tio n by some
T h e m a jo r emphasis in study o f social change through concepts
sociologists o f the structure o f traditions in Hinduism which were
o f sanskritization-westernization and o f the levels of traditions is on
claimed to be multiple and not unitary in character.
the changes in cultural styles, customs and ritual practices. T h e re
Sanskritizatio n and westernization as concepts and th e oretic are, how ever, some presuppositions in the processes both of
orientations stirred Indian sociology m o re deeply than any other sanskritization and westernization which do imply precedent or
conceptual schem e so far. “H ere was a co n c ep t which had an equal c o n c o m ita n t structural changes, such as im provem ent in econom ic
110 | Id e o lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y Id eo log y , T h e o r y a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | ill

po sition o f the sanskritizing caste, superiority and d om inance o f the abstractin g out consistent elements that culturological study
caste being emulated and psychological d isenchantm ent am ong the attempts. A valid sociological understanding can be achieved, given
low castes fro m their ow n p osition in the caste hierarchy. E ffo rt has certain problem s, by making abstractions immediately fro m
b een made to spell out the presuppositions con ta in e d in b oth the b ehaviour or fro m other non-verbal in form ation, and by using our
Srinivas and the Singer models and to integrate th e m on a logical ow n concepts (Bailey, 19.59: 8 8 —1 0 1 ). T h e p re -e m in e n c e o f
paradigmatic principle (see, Singh, 1 9 7 3 ) . T h e tw o essential concep ts or models is one characteristic o f the structural studies. Its
coordinates implicit in Srinivas’ and S ing er’s form u lations are that o th er im p ortan t attributes are re lated to the natu re o f problem s it
o f the sources o f change— heterog enetic and orth og e n e tic and the undertakes for observation and analysis, such as the processes o f
substantive domains o f ch a n g e — cultural structure, com prising the structural cleavages and d ifferentiation in societies, problem s o f
‘little’ and ‘g re a t’ traditions and social structure, com prising o f equality and inequality, study o f p o w er structure, social
m icro-stru ctu re ’ and ‘m acro -stru cture’. Placed in a schem atic form stratification, social mobility, urbanization-industrialization,
(o f property-space) these lend us typologies o f op eration al concepts changes in the dem ographic and family structure, etc. Such studies
in which notions o f sanskritization and w esternization ca n n o t only also have a macro-structural and historical perspective.
be subsumed but also extend ed to explain also the structural change In the structural studies, one im portant trend is the focus on
through generating logically related set o f structural concepts o f co m parative categorial re lationship, such as caste and class
change, such as role differentiation, emergence o f new structural relatio nship in India and its im plication on the nature o f the society.
forms, bureaucracy and elites through heterogenetic changes and T h is trend has continued since late sixties. In such studies the
pattern -re cu rren ce , migration, internal social m o vem ent, analysis o f social structure is un dertak en with the help o f tw o or
circulation o f elites and rise and fall o f urban centres and dynasties, m ore conceptual categories. This introduces the elem ent o f
etc., through o rthog enetic sources. Attem pt has been made to com p a riso n and generalization in their th e oretic power. B a ile y ’s
analyze processes b oth o f modernization and traditionalization ( 1 9 6 0 ) analysis o f structural changes in India with the set o f
through these conceptual categories based on sociological and com parative categories like ‘trib e ’, ‘caste’ and ‘n a tio n ’, B eteille ’s
historical data. ( 1 9 6 5 ) study o f social structure o f a village with analytic categories
‘caste’, ‘class’ and ‘p o w e r’ have been forerunners o f a whole new
series o f structural studies. Additional sets o f categories that have
Structural Theoretic Orientation
been used by sociologists for com parative study o f social structure
are, caste, religion and power (Aggarwal, 1 9 7 1 ) , caste, race and
T h e culturological orientation o f Indian sociology whose th e oretic
politics (Verba, Ahnted and Bhatt, 1 9 7 1 ) tribe, caste and class
te ndencies we have exa m in e d has also been related primarily to
(Aurora, 1 9 7 2 ) , mind, body and wealth (Pocock, 1 9 7 4 ) to study the
studies o f the village com m unities, caste structure, its institutional
structure o f beliefs rather than social relationship caste, class and
correlates and family, kinship and religious ideology o f the people
politics (B hatt, 1 9 7 5 ) and language, religion and politics (Brass,
in villages. M o s t such studies being cond u cted throug h social
1 9 7 5 ) . Several o th er studies using such com para tive sets o f
anthropo logical and observational techniques had a holistic
categories for analysis o f social structure, beliefs, ideologies or
character. T h e social structure was studied at the village level, but it
cultural systems have been made during the past fifteen years
was m o re descriptive and sociographic than fro m a theoretical
(Thapar, 1 9 7 7 ; box, 1 9 7 1 ). The use o f a set o f m o re than two
exp lana to ry point o f view. T h e structural o rientation differs fro m
conceptual categories for analysis o f social p h e n o m e n a renders the
culturological because, as Bailey says in structural studies, “we
theoretic elem ents in these studies not only com parative but also
ought n o t to confine ourselves to the raw material provided by the
increases their power o f generalization. T h is was not usually a
‘principles that people themselves give’, our only task is n o t to make
characteristic o f holistic studies o f villages and tribal social
sense o f the flagrant contrad ictions in popular tho u g ht by
structures conducted in the fifties and early sixties in India.
112 | Id e o lo g y , T h e o r y a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y Id e o lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 113

T h is tend ency o f com parison has also coincided with the use of entrepreneurial structure in a Punjab township, which improves
th e o r e tic and conceptual schemes not only to analyze but also u p on E. H a g e n ’s thesis on the th eory o f innovations in developing
explain changes in the social structure. T h e uses o f the terms societies and analyzes the structural notions related to e conom ic
‘c lo s e d ’ and ‘o p e n ’ stratification (Bailey, 1 9 6 3 ; Beteille, 1 9 6 9 ; and social risk-taking, its absence in the lower classes and its
S ingh, 1 9 7 0 ) and ‘h a rm o n ic ’ and ‘d isharm onic’ systems (Beteille, relationship with social mobility.
1 9 7 1 ) do constitu te attem pts to w ards a n e w explanatory dimension In the structural th e oretic orientation, n ot only the number o f
in sociological analysis. T h e explanation o f course does n ot reach conceptual schem es for com parative studies increases, but also the
the level o f fo rm al theory, but is a definite advancement from relationship betw een concepts and social reality undergoes a new
earlier descriptive studies o f social structures in India.
form u lation . T h is is evident in the replacem ent o f studies o f
T h e structural th e o retic orie n ta tion o f sociology during the villages, so d om in a n t in the sixties, by those o f ‘agrarian structure’
seventies is also reflected in the spurt o f urban surveys which were and ‘peasantry’ in the seventies and eighties. Th e focus on the study
c o m p le te d fro m 1 9 5 7 to 1 9 6 9 ( D ’Souza, 1 9 7 4 : 11 7 ). T h e se urban o f agrarian structure, and not the village, takes sociology into the
surveys, sponso red mostly by the Research Programmes C o m m ittee macro-analytic domain. It introduces a theoretical rather than a
o f the Planning C om m ission , have been analyzed integratedly by territorial orie n ta tion in sociological thinking and also brings the
Bulsara ( 1 9 6 4 ) for nine cities, though in all m o re than tw o scores o f M a r x is t and functionalist form ulations o f sociological theory face-
surveys have b een published. T h e s e surveys have dealt with items to-face challenging each to test and verify their relative theoretic
such as p o p u la tio n , language, literacy, occupation and industry, power. It also introduces a new dim ension in the study o f change,
internal m ig ration , incom e, em ploym ent, housing conditions and through emphasis on sociology o f social m ovem ent and revolution.
social life, etc., in the cities. T h e surveys have used a statistical T h e s e innovations in concepts and theory have also led to a new
model fo r study with the help o f schedules and questionnaires on a m etho d o lo g ical awareness in sociology. Sociologists now
selected sample fractio n. They have mainly generated benchm ark increasingly use historical m ethod and archival and documentary
data for planners and have occasionally contributed to innovations data to form ulate their propositions. This has brought history and
in m e th o d o lo g y through standardization o f the tools o f research. sociology closer and there is a possibility o f one rein forcing the
T h e y have also contrib u ted to the training o f a whole batch o f other.
researchers in survey type study, w h o today rein force many social
T h e interest in agrarian sociology is derived from interest in the
research organizations in the g o v ern m e n t and private industry. study o f basic changes in the rural social structure initiated through
Cities have also been studied using the culturological model,
land re form s after independence. It covers studies o f new class
especially the n o tio n o f ‘sacred c o m p le x ’ (Vidyarthi, 1 9 6 1 , 1 9 6 9 ) or
fo rm ations, social m obility and contradictions arising from these
‘cultural c o n fig u ra tio n ’. Som e conceptual evaluations o f categories
processes, with inter-regio nal and com parative perspective (cf.
used in urban studies have also been undertaken from the criteria o f
Jo s h i, 1 9 7 1 , 1 9 7 5 ; Singh, 1 9 7 4 ; Beteille, 1 9 7 4 ; O o m m e n , 1 9 7 2 ;
logical adequacy, and principles o f verification and validation
Bhalla, 1 9 7 6 ) . T h e r e have also b een studies o f changes in agrarian
(M u k h e rje e , 1 9 6 5 ; Berrem an, 1 9 7 2 ) . Studies o f urban elite
relations resulting from ‘green revo lu tio n’ or agricultural prosperity
entrepreneurs and o th er specific structures and categories have been
in some regio ns (see, Ladejinsky, 1 9 7 3 ; O om m en , 1 9 7 7 ; M encher,
u n d ertak en by several sociologists (Jones, 1 9 7 5 ; R osenthal, 1 9 7 0 ;
1 9 7 4 ) . M an y studies on the social m o ve m e n t among the peasantry
B erna, 1 9 6 0 ; H azlehu rst, 1 9 6 6 ; Saberwal, 1 9 7 4 ) . Sociologists have
have also been conducted to analyze historically, as well as in
also studied slums in cities from a diagnostic as well as theoretical
co n tem p o rary setting, the contrad ictions em ergent in the agrarian
perspective (Desai and Pillai, 1 9 7 2 ) . M o s t o f these studies have
social structure (Dhanagare, 1975; Gough, 1975). Social
observed the levels o f structural changes and accom panyin g
m o vem ents which have their origin either in tribal agrarian
c o n tra d ictio n s in the process o f urban growth. Som e o f them have
pro blem s, o r those sponsored by socio-econo m ic reform
also innovated upon conceptual schemes, as Saberw al’s study o f
m ovem ents like the Sarvodaya o r by the radical m ovements as those
114 | Id eo lo g y , T h eo ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y
Id eo log y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 115

o f the N axalitii >, have also been studied by sociologists (O o m m e n , ‘n u c le a r’ and ‘joint fam ily’. !: also applied in the case o f
1 9 7 7 ; Desai, 9 7 5 ; Shah, 1 9 7 4 ; Dasgupta, 1 9 7 4 ; M u k herjee, culturological concepts such as ‘little’ and ‘g re a t’ tradition and the
1 9 7 7 ). T h e study o f the historical bases o f some regional processes o f traditio nalization and m odernization. Kothari writes:
m ovem ents like the Siva Sena and the caste m ovem ents such as T h e prevailing dichotom y betw een tradition and modernity has
neo-B uddhism have been explored (Gupta, 1 9 7 7 ; R ao, 1 9 7 5 ; Singh created a curious cognitive hiatus—-in ideological thinking as well as
and Singh, 1 9 7 7 ; Singh, 1 9 7 7 ) . T h e study o f social m ovem ents has in much o f social science theorizing— b etw een society on the one
not only added a new methodological orientation but has also led to hand and polity on the other. T h e fo rm er is conceived as if by
innovations in conceptualization and fo rm ulation o f con tex ts and definition, as ‘traditio nal’, the latter as ‘m o d e rn ’ and
categories o f social change. It makes a significant b rea k from the ‘d ev elopm en tal’. In reality, however, this is a false approach to the
functional notion o f a creative and adaptive change and focuses on p h e n o m en o n o f m odernization” (Kothari, 1 9 7 0 : 3).
those processes o f change which have the capacity to bring about a
d he structural theoretic orie n tation has n o t only contributed to
structural transformation in society.
deeper insight in the understanding o f the basic process in the
T h e structural orientation in th eory during the seventies has Indian society but has also led to innovations in conceptual
also led to new focus on kinship studies and family sociology (see, categories, paradigms o f analysis and in addition to this brought
Shah, 1 9 6 4 , 1 9 7 3 , 1 9 7 4 ; Dube, 1 9 7 4 ; Gough, 1 9 7 5 ) ; the emphasis sociology closer to the work o f the historians, political scientists and
on the diachronic process o f changes in family structure, from econom ists. This has increased the viability o f sociological studies
jointness to nuclearity, has been replaced by that on family cycle and raised new significant professional implications.
studies (Desai, 1 9 6 4 ; Nicholas, 1 9 6 1 ; Gould, 1 9 6 8 , etc.). Historical
studies o f family structure and differentiation o f its fo rm have been
Dialectical Historical Orientation
followed by studies in the area o f sociology o f disputes (Srinivas,
1 9 5 9 ) com binin g in-depth observations with historical social
a nthrop o logy o f villages. C o h n has applied it for m acro-analytical T h e dialectical theoretic orientation is related primarily to M a rx ist
study o f the Indian civilization (C ohn, 1 9 7 1 ). T h e studies o f methods and propositions for the analysis o f social reality. We have

factional differentiation and conflict in social and political netw orks used the terms dialectical and not M a rx ist because in Indian
have also been conducted to reveal the bases o f cleavages in Indian sociology, M a r x is t approaches com prise several adaptive models;
rural and urban society (N icholas, 1 9 6 8 ; K o thari, 1 9 7 0 ; Brass, many innovations have been made on classical M a r x is t formulations
fo r the study o f Indian society. Also, am ong Indian sociologists,
1 9 6 5 ; Weiner and Kothari, 1 9 6 5 , etc.). This has led to historical
there is gro wing awareness that M a r x ist categories and paradigms
study o f the rise o f new elites and changes in their com p ositio n and
will have to be reform ulated and tested against societal realities o f
social background (Leach and M u k h e rje e, 1 9 7 0 ; B roo m field , 1 9 6 9 ;
various historical origins to validate them as universal or particular
Rosenthal, 1 9 7 6 ) . Studies o f social mobility and changes in the caste
categories in sociology. In this perspective, when we look at the
and class structures, both fro m sociological and historical
perspectives, have been particularly emphasized (see, Silverberg, grow th o f dialectical-historical orientation in theory, we find that
com paratively it is a less developed branch o f Indian sociology.
1 9 6 8 ; Bose, 1 9 6 8 ; Kothari, 1 9 7 0 ; Srinivas, 1 9 6 8 ).
M o s t basic M a r x is t thinking in India was done in the forties and
An im portant theoretical insight which dominates the
fifties by non-sociologists (see, Singh, 1 9 7 3 , 1 9 7 7 ) . Am ong the early
o rientation in form ulating categories is w h at m ay be called,
sociologists who emphasized the significance o f dialectical model
p reference for the notio n o f ‘levels’ rather than continu um in
were D.P. M u kerji and R am krishna M ukherjee.
s ociology and social sciences. T h e conceptual d ich o tom ie s through
D.P. M u k erji, whose con trib u tio n to sociological th eory we
which changes in structure w ere observed proved to o static and
have already exam ined, continually used the categories o f structure,
inadequate when seen in historical perspective. T h is was true
class c o n flict and the model o f socialist society in his analysis o f
specially for concepts like rural and urban, caste and class and
Id eo log y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 117
116 | Id eo lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y

movements. T h e contradictions in Indian political, econ om ic and

historical social processes in India. B oth historical fram ew ork and
social structure, and in its d evelopm ent program m es, etc., have
dialectical o rie n ta tio n are essential, according to him, in
been highlighted by B ettelheim , w h o has concluded that although
sociological thinking. H e did n o t c o n d u ct any empirical studies
Indian case is one o f m ounting contradictions, the Indian
using this fram e o f reference. R am krishna M u k h e rje e made
b ourgeoisie has relatively been m o re responsive to elimination o f
systematic historical as well as empirical studies using dialectical
these contrad ictions, at least fro m som e o f the structures than
m odel. His T he R ise a n d F all o f th e E ast Indian C om p a n y (1 9 5 8 ) is
b ourgeoisie in o th er nations (see, B ettelheim , 1 9 6 8 ) . Th e judgement
a con trib u tio n to e co n o m ic and social history o f the
o f several other M arxists within India also, however, coincides with
institu tionalization o f colonialism in India through stabilization of
these observations. But there is a significant difference o f opinion as
e c o n o m ic policies, disintegration o f feudalism and aristocratic
to the intensity and rate o f expansion o f contradictions in Indian
despotism , and the rise o f new middle classes. In his T h e D yn am ics
society that may trigger o f f revolutionary m ovem ents (see, Desai,
o f a R u ral S ociety ( 1 9 5 7 ) , M u k h e rje e studies social and econ om ic
1 9 7 5 ) . T h e agrarian studies conducted from the M arxist frame o f
changes in a set o f villages through changes in the structure o f
reference have used ‘feudalism’, ‘capitalistic’ and ‘pre-capitalistic’
classes. H e emphasizes the necessity to grasp the systematic and
categories and mode o f production frame o f reference in the study
organic c h a racter o f Indian society for understanding o f its social
o f the social structures (see, Sau, 1 9 7 3 Chattopadhyaya, 1 9 7 2 ;
processes. In his later works, R am krishna M u kherjee has changed
Bhaduri, 1 9 7 3 ; Saith and Tankha, 1 9 7 2 ; Patnaik, 1 9 7 2 ) . Because o f
from dialectical historical to a ‘probabilistic Homological’ approach
the uses o f theoretic categories o f feudalism, pre-capitalistic
fo r the study o f social reality. H e calls his approach ‘inductive
structures and capitalism, with accom panyin g variations in the
in fe ren tial’ w hich is neutral to the type o f propositions, M a r x ist or
modes o f production and modes o f social relationships, these
n o n -M a rx ist, th at one chooses to test and verify. T h e role o f history
empirical studies assume significance. Theoretically, the
and dialectics in the sociological thinking and research, according to
contrib utio n <jf these studies i$ tw o-fold: first, these enrich our
M u k h e rje e , stops at the level o f form u la tion o f propositions; these
sociological understanding of the structural tensions or
may help in even a ta x o n o m ic fo rm u lation o f categories (see,
contrad ictions in the agrarian society and link them with its
M u k h e rje e , 1 9 7 0 , 1 9 7 5 ) or social indicators, but beyond this the
m acro-structures; and secondly, these also lead to innovations in the
logical principles o f test and verificatio n would have to operate
M a rxist sociological categories themselves, as these are put to test in
independently.
a different socio-cultural and historical con tex t. T h e need for such
A m ong Indian sociologists one w h o has consistently advocated
innovations in M arxist dialectical paradigm in India has been
and applied dialectical-historical model in his sociological studies is
emphasized both by Indian and foreign sociologists (see, Jo sh i,
A .R . Desai. In his studies o f nationalism , analysis o f rural social
1 9 7 4 and T h o rn er, 1973).
structure, the nature o f e c o n o m ic and social policies o f change in
In addition to the uses for the analysis o f agrarian relations and
India and the structure o f state and society, he has consistently tried
class structure, the dialectical theory has also been applied to the
to expose the contradictions and anom alies in policies and process
study o f m acro-structural social and e c o n o m ic processes in India.
o f change resulting from the capitalistic-bourgeoisie interlocking o f
H e re , the fram ew ork o f capitalism is fu rther informed by that of
interest in the Indian society (see, Desai, 1 9 5 9 , 1 9 6 6 , 1 9 7 5 ).
‘im perialism’ and ‘ne o-colonialism ’ for the understanding o f the
A ccord ing to Desai, the polarization o f class interests, especially o f
forces o f change (see, Patnaik, 1 9 7 5 ; Frank, 1 9 7 0 ) in society. T h e re
the bourgeoisie in India, is the found ation o f m odern society in
have also been some contributio ns on the exegesis o f writings of
India. It has thus inherent in it the class contradictions and the logic
Karl M a r x on India by both Indian and non-Indian sociologists (see,
o f its dialectics. T h is has been thoroughly exposed by Desai in his
T h o rn er, 1 9 6 6 and Jo sh i, and D am od aran, 1 9 7 5 ).
several writings.
The dialectical-historical theoretic orientation in Indian
T h e dialectical theoretic orientation has subsequently increased
sociology has grown rapidly in the seventies, when in addition to
in the studies o f political structure, agrarian formations and social
2 28 | Id eo log y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y
Id eo lo g y , T h e o r y a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 119

macro-structural studies o f social, eco n o m ic and political

sociology could he universal or has to be particularistic. A sem inar
institutions, micro-structural realities at the empirical level have
was organized on this problem in 1 9 6 6 and its deliberations have
also b een submitted to closer observation. T his developm ent has
b een published (Unnithan et ah, 1 9 6 7 ). T h e conclu sion o f this
also coincided with m ore analytic sophistication in the study o f
sem inar was th at Indian sociology w ould have to operate at b oth
macro-social problems. In August 1 9 7 5 , a journal S ocial Scientist
levels, the particularistic and the universal. Som e concepts or
was also started from Kerala which publishes M arxist-oriented
categories as Srinivas’ sanskritization-westernization, would be of
writings by social scientists and political workers on various
primarily particularistic and etlm o-sociological relevance, but these
problem s o f theory and substantive realities in India. Evidently,
studies with dialectical theoretical and m ethodolo gical orientation could be further abstracted for cross-cultural com parisons (see,
have been on an increase in India with innovatio ns in concepts, Singh, in Unnithan et al., 1 9 6 7 ).
methods and categories. T h e debate on this issue has not subsided. It was given a sharper
edge by linking the problem both o f creativity and categories in
Indian sociology to the colonial situation. J.P.S. U beroi, in his
For a Sociology o f India
“ Science and S w araj” conclu ded : “ Every swarajist should recognize

Having reviewed the main theoretical orientations in Indian w h at are the essential pre-co nd itions, under this system (structural
sociology it may be useful to assess its impact on the process of asym m etries like rich-poor, international-national, w hite-b lack), for
universalization or particularization o f categories and theory. This the a d va ncem ent o f universal science in our environm ent. Until we
issue is b oth ideological and theoretical. Since D u m o n t and P ocock can co n c e n tr a te on decolonization, learn to nationalize our
initiated the debate on “For a Sociology o f India” in 1 9 5 7 , this issue problem s and take our poverty seriously, we shall continu e to be
has been debated in response to their and Bailey’s writings and also b oth colonial and un original” (Uberoi, 1968: 1 2 3 ). T h is
independently. D u m o n t’s emphasis in the study o f Indian sociology observation of Uberoi has echoes in many quarters. As we
is on its fundamental ideo-structu ral categories fro m an ‘external m e n tio n e d , Saran is its strong exponent. M any others who support
point o f view’. He would fo rmulate his sociology from the language it with q ualifications, do n o t see contradictions in methods and
o f the sources as it were, from the sentiments and ideas o f the categories of the ctlm o s o cio lo g y and general sociology. The
people themselves. Bailey finds fault with this model for its pro blem is ideological, and as such it pervades through all levels of
indifference towards study o f ‘relatio ns’, which is the main sociological thinking in India where normative questions and not
sociological category. With this frame o f reference, sociology gets merely technology o f research are involved.
reduced to what Bailey calls ‘cu ltu rolog y ’ . In his statem ent on “For Even the universality o f methods and tools o f research is
a Sociology o f India” in the final issue o f C on tribu tion s, however, questio ned. M o s t o f these involve translation o f cultural idioms and
D u m o n t clarifies that he does not see the possibility o f a symbols from one culture into another. W h a t is m o re seriously
particularistic sociology even though the substantive reality he
q u estio n ed , how ever, is the choice o f problem s and research
would prefer the sociologist to deal with would be ideas and priorities that sociologists undertake for investigation. In a re cent
sentim ents and not relations. T h u s, without taking a structural debate on this problem which is contained in S ocia l Scien ces a n d
position as that o f Bailey, D u m o n t sees the possibility o f a general S o cia l R ealities: R ole o f S ocia l S ciences in C o n tem p o ra ry India
sociology as the only way-out. (D ube, 1 9 7 6 ) , such issues have been reopened for a variety o f social
T h e debate betw een D u m o n t and Bailey led Indian sociologists sciences. T h e distortions in sociological thinking and practice are
to think on this problem from an Indian perspective, where the created by alienation o f the professional sociologist from the other
issue was not o f tw o varieties o f general sociology, o f which the sections o f elites and people o f the society. T h is leads to the
Indian sociology would be a part, but it was mainly whether Indian distantiation o f sociologist fro m the m ajor issues o f national
120 | Id e o lo g y , T h e o r y a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y Id eo lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 121

c o n c ern or with national identity. His uncritical acceptance o f points o f operation. First, with reference to the types o f methods
models o f theory and research tools im ported from abroad have and techniques o f research that have b een used in sociology and the
c o m e in for th orough exam ination (see, Singh, in Dube, 1 9 7 6 ) . degree o f their innovativeness. Secondly, we could also exam ine the
types o f reflections that sociologists have made on their own
T h e question o f universalization o r particularism o f sociological
m ethodological craft, looking at it from a new co n t e x t o f p o s t-fa cto
categories in Indian sociology or social science as such remains
op en. A m o re enduring solution to this issue w ould probably com e objectivity.
from accum ulation o f empirical know ledge through the findings o f Indeed, in the sixties, Indian sociology un derw ent a strong
Indian sociologists and social scientists from studies c ond u cted with change in its orientation towards the tools and techniques of
self-awareness and scientific objectivity within their own ideological research. T h e tw o most co m m o n tools used by sociologists during
setting. this period were participant observation by social anthropologists
and survey research design for urban studies or studies o f social
categories. Som e social anthropologists also used historical methods
M ethodological Orientations
in their study, but its vogue was muted only to revive m o re strongly
in the sixties and seventies. S ociology teaching by this time
M e th o d o lo g y comprises logic o f enquiry and philosophy o f science,
invariably included courses in research methodolo gy. C o m p ared to
techniques o f operationalization o f c o n c ep ts and tools o f research,
o th er social sciences, with the exception o f e co n o m ics and
problem s o f m easurem ent, verification and validation, and finally
psychology, m ethodological awareness has been higher in Indian
q uestions o f universality and particularity in tools o f research that
sociology. W hereas survey design using statistical m odel o f
use symbolic-linguistic categories for m easurem ent and observation.
investigation has been quite co m m o n , the use o f mathem atical
T h e s e co m p o n e n ts of methodology, therefore, at another level raise
m odels has been rare. T h e applicatio n o f cyb ernetic m o del, set
similar ideological issues that we discussed in the c o n t e x t o f
theory, matrix algebra, etc., in sociological researches have been
th eoretical orientations o f Indian sociology. M e th o d o lo g ica l
made only recently and by few sociologists (see, Rastogi, 1 9 7 6 ,
problem s also get entangled in the web o f ethical questions, of
1 9 7 5 ; D ’Souza, 1 9 7 2 , M u k h e rje e, 1 9 7 6 ) . As com pared to the
co m m u n icatio n of values, preservation o f the confid ence of
sociological practice in India during 1 9 5 2 - 6 0 , the trend in 1 9 6 0 - 7 0
respondents or its exploitation. Since social science research implies
and 1 9 7 0 - 7 1 has been more towards structural analysis from a
social interaction, betw een the researcher and his respond ents, the
historical and comparative perspective. T h is type o f study did use
observer and the people he observes, and also the act o f cultural
simple quantitative techniques, but relied m o re on observational,
interpretation, the likelihood o f asymmetry developing in the
case historical and documentary data. O nly the M arxists studies on
relatio nship of researcher and the hu m an subjects o f his inquiry is
agrarian structure, we reviewed, cond u cted mostly by econom ists
high and also ethically vital. Indeed, the m o ve m e n t o f
than sociologists have used higher m athem atical techniques in
eth n o m eth o d o lo g ical ideology in research is a result o f the
survey design o f research.
dilemmas created by such ethical and structural problem s in social
With few exceptions, the sophistication o f quantitative methods
research.
o f research in sociology is yet to be a popular movement. Instead,
T h e m ethodolo gical trends and its problem s in Indian sociology
there is some evidence in recent sociological studies o f social
have been reviewed earlier (see, M a d an , 1 9 7 3 ) . The ethical
m ovem ents, historical life cycle o f institutions that there is reaction
q uestions posed by research m e th o d o lo g y have also been discussed
against uses o f quantitative techniques o f research. Srinivas, in a
at philo sophical and political levels. M u ch o f the critique o f
recent article on this problem takes e conom ists and others who
sociology by Saran m entioned in the philo sophical orientation
devalue docum entary and to task observational facts and insights in
belongs to this level o f discussion. We cou ld , however, e x a m in e the
researches, and attributes this neglect to the many failings o f the
m etho do lo g ical contrib utio ns made by Indian sociology at tw o
e xp lan ato ry models o f these sciences (see, Srinivas, 1 9 7 5 ) . Similar
1 22 | Id e o lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o cio lo g y Id eo log y , T h e o r y a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y j 123

views have bee n expressed by other sociologists (Singh, 1 9 7 6 ). T his adequately found useful and innovative are that o f family sociology,
reasoning is strengthened by studies on the problem s o f conductin g study o f social m ovem ents, analysis o f problem s o f inter-group
survey researches in India. It is revealed that many tools which take relations and m obility o f classes and categories. T h e utility o f survey
individual re sp o n d e n t’s a u ton om y o f views and opinions for design and quantitative models has been found to be extrem ely high
g ranted (as in the west) d o n ot apply in India, because o f the in studies with a bearing on applied problem s or where generatio n
d ifferent nature o f relatio nship b etw een individual and society in o f b e n c h m a rk data is essential for im plem enting public policy.
India (R udolph and R ud olph, 1 9 5 8 ) . O n the other hand, the T h e o re tic a lly challenging uses o f m athematical models have,
emphasis on m etho ds and scientific techniques is m o st pronou nced however, n o t heen in evidence in Indian sociology on any significant
in the writings o f R am k rishna M u k h e rje e, w h o insists that scale.
exp la n a tio n o f p henom ena through research is not possible without
the uses o f experim ental and inductive inferential models in
Sociology and Other Social Sciences
sociology.
T h e seco nd im portant developm ent in Indian sociology is in
Indian sociolog y has interacted closely with o th e r social sciences.
respect o f self-reflection by sociologists ^ h o have com pleted studies
T h e tea ching o f sociology has indeed differentiated from political
or m a jo r researches on the m etho do lo g y they have employed in a
science in B o m b a y University and fro m e conom ics in Lucknow
post-facto exercise o f self-critique and self-assessment. Also, there is
U niv ersity— the tw o centres w here its teaching made early impact
a te nd ency to ob jectively exa m in e some o f the subjective and
on the profession o f sociology in India. Its conceptual categories
ideological issues which influenced their research strategy and
have also been influenced by discoveries in other social sciences and
choice o f tools and techniques. We have an interesting accou nt of
have in turn influenced their orientation. Historians have
social a nthropologists on their own ‘encounters and exp e rien ces’
influenced deeply the wider uses o f the notio ns o f sanskritization
doing field w ork in India (Beteille and M ad an, 1 9 7 5 ). A similar
and westernization, the study o f middle classes and so cio -e co n o m ic
study on the craft o f Indian sociology by sociologists, political
fo rm atio n s in India. They have deeply contributed to the validation
scientists and psychologists w h o have conducted m ajor studies in
o f pro positions o f M a rxist and dialectical theoretical orientations in
their field in India has been prepared where each social scientist
sociology as also offered refu tation o f some o f its hypotheses.
reflects retrospectively on the problem s he faced in his field study,
Political scientists’ contrib u tio ns through studies o f political elites,
the ideological leads that he n ow thinks had bee n implicit in his
p o w er stru cture and political com m u n ication and studies o f
design o f research and concepts and categories he has used (Singh
ideology have influenced similar studies in sociology. Rajni Kothari
and O o m m e n , 1 9 7 7 ).
has co n trib u ted to the theory o f political socialization in India
T h e s e reflections on tendencies in m ethodology and uses o f w h ich has enriched studies on the fo rmation o f cognitive and value
techniqu es in Indian sociology and social sciences highlight certain systems in personality. Similarly, studies in political participation,
c o m m o n problem s. Sociologists have now acknow ledged the role o f political culture and its systemic treat merit have offered new insight
ideology in operationalization o f concepts and theories in research to sociologists w orking in this field (Kothari, 1970). T h e study of
designs and its techniques. T h e y at the same time do n ot reject leadership by political scientists has enriched insights o f sociologists
n orm s o f scientific m ethod or the statistical model in social in their own studies o f leadership in rural and urban societies.
researching favour o f ethnom ethodology. About the uses of
T h e influence o f sociology and social anthropo log y has been
techniqu es, however, their values and preferences are te mpered by
consid erab le in India b oth on history and political science. History
cau tion and circum spection. Uses o f history, docum entary data and
has n o t only influenced sociology but has been influenced by it,
reflexiv e insights are preferred in m ore recent sociological
especially in the recent formulations o f historical problems, where
researches to simplistic attempts at quantification ad statistical
fo rm a tio n o f structures, modes ol production and other
reasoning. M o r e im portant areas where such insights have been
22 4 | Id eo log y , T h e o r y a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y
Id e o lo g y , T h e o ry a n d M eth o d s in In d ia n S o c io lo g y | 125

infrastructu ral realities o f society deeply inform historical analysis

(see, Thapar, 19 7 5 ). Indian history bears the imprint o f sociology as
References
it moves fro m narrative history to problem history. It is evident in
e c o n o m ic historical studies, analysis o f social m ovem ents and Aggarwal, Pratap C., Caste, Religion an d Pow er: An Indian Case Study,
agrarian structure by Indian historians. A .M . Shah w rites: “D uring New Delhi: Shri Ram Centre for Industrial Relations, 1971.
the last fifteen years o r so, historians have b eco m e increasingly Aurora, G.S., Tribe, Caste, Class Encounters: Som e Aspects o f
receptive to sociology and social anthropology. T h is is seen in the Folk-U rban R elations in A lirajper Tehsil, Flyderabad: Administrative
works o f several historians such as Tapan Roy Chaudhuri, D h arm a Staff College o f India, 1972.
Kumar, Donald Smith, R obert Frykenberg, Eugene Irschic, B urton Bailey, F.G., Closed Social Stratification in India”, European Journal o f
Stein, M o rris D. M o rris, R o b ert C rane, R. Flardgrave, S.C . M isra, Sociology, Vol. IV, No. I, 1963.
R om ila T h a p a r and A.L. Basham, am ong others. T h e new jo urnal , “For a Sociology o f India”, C ontributions to Indian Sociology No
In dian E c o n o m ic a n d S ocial H istory R eview , founded by Tapan III, 1 95 9. ‘ ’
Roychaudluiri, has served to bring history and social sciences,
, Politics an d S ocial Change: Orissa in 1959, Berkeley: University of
including sociology and social anthropology, in closer relationship. California Press, 1963.
Roychaudhuri has devoted almost the whole o f the long preface to
— , Tribe, C aste an d N ation : A Study o f P olitical Activity an d Political
the second edition o f his book, B en g al u n d er A k b a r a n d Ja h a n g ir to
C hanges in H ighland Orissa, Manchester: Manchester University
sociology and social anthropo log y and their usefulness in h istory” Press, 196 0.
(Shah, 1 9 7 4 : 4 5 3 ) .
Berna, J.J ., 1 9 6 0 , Industrial Entrepreneurship in M adras State New
W h ile the interaction betw een history and sociology, and York, 1 96 0.
political science and sociology, has been mutually rein forcing and
Berreman, Gerald D., “Social Categories and Social Interaction in
has proved beneficial, the same type o f interaction b etw een
Urban India”, American Anthropologist, 7 4 , 1972.
sociology and e co n o m ic s has n o t taken place during the past one
Beteille, Andre, Ideas and Interests: Som e Conceptual Problems in the
and half decades. Earlier, sociologists and e conom ists used to
Study o f Social Stratification in Rural India”, Intern ation al Social
interact m ore purposefully in uses o f categories and in substantive
Science Jou rn al, Vol. 21, No. 2, 1969.
studies. The reason for this lag lies in high mathem aticalization of
eco n o m ics during the past one and a half decades w h ich on the one , Th e Future of the Backward Classes: The Competing Demands of
hand endows e conom ists with a sense o f technical superiority in Status and Power”, Perspectives—A Supplem ent to the Indian Jou rn al
their researches, and on the other alienates sociologists, who often o f Public A dm inistration,V ol. 12, 1 96 5.
not trained in mathem atical logic, tend to he mystified by — , “The Politics o f ‘Non-antagonistics’ Strata”, Contributions to Indian
e co n o m is ts ’ works without, however, being impressed by them . O n Sociology (New Series), Vol. 3, 1969.
the contrary, sociologists often consider such technolog ical skill o f (ed.), Social Inequality, Flarmondsworth: Penguin Books Limited
econom ists rather misplaced and inadequate in captu ring the 19 69 .
essences o f the social and cultural correlates o f e c o n o m ic behaviour , and Madan, T.N. (eds.), E ncounter an d E xperience: The Personal
and its system (Srinivas, 1 9 7 5 ) in India. It is hop ed th at as D im ension o f S ocial A nthropological Fieldw ork, Delhi: Vikas
e co n o m is ts ’ study of social structures, such as the agrarian and Publishing House, 1975.
industrial social formations, using their own frames o f reference,
, Caste, Class an d Power, Berkeley: University of California Press
b eco m es mature, they would also in the process generate insights 1 96 5.
other than m athematical which could be meaningful to sociologists.
— , Castes: O ld an d N ew : Essays in S ocial Stratification, Delhi: Asia
Publishing House, 1969.