Q.1 difference between ethnomethodology, interpretative theory and phenomenology?? First of all interpretative approach and phenomenology is the type of qualitative methodology to carry out sociological research. Interpretivists usually advocate the use of qualitative data to interpret social action ,with an emphasis on meaning and motives of actors. They differentiate sociology from natural science in the way that it requires understanding of meaningful behaviour by humans.Phenomenologists on the other hand go further than interpretivist approaches and rejects the idea that causal explanations are possible.To them social world has to be classified before it can be measured.Thus phenomenologist try to understand the classifications people use to give order and meaning to the social world.Ethnomethodology means a study of methods used by the people to construct,account for and give meaning to their social world. They apply phenomenological ideas to carry out their research means they also reject any kind of causal explanation to social phenomena.They have conducted investigations into the techniques that are used by members to achieve the appearance of order..---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Format for answer writing and notes makingAll the questions of paper will be renumbered for the continuity of the work. Once a particular chapter is finished all the well written answer of that chapter along with notes will be combined for revision notes.Here lets discuss how will it be doneI am taking the very first question of paper II 1. Write short note on the following with a sociological perspective: Limitations of the dialectical approach to the study of Indian society. (12/II/1a/12)Information needed :1.Dialectical approach to the study of Indian society2.The context and the following developmentsThus this information will be written separately in the notes associated with this question along with source referred.Answer to the question:Dialectical approach to the study of Indian society is primarily used by Marxist in the analysis of social reality. Marx borrowed the concept of dialectic from Hegel and applied it in the analysis of society through different phases based on mode of production. Using this approach Marxist sociologist like D P Mukerji, A R Desai and R K Mukherjee have studied Indian society.Dialectical analysis of Indian society see contradictory forces like tradition and modernity, colonialism and nationalism, individualism and collectivism etc interacting dialectically with each other giving rise to new contradictions in contemporary India. Though it has to the large extent being helpful in understanding social change and movements of modern India it is criticized on the following fronts1.As pointed out by Yogendra Singh dialectical approach to study Indian society lacks any kind of empirical exercises of data collection/survey thus are armchair sociologist.2. T N Madan criticize dialectical analysis on the ground that it emphasise more on class struggle as the means of social change and undermine the importance of value assimilation and cultural synthesis due to the forces of tradition and modernity in Indian society.3.Dialectical analysis of Indian society failed to see the specific social reality present in Indian society like the caste system which has covered the class conflict for a long time, also the forces of tradition which has resisted modernity, thus ignorant of socio economic history of India.Apart from above mentioned dialectical analysis also could not appreciate the diversity present in Indian society where contradictory forces has synthesized itself into new social reality like rise of Sufism, rise of middle class in India. But in spite of these limitations it has successfully showed that how development of man is conditioned by social milieu thus explained rise of national consciousness in colonial India as well as rise of different social movement in modern India and created foundation for further sociological development.Notes makingAll important point related to dialectical approach can be noted down in point format in one page and can be kept for revision .Like here it is related to the the chapter of Marxist sociology(A R Desai) So all the points from B k Nagla can be noted at one place.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yes the syllabus has changed but if you will try to look deeper into the matter you will be able to see that it is still there with different names i will point out how1. Impact of west on Indian society = The process of westernisation talked by M N Srinivas and also by Yogendra singh in the book Modernisation of Indian tradition both are in the syllabus.2. Impact of Buddhism on Indian society = Religious communities in India you can also check the question no 3 under the religion and society. The parsi community and it's contribution to Indian society (2010) 20 marks.Even then if you feel it will not helpful in sociology i would say write it for gs purpose. Also as you know sociology paper 2 is full of so called bouncer questions so it could be one of those also-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. Write short note with a sociological perspective on the following:Demographic perspective of Indian youth. (12/II/5a/12)Regarding this question I have a different understanding and I am not sure whether I am correct or not and unnecessarily reading too much into the Question.According to me The Question is Demographic perspective of Indian youth not Demographic perspective on Indian youth.. means it's not our Perspective of Indian Youth but Indian Youth's Demographic Perspective. i dont know whether you know hindi or not..but if yes,then just once read the hindi translation of the Question,I think it will provide more clarity as there is 'ka' not 'par'.. It seems to me that it is more of related to the National Youth Policy of 2012. skylaxskylax August 2013Hmm. I think you might be reading too much into it. 'Demographic perspective of Indian Youth' is probably meant here as 'Demographic perspective on Indian Youth'. Perhaps it is shortened version of '(What is your) demographic perspective of Indian Youth? Not really sure that this is the case but I don't think 'Demographic perspective of Indian Youth' is a coherent idea. Needless to say, I may be wrong. Your thoughts, @aman8770 ?By the way, nicely spotted I had automatically assumed it meant 'on' by 'of'. aman8770aman8770 August 2013@horizon_21 In Hindi it is bhartie yuva ka jannakiye pripechye. so yes it is of Indian youth rather than on Indian youth .and my answer is on Indian youth so definitely it is not appropriate .Thanx for pointing it out also i got the trick to read both english and hindi version of the question. i will correct my answer and it will be uploaded in the group folder as well as here.Also i will be granting edit access so that you people can upload your answer in the folder as well as can post it here and re correct it whenever required but please be careful not to delete anything .In the end we will collect it chapter wise in a single folder.Also now onward no assignment, it will be more of self assessment exercise as i think it will be more feasible given some members are struck in paper 1 and other are in different chapter of paper 2 but the condition is whenever you people are uploading it make it sure it is going in right folder (chapter wise different folder can be made)Thank you pvs88pvs88 August 2013I have written this after only one reading of this topic. So don't really know how far I have got it right. Please review guys.10)How far is the structural functional perspective helpful in understanding changes in contemporary Indian society ?The structural functional theory posits that society is a whole consisting of various groups and categories that are inter related. Stressing the elements of harmony and consistency it argues that any change in one part of the system leads to change elsewhere and finally results in reorganization of the system. The followers of this perspective are M.N Srinivas. SC Dube and others.Contemporary Indian society is a cauldron of modernity and tradition. The structural functional perspective explains some of its aspects while fails in explaining others.Various factors like land reforms,modern education,mass media,new forms of marriage have brought changes to traditional institutions like joint family,kinship,common property, caste system of purity and pollution.Positive discrimination and decentralization has helped the lower caste challenge the status quo. Changes to the legal system have allowed women to challenge the patriarchal system but it has also facilitated deviances like divorce. The validity of sanskritisation in todays society has been challenged by agitations by intermediate caste for SC and ST status and thus trying to climb down the social ladder than imitate upper caste for social mobility.However the perspective also helps to explain the churning in urban milieu owing to migration through concepts like parochialisation and universalisation. Deviances in cultural pattern like atrocities against weaker section and women have been surmounted by change in legal system that helps to restitute social equilibrium. The structural functional perspective which was confined to understanding present structures and functions could have helped us better understand changes in todays society by including a socio historical perspective in its studies.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Nice answer! You have explained both structural-functional approach and changes in contemporary Indian society, and linked them well. Some points:1. You could have stressed the point that structural-functional approach is generally conservative and not very helpful in understanding large-scale changes, which has been the case in contemporary Indian society. A dialectical approach or conflict approach is a better approach in this scenario. This is the key point. You have mentioned it but haven't stressed on it enough.2. You have given far too many points regarding changes in contemporary Indian society. There was a feedback by people who appeared last year that giving fewer examples and substantiating them better is more likely to fetch good marks than trying to give a exhaustive and comprehensive list.By the way, I was wondering, is calling divorce as deviance justified? It's a change, yes, but is it deviance? Any thoughts, anyone?Regarding divorce I googled just to make sure. Here is a line from the below link"Historically, divorce has been viewed as socially deviant behavior and therefore a bad thing. "http://www.divorcesource.com/ds/texas/what-makes-divorces-go-bad--3419.shtml--------------------------------------What Makes Divorces Go Bad? Information Provided by: Accord Mediation ServicesIf you are reading this article, you have probably decided that you are moving in the direction of getting divorced. Maybe the decision is yours, maybe it is your spouse's, or maybe your reached the decision mutually. The important certainty is that you are going to divorce, and that now, you and your spouse have some very important decisions and choices to make.The choices concern the manner and process in which you will divorce. Will it be bitter or civilized? Will you have an intense litigated adversarial divorce, or will you have a cooperative, even amicable, divorce? Will you attempt to vindicate the past or will you use your resources to build your separate futures? Will your children suffer emotionally or will you minimize the impact on them? Will your divorce be a mess or will it be a transition to new and better lives for you both? In other words, will you choose a good or a bad divorce?Many people will argue that you do not possess such choices. It's a matter of luck or chance they will tell you. They say to you that divorce causes so much bad feelings and anger that there is no way to keep it under control. It's just something that you have to survive and if you're lucky, you will not be too hurt to badly or for too long by it. On the other hand, it could ruin your life. However, healthy divorce or unhealthy divorce is not a matter of luck. The outcome is very much subject to the choices you are about to make. People, you are in complete control.Your divorce does not have to be a disaster. Painful as it, successful divorce can help both of you to begin new lives that offer a second chance at future successful relationships. There will be new many relationships and new opportunities ahead. You can enhance these opportunities or you can demolish them. You can use your economic and emotional resources for the benefit of yourselves and your children or you can squander them in battles in which, ultimately, you all lose. You can help your children come out of this difficult period with two whole and effective parents or you can turn them into emotional cripples.You will make these choices as a couple. Remember, until you are successfully divorced, you are still a couple. Legal ties make you a couple. Economic and emotional ties make you a couple. Do not believe that because there is anger and distrust or sadness that you are not emotionally connected. Fighting is often a way of staying together. Some people remain connected through fighting for years after a divorce.You are about to begin the final task of the marriage: negotiating a decent and conclusive end of your relationship as husband and wife. How well you perform this task in large part will determine how the divorce turns out.Divorce is a process, not an event. During the process of getting unmarried you can choose to treat yourselves with derision. The important thing about these choices is that you can only make them as a couple. Couples get divorced, not individuals. One of you can choose an unhealthy divorce; but only both of you can choose a healthy divorce.If one of you engages in war, it is very difficult for the other not to counter. In divorce, few partners turn the other cheek. One of you may want an amicable divorce but may believe that the other is too angry or too vindictive to make it feasible. This is a particularly trying time because you are separated and single on one level, but still married and together on the other. In this time of confused and mixed signals, it is easy to offend each other.You are neither clearly together nor clearly apart. If you were capable of immeasurable participation, you would probably stay married. But you are capable of confined cooperation, and this is enough to get divorced decently. It is this residual capacity that enables you to choose, as a couple, the manner in which to end your marriage.Seemingly, it may be strange to talk about healthy divorce. Historically, divorce has been viewed as socially deviant behavior and therefore a bad thing. It is generally regarded as an unfortunate event that leads to negative results like broken homes. Social attitudes have altered substantially in the past twenty five years. Although few feel that divorce is desirable in itself, we are witnessing a wide-range reassessment of divorce, stemming partly from its pervasiveness. Half of all marriages that occur this year will end in divorce. About 80 percent of the people who get divorced will remarry within the next 5 years, and about 60 percent of the second marriages will end in divorce. This means that about half our population experiences one divorce, and about a quarter will live through two. At this time, divorce is no longer viewed as deviant behavior, it is slowly becoming the norm.I will not debate the pertinence of the term healthy divorce. What I am talking about, and what I believe you as a couple can choose, is a divorce that achieves legitimate and constructive goals for yourselves and your children. A healthy divorce accomplishes three distinct objectives:A legal divorce that ends the marriage within a reasonable time of the decision to divorce, without huge legal fees that drain the family's finances, and with a minimum of animosity and battling.An economic divorce that separated the marital partners into two distinct economic units so that assets and income are fairly distributed and economic sacrifice equally shared.An emotional divorce that allows both partners to grieve the end of the marriage so that each can move on to new relationships. Appropriately completed, the emotional divorce leaves the former partners capable of cooperating as parents, behaving decently and respectfully toward each other, and embarking on new relationships without destructive baggage from the previous marriage.A healthy divorce requires completing all three of these objectives. Naturally, all three are interrelated and each step affects the others.To work toward a healthy divorce, it is imperative that you understand the specifics that make divorces go bad. There are two related aspects of a divorce that are unhealthy. The first is the nature of the divorce process itself, and I will identify a few of the characteristics of the legal system that when combined with the behavior of divorcing spouses, produce hostile and bitter divorces. Second are the products of a unhealthy divorce, mainly the settlement agreements that are unfair and unworkable and the feelings of bitterness and injustice that emanate from them. When you have a settlement agreement that is complete, it is important that both of you feel and believe that it is fair. If this is not the case, it will be arduous at best for you to get on with your new and separate lives. Such feelings of abiding bitterness continue to interfere with readjustment, growth, and new relationships. Flawed settlements can bring you and your ex-spouse back into court again and again so that the continuing battle contaminates and ruins your attempts at putting you new life together.From a statistical perspective, divorce is a disaster in America. Approximately half of all fathers default entirely on their child support obligations, while only a quarter pay their full obligation. Average visitation between divorced fathers and their children is less than once a month. Divorced women with children make up the fastest growing segment of Americans living below the poverty level. The statistics point to systematic shortcomings in the American approach to divorce and should serve as a warning to any divorcing couple. There is a true but terrible series of trade offs that occurs in the process of divorce in America: The mother loses the money and gets the children. The father gets more money, but for all practical purposes loses the kids and, one might argue, a large part of himself. The children lose at least one parent, and perhaps two, because the parent who is left is frequently too tired and worried to meet their needs. This is not the exception people, it is the norm.The divorce disaster is a product of the feelings that escort divorce, anger and vengeance, along with the legal system itself, which is based on opposition, not cooperation. There is a terrible fit between the needs of the divorcing family and the American legal system, so before you allow yourself to become drawn into it, you need to understand how if functions and why it functions the way that it does.--------------------------------------------------Elaboration of my point of view:The classical theory of deviance is that it happens when some people reject the cultural goals or the legitimate means of achieving those goals or both goals and means. Marriage was a sacrament in the traditional Hindu society, hence could not be annulled. With the introduction of marriage bill, it is now a contract from a legal point of view, and can be therefore annulled. Hence, divorce is a rejection of the cultural value of marriage as sacrament in favor of contract and it can be thought of as deviance.On the other hand, it is not a rejection by some people on the margins; it is more of a systemic or institutional change. Hence, my doubt if it is a social change but not deviance. tushar175tushar175 August 2013Write Short note on indological perspective of G.S . GhuryeIndology is the academic study of the history and cultures, languages, and literature of the Indian subcontinent (most specifically the modern-day states of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal), and as such is a subset of Asian studies.Specifically, Indology includes the study of Sanskrit literature and Hinduism along with the other Indian religions, Jainism, Buddhism and Pali literature, and Sikhism.G.S.Ghuryes approach distinctive from other Indological approaches for the following reason1 Being a student of Sanskrit Ghurye uses Sanskrit text exclusively to explain Indian society and culture.2 Being a student of Prof Rivers he uses the method of diffusion to understand evolution of caste in India and cultural synthesis of Indian society.3 His nationalist feeling and idea of nation building can be traced in his writings in which he uses Indological data to glorify India's cultural past and manifest concern through his writing about caste consolidation, tribal unrests and religious conflicts in India.-------------------------------------------------------------How far is the structural functional perspective helpful in understanding changes in contemporary Indian society? (10/II/4b/30)Answer to the questionStructural functionalism traces its origin in the ethnological studies of social anthropology ,the tradition which started with Malinowski ,Radcliffe brown and further refined by Talcott Parsons and R K Merton. This perspective of society stresses on the element of harmony as opposed to conflict thus see change as a gradual process where structures adjust themselves to new equilibrium.In Indian context structural functional perspective has been credited with enriching field work tradition in analyzing social reality .The study of Mysore village by M N Srinivas,study of Kishangarhi village by McKim Marriott confirms to this tradition. The dynamism of Indian society has always fascinated sociologist studying Indian society as a result of which it has been studied,analysed and discussed widely by sociologist with different perspective. Structural functionalist like M N Srinivas see it through the process of sanskritisation and westernization whereas Mckim Marriott see change happening through the process of universalisation and parochialisation yet another structural functionalist Robert Redfield see it as the interaction between little tradition and great tradition. Analysing changes in family structure I P Desai questions the simplistic theory of breakdown of joint family system due to the process of industrialization and urbanization and see as the myth of disintegration. On the other hand study of caste system as done by Mckim Marriott see it surviving because of its inherent value system despite the forces of secularization and modernization. M N Srinivas studying social mobility in caste system coins the term brahminisation as imitating the ritual and cultural methods of Brahmins as a way to gain higher social status.Even though to the large extent social change as studied by structural functionalist remained helpful it ignored the inherent conflict present in the social system and thus the change therein. Under the forces of modernization the change in value system has brought substantial breakdown in social structure of caste, family and marriage which could not be studied from structural functional perspective. Modernity has shaken the foundation of traditional Indian village system and transforming agrarian social structure is confirming to it. Thus it can be said that social reality of changes in Indian society is multifaceted and thus demands a multidimensional approach to study it.------------------------------------------------------------------------------Indological perspective of G.S Ghurye Indological approach is the systematic study of Indian society through religious texts,art,architecture etc. The origin of Indology can be traced to the works of 18th and 19th orientalists and the understanding that due to distinct values of Indian society it cannot fit into the framework of western society. It can be studied only through the concepts , theories and framework of Indian Civilization.Indological aprroach was developed and enriched with the studies of G.S Ghurye and Louis Dumont.In Ghurye perspective, Indian society through its long historical process of growth presents a picture of vast mosaic of culture held together by religion,value and norms of hinduism. It has maintained the continuity of values with limited variations in the course of time and space and also present can only be understood with reference to the past therefore religious text can be taken as authentic blueprint for study of Indian society but Ghurye approach was distinct in the sense that he used exclusively sanskrit text and diffusionist approach to explain indian society Ghurye approach has been criticised on the ground that it presents only Brahminical viewpoint and also that he has equated indian Tradition with Hindu Tradition ignoring the synthesising elements of Islamic or British Culture. A.R Desai had criticised that he has studied India only through lens of culture ignoring the underlying conflict, inequality and exploitation.However, Ghurye Indological approach was not static it recognized the changes in Indian society as the dysfunctional character evolved in the course of time and indicated the dichotomy between ideal culture and empirical nature of culture. aman8770aman8770 August 2013@horizon_21 Your answer is good but there is scope for improvement .See this is a very straight forward question so what you have written content wise it will be almost same in any other good candidate's answer that is you would be getting good marks but since we are here for improvement and i think there is still a scope in your answer to improve it further with the same level of knowledge 1.you could have given the origin of indological perspective as a reaction to colonial writings2.Conclusion could have been better.3.You could have included other dimensions of his study.Here i will also try re writing the same to illustrate my point.please give your feed back too so that further refinement can be done. aman8770aman8770 August 2013Write short note on Indological perspective of G S Ghurye. (09/II/1a/20)Answer to the questionIndological perspective developed as a reaction to the ethnocentric writings of orientalist writers from western countries who studied Indian society. When orientalist were busy in documenting the picture of Indian society as being static, timeless and spaceless, Indologist tried freeing Indian sociology from the bondage by interpreting the ancient texts and literature. The foremost Indian sociologist associated with Indological perspective is G S Ghurye who is also known as father of Indian sociology. The impact of his writings can be well understood by the suitable comment made by M N Srinivas when he said ,nothing disguises the fact that ghurye was giant. Ghurye was practitioner of theoretical pluralism. Even though he was trained in the craft of Indology (Book view), he was not averse to fieldwork traditions of social anthropology.He was a voracious writer who wrote on almost all aspect of Indian social life including caste, kinship, tribes, religion and others to name a few. He saw the close relationship of caste and kinship by the means of exogamy and marriage restriction, also for him tribes are backward Hindus as they could not integrate into Hindu society. Emphasizing on the supremacy of brahimincal ideas he see process of acculturation as a one way flow in which the brahmincal ideas infiltrated among non Brahmins thereby terming Indian culture as Hindu culture.Thus he opened the vistas for his own criticism when his view point was criticized as brahminical view point which gives only partial picture of reality, some also criticized him as armchair scholar for lack of any field work in his writing. In spite of these criticism he is termed as doyen of Indian sociologist because he uplift sociology from identity crisis when no other way was available. horizon_21horizon_21 August 2013@aman8770 Your Answer is very attractive and will fetch good marks..your writing skills has been improved a lot.. In this answer the best part is that you have started with why indological approach developed.but I think the 2nd paragraph is too much focusing on the Writer that can be cut short and more can be added to 3rd paragraph becoz the question is about his perspective.. the answer seems to be more focussed on his contribution. horizon_21horizon_21 August 2013your have scored 138 in Paper-1,which is I think highest score or near about it ..what strategy you adopted for it. aman8770aman8770 August 2013@horizon_21 I have focused on his contribution to Indian society as there is no other way to know his perspective.It might not appears to be a good way of writing but otherwise one will write is the indological perspective not indological perspective of G S Ghurye. For paper 1 I did not refer to any coaching notes but studied IGNOU and Haralambos(Blue book)yes i prepared some final revision notes most importantly i did not write any test series and my writing style was very immature but i think it helped me in writing to the point answer without much introduction and conclusion part.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Colonial hangover and its social impact (09/II/1d/20) or Impact of West on Indian society (01/II/1c/200/20)With the advent of the British Rule,the traditonal and stagnant Indian society came in contact with modern and progressive British society.The nature of contact was asymmetrical and british traditon being dominant one,it was only natural that indian society should change towards modernity.The basic themes of hierarchy and holism came under attack and a gradual process of modernization began.The early phase of western impact was confined to a section of urban middle class and the impact was more of westernization rather than modernization where only superficial aspect was adopted and underlying values remained unchanged.Later the spread of the modern education and occupation differentiation led to emergence of new professional elities which lead the freedom struggle against british rule.At the grass root level also ,with change in land relations and commericalization of agriculture a new social class emerged.With industralization and market economy ,jajmani system came under stress and village economy lost its self sufficent character.British rule also generated forces which directly or indirectly gave a mortal blow to the very root of the peculiar stratification system i.e Caste system.A new system of stratification based on achievement emerged atleast in urban area.However,the process of modernization which unleashed with the british rule does not let the dismantle of traditional institutions. They adopted themselves to new roles.caste and religion are two important examples.Such coexistence of traditional and modern structure on the context of developing societies is termed by Fred Riggs as 'Prismatic Society'.Thus modernization of Indian society due to British rule has not taken the same course as it did in the west. horizon_21horizon_21 August 2013How has the Marxist Perspective been applied to explain social background of Indian Nationalism ?(08/II/4/60)A.R Desai in his work "Social background to Indian Nationalism" trace the emergence of Indian nationalism from dialectical perpective.He interpreted Tradition in term of the underlying production relations.According to him economic relationships form the basis of the traditional institutions,which undergo change with change in econimic relations. Indian Nationalism is a modern phenomenon.It came into being during the British period as a result of the action and interaction of numerous subjective and objective forces and factors which developed within the indian society ,under the conditions of the British rule.British Rule in India generated new currents of economic processes.For their economic interests Britishers introduced new principles of political rule,administrative setup and different norms for governance.This created the basis of emgerence of new social classes and strata which laid the foundation for modern class system.British Rule though unintentionally, made a qualitative structural transformation in the India society which led to the unification of the nation.As a reaction to the new web of politico-economic and socio cultural relations created by british policies,various movements emerged.These movements were to serve the interests of the diverse social classes but ulimately they converged on one goal,emancipation from british rule.Thus these movements manifested themselves into a national movement and national awakening.After independence the same Capitalist economic system introduced by Britishers was adopted the bourgeoise Leadership evident from it pursuing a capitalist path of development in form of mixed economy.The underlying character of state did not changed with independence and these contradictions gave rise to the later peasants and other movements.Thus marxist approach to the analysis of social background of Indian nationalism gave new dimension to Indian sociolgical analysis and opened new frontier for further research.It took the indian sociological research from the limited sphere of religion,caste and rituals to wider spectrum of all India level. aman8770aman8770 August 2013@horizon_21 About your first question Colonial hangover It is good but could have been better .your answer could have been written in more coherent manner About your second answer I think what you have done will be done by almost every other candidates.The question isHow has the Marxist Perspective been applied to explain social background of Indian Nationalism ?(08/II/4/60)and you have written answer forHow A R Desai has used the Marxist Perspective to explain social background of Indian Nationalism ?(08/II/4/60)Even though he is the one who has contributed immensely while analysing social bakground of Indian Nationalism but there are still others who have followed Marxist perspective to analyse it partially .for example D P Mukerji analysis of Middle class in India due to encounter between tradtion and modernity.My point is when asked about Marxist perspective one should not start with A R Desai blindly as it shows narrow understanding and will not fetch good marks that is what i believe.Thanked by 1vayam horizon_21horizon_21 August 2013@aman8770 You are right, for 2nd answer it was wrong approach.It will be a narrow perspective,answer needs to be holistic .I should have mentioned other marxist sociologists,even R.P Dutt has analyzed indian nationalism in the book 'India Today' and in 1st answer,there was a connective problem,paragraph were more discrete which shows lack of writing practice.I will try to written those questions again but not now after covering some more portion and having a better understanding.And now onwards will try to imagine myself in place of examiner and then address the question with a view that what he will looking for in the answer.My preparation seems to be lacking in depth but still there are 3 months ,so there is scope for improvement.Thanks a lot for pointing out and Please continue with it as it is really helpful in improving the quality of answer. sociology_novicesociology_novice August 2013--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------can somebody help me with the question..How is vertical and horizontal social mobility problematic in society? suggest solutions.This was a 60 marker question when asked in the mains.My doubt : The question wants to ask the problems of social mobility once it happens or problems associated with achieving social mobility? aman8770aman8770 September 2013@vikky_baba Regarding the question as it seems is asking about the problem associated with vertical and horizontal mobility as it happens.Vertical social mobility as it is well known fact is associated with the change in the status of a person or group because of change in societal position .In Indian context as studied by M N Srinivas it is through the process of Sanskritization (change in ritual hierarchy ) whereas in western society it is change of secular hierarchy associated with class mobility. It leads to the problem of conflict in the society when the associated group refused to accept the coming group.You can give the examples of caste conflict in case of Indian society and class conflict in case of western society but under the forces of modernization there is changing equation between caste and class thus no specificity of the same with respect to Indian and western society.We can well observe the class conflict in case of Indian society also.Other problems which can be attributed to the vertical mobility includes Dalit atrocity(You can well observe in the newspaper a dalit sarpach of some village was not allowed to work as his new position was not accepted by other people belonging to higher social status),Rise of new social movement( you can give the historical context of rise of buddhism and jainism to the rise of new sects and cults in modern India).Also you can give the feminist angle by describing the phenomenon of rising violence against the women as the product of their rising social status in the society.Coming to the aspect of horizontal social mobility you can sight the example of migration and problem associated with it like rising familial stress,,breakdown in marriage,feeling of isolation and psychological deprivation etc.Other problem includes change in structural composition of family structure from joint to nuclear to extended family. also people moving more towards household than family.also changing form of gender relationship like rise in cases of live in relationship etc.Once you know the problems you can always suggest the solution.For example i can always sight the cultural lag theory of Ogburn and say that as our material culture has moved forward with respect to non material culture so what we need is social change by means of law,education, Technology etc.Hope it will help... Thanked by 3vayam corona vikky_baba vayamvayam September 2013@aman8770 are we supposed to give reference of western sociologists in paper-II , if the context of question seems appropriate for it? coronacorona September 2013@aman8770Bro, can you please tell what is the difference between religious revivalism and religious fundamentalism? This is my takeReligious revivalism is a term applied to mass movements which are based upon intense religious excitement like new age movements. it can be seen as a response to secularization. As many churchlike organizations become more worldly, many people leave them in favor of more sectlike communities offering a more intense religious experience (Stark & Bainbridge) whereas religious fundamentalism is the literal interpretation of a religious doctrine and its applications to all spheres of life.can a fundamentalist movement also be a revivalist movement? e.g. can the Iranian revolution of 1979 be said to be both revivalist and fundamentalist?can you please provide a basic framework for this 2012 question?Discuss the factors leading to growing religious revivalism in the contemporary world. preeti27preeti27 September 2013@aman8770How D.P. Mukherji has been considered marxist? He has emphasised on cultural synthesis where tradition has upper hand and ultimately leading to adjustment in traditions.He nowhere talks abt class formation,conflict of interests, violent revolutionary changes. Can you please explain it...I m quite confused...also where has he explained emergence of middle class.I m following Nagla.Thank you. aman8770aman8770 September 2013@preeti27Do you think every Marxist should talk about class formation or violent revolutionary then only be he called as Marxist ?Marxism is an ideology which believe in dialectical materialism is the basis of change in the society.In Indian context whoever analysed society following dialectical approach can be said to be Marxist at that point of time.Now you must be aware of the fact that owing to the specific cultural and historical root of Indian society it is not possible to consistently follow a single approach thus methodological pluralism is must as is also evident in writing of prominent sociologist analyzing Indian society.Now coming to your question D P Mukerji (not Mukherji) has also applied Dialectical approach to the study of Indian society with some adaptations as you said cultural synthesis specially accepting the reality of caste thus in strict sense we can say him following dialectical approach not Marxist approach but then whom you will refer to when talking about Marxism in Indian context so this inconsistency(even A R Desai has used dialectical historical approach with ideological commitment).About the Middle class he see it's emergence linked with the tradition of Indian society and saw it moving toward modernity thus getting separated from it's root thus he says that India can move on to the road of Modernity by adapting it to her traditions if the Middle class re establish their link with masses.Indian society is peculiar thus it is quite natural to get confused when you try to see it through the lens of particular methodology even sociologist who analysed it accept this fact.My suggestion would don't see sociology through water tight distinction while studying try to analyse the social reality you are very much aware of .Try to understand the context in which any theory emerged even use phenomenological approach in studying try to understand meaning and motive behind it.Hope it will help aman8770aman8770 September 2013@vayamPaper I and II is mechanical distinction does not mean they are separate thing all together .you can not quantify sociology so use both of it whenever appropriate.@coronawhat is the difference between religious revivalism and religious fundamentalism?First try to understand the difference between revivalism and fundamentalism.(No need to elaborate)Then try to get why it is happening that too at the same point of time some thing must be going on in the society what is it?It is the process of secularization which has impinged upon religious structure and it is the response of it (you have explained)or the process of cultural protectionism due to rapidly changing social structure some goes for the formation of sects and cults (protect it's culture) and some goes for enforcing their culture by strict adherence of moral codes and traditional values thus again protect it from perceived challenge.You can give various example of it .there are so many factors apart from the process of secularisationlike Marginality discussed by Weber,Relative deprivation , social change as discussed by Wilson etc.Thanked by 1corona aman8770aman8770 September 2013@Members of answer writing groupIf You people are ready can we start writing answers ?Topic wise We Have 13+16 =29 subtopic for questions given in topic wise question bank(Hope you all must be having a copy of it if not buy one)So as we have 8 members we can touch each topic everyday by writing 8 answers (each writing just 1 answer and giving the best in it)thus in one month of time we will be able to finish one revision of the whole paper 1 and 2.(Everyday one subtopic will be covered and we will try to answer diverse question of the same topic)Question division exercise will be done by every member each doing once (so that maximum coverage with no repetition) .The same can be posted here as well as uploaded in group folder date wise.once after the full cycle is completed we will again resume the same so if every member is participating each will have to do the exercise just 3 times (question division) in the whole exercise.If everybody is ready as the case should be we can start the exercise.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------let's start it from today as old members are not responding and new are coming so what i am doing isassigning membership to new people who will become part of the group after some time and also unsubscribing inactive members from the group.Right now as i can see only 3 people apart from me are showing interest soM 1 Preeti27M 2 ShkkM 3 aman8770M 4 maestroSo from today let's start it and if any further addition and reduction will be done according to the activeness of the members (regularity in answer writing and other new request for joining).Rules for answer writing are very simple give your best in the single answer you are writing..Rules of assignment giving is also very simple as everybody in our group have new vishal's Topic wise question bank for sociology.(updated) so assignment given will contain the question number with membership ID with subtopic mentioned at the top thus very simple exercise.Members will have to write answer with in the 24 hour of assignment as after that another assignment will be given and this will go like this.So let's start it with first subtopic today only.It's for preeti27 (M 1) to give assignment of the day.Just mention the subtopic along with question number and membership ID.Thank you. horizon_21horizon_21 September 2013@aman8770 me too. preeti27preeti27 September 2013@aman8770 I don't hav new vishal's Topic wise question bank for sociology , I have already ordered it...so will be getting in 4-5 days.I would request please assign someone else for today to distribute questions...I would clear off my backlogs as soon as I get my question bank.Sorry for the inconvenience.I would also request to fix a time for assigning questions, so that we all r aware it nd chk this forum/mail accordingly. vayamvayam September 2013@aman8770 Right now,even I don't have that book either and I have also ordered it. Meanwhile, I would suggest to start the answer writing session with the set of previous year's questions provided by mrunal (copy attached),starting from2012 and proceeding backwards.Also, I would like to mention that I am a working professional and little flexibility in time schedule for answer submission will be much appreciated.-------------------------------------------------------------------------8. Write short note: Sociology and its relationship with economics and political science.Sociology according to its forefathers is foremost evolved discipline which encompasses all other dimensions of human life. It has very close relationship with all other discipline including Economics and Political science.The relationship which sociology enjoy with Economics takes it root from the writing of Karl Marx who try to see society through the lens of Economics thus dialectical materialism. Max weber saw economy closely related with religion and thus determined by social factor in his famous work Protestant ethics and spirit of capitalism. Structural functionalist like Talcott Parsons also see economic subsystem playing important role in maintaining moving equilibrium of society by playing the role of Adaptation in his AGIL schema.Sociology as the critical discipline has essential role to play in any economic theory as rightly pointed out by Pierre Bourdieu. Thus it has very important role to play in examining the limitation of economic theory and thus enriching the study of economic phenomenon. Due to this in recent years the two discipline have come closer and thus parameters of development is measured not only in terms of economic factors but also social factors.On the other hand Political science which deals with the organized social group in the form of state has intimate relationship as state is also a social institution thus an object of sociology. Thus the grounds covered by sociology and political science is largely common with different view points.Marx explanation of political structure as the super structure of the society coming from relationship of people entering into relationship through the means and forces of production clarify the above point. It is also evident when we try to look into the work of other sociologist like Pareto and weber who studied circulation of elites and bureaucracy respectively.Again in the recent years the sociological area of research are increasingly becoming the area of research of political science and vice versa whether it is sociological definition of power or studies on pressure groups ,political parties or civil society. Thus the trend in political science has been towards the merger with sociology and thus the rise of political sociology. horizon_21horizon_21 September 2013Write short note : Sociology and Social Anthropology.Sociology and Social Anthropology though had different origin but both converge on one aspect,study of human society in respect of social & cultural milieu although from different perspective.The difference in world view of both disciplines has its genesis in its evolution.Whereas Sociology evolved in late 18th and 19th century and was influenced by Philosophy of History,Polical Science and Positive Science,Social Anthropology has much later evolution in 2nd half of 19th century and had origin in Biology.In the earlier period of Evolution both discipline borrowed much from each other and cooperation but later there was extreme divergence reflected in their universe of study and methodology.Whereas In the West,Sociology was considered as study of 'own' society i.e modern Industrial Societies.Social Antropology was delineated to the study of 'their' society i.e Societies which have different social and cultural structure from Western Societies.They were considered as simple societies which were at a lower stage of evolution.As the universe of study of Sociology was complex societies which was at that time grappled with profound changes in every aspect of life.These characteristic of complex societies reflected in area of interest also which was designated as conflict,deviance,movements etc.As these societies has evolved through historical process,HIstorical Approach was considered suitable.Whereas Social Anthropology has to study the small scale agarian and tribal societies which have hardly under went any major changes the area of interest revolved around kinship,religion,caste and village communties.The methodology adopted was Functionalist approach and field work.These diffference of Social Anthroplogy and Sociology are increasing getting blurred with the emergence of new nation states which reflects the dualistic character and encompasses features of both Traditional and modern industrial societies.Thus requires both Sociological and social anthropological approach.Convergence is also reflected in borrowing the meothodologies as reflect in the work of Social Anthropologist such as Block,Sodder and Godelier which has increasingly used the Marxist Approach and adoptation of functionalist approach by Parsons and Merton in Sociolgy.With rapid Changes in both simple and complex societies, the distinction between them is precipitating which compled both the discipline to converge as faras the subject matter is concern. vayamvayam September 201317.Do you agree with the view that Sociology can never be a science?What limitations need to be taken into consideration in the scientific study of social phenomena?Sociology developed at a time in history when social ills viz poverty had plagued society.It also needs to be mentioned that it was happening in the backdrop of the new advancements and theories e.g Galileo's and Darwin's in the field of science(which itself as a term became famous in the renaissance period).August Comte,claimed the father of sociology,had defined sociology as the science of society.Sociologists such as Herbert Spencer(positivist),Emile Durkheim also followed the scientific line of thought in their respective studies.Science,which was classically defined as body of knowledge based on inter subjective reliability ,empiricism,experimental testability,objectivity and generalization of universal theories. However, as karl popper propounds ,later on it was largely accepted if any body of knowledge is pursued using scientific and rational methods of investigation, it could be posited as science.Sociology failed comparatively to establish itself as science in terms of the former definition whereas, scientific methods such as interviews,questionnaires etc are employed in the investigations.Therefore, Sociology has shed some of its scientific character in the classical terms.This becomes evident as new methods like symbolic investigationwhich gave more importance to meanings and motives of human beings instead of external observation gained steam in the recent past decades.The limitations faced in the study of sociology as a science runs alongside the demands of science i)Inter subjective reliability-Sociology has tried to establish theories w.r.t social institutions that are same for all people but conflicts have risen e.g. religion was explained differently by durkheim ,Marx and functionalists.ii)Objectivity-As Weber had said it is impossible to conduct the study without value.So, value neutrality becomes a major concerniii)Quantification and Universal laws -As Weber claimed,the subject matter of natural sciences do not have any consciousness,whereas human beings,the subject matter of sociology have consciousness;therfore, making it difficult to quantify the findings and establish universal laws. vayamvayam September 2013Pl read symbolic investigation line as "This becomes evident as new interactionist methods viz. symbolic interactionism , Ethnomethodology,which" preeti27preeti27 September 2013Sociology without history is rootless and history without sociology is fruitless.The relationship between sociology and history is more of a complementary nature where both serve each other. History with its specificity and sociology with its generalizations aid each other in better understanding of dynamic social structures.History is mainly concerned with past events. It is systematic record of the story of mankind. History presents a chronological account of past events of the human society whereas sociology is mainly concerned with study of contemporary societies. It is therefore in this context that Prof G.E. Howard said History is past sociology and sociology is present historyHistorical methods have been largely employed by many sociologists to validate their social theories. Historical methods essentially mean using historical data and comparative analysis to study changes, evolution and emergence of new social structures.Karl Marx had utilized historical method in conjunction with dialectical materialism to understand evolution and emergence of social classes in various societies which include primitive-communism, slavery, feudalism, capitalism and socialism. Similarly Max weber had resorted to historical method for tracing the emergence of capitalism in Europe in his book Protestant Ethic and the spirit of capitalism.Whereas history provides with much needed facts and data to sociologists, sociology with its theoretical perspectives give insight into the social fabric. The historians need social background for writing and analyzing history and this is provided by the sociologists. The study of History would be meaningless without the appreciation of sociological significance. History becomes meaningful in the social content.These two streams though distinct in their mode of inquiry, support each other in the larger context and therefore John Seely rightly says that" History without Sociology has no fruit, Sociology without History has no root". aman8770aman8770 September 2Q6. How is emergence of sociology linked with modernisation of Europe?(It was of 60 marks but I am writing for 30 marks) (360- 380 words)Answer Modernisation - Europe during medieval period was undergoing total period of darkness. Renaissance period included developments which were a transition as shown below Medievel Europe ---->>> ----->>>> ---->>> Renaissance Periodo Absolute control of church ---->>> ----->>>> ---->>> Increasing Secularismo Feudal society --->> --->>> --->> Rise of middle class. Feudal society disintegrates. o Authoritarian Political system ---->>> ----->>>> ---->>> Rise of liberal democracyo Agricultural based economy ---->>> ----->>>> ---->>> Industrial EconomyNew scientific world view emerged which tried to view everything through a scientific angle, which was called modernity.Changes due to Modernity Modernity ---->>> ----->>>> ---->>> ChangesPolitical ---->>> ----->>>> ---->>> Democratic systemSocial --->---> --> Nuclear family, Secularisation, Industrial society, Improvement in status of womenEconomic---->>> ----->>>> ---->>> Rational organisation of production, Use of modern technology, Rise of new corporates, Rise of technology.Intellectual ---->>> ----->>>> ---->>> Faith in science, Logical enquiryProblems developing due to Modernity These changes of modernity although desirable were associated with new problems, or challenges The process of industrialisation brought new social problemso Poor working conditions for the workerso Nuclear families leading to domestic violence, frequent separationso Faith in religion decreasedo Absolute poverty- Denial of basic life needs of food, cloth, sheltero Survey in early 19th century Europe showed that poverty is socially created Rise of liberal democracy brought about its own problemso During French Revolution, changes were so abrupt that it brought a total chaos- People did not understand how it will work, and will they be better off. A number of groups emerged, which advocated going back to the Feudal system. Rise of middle class created structural divide in the society - The middle class was more demanding, more aspirational and could not be contained under the present system and was thus unhappy.Emergence of a Body of Knowledge All these developments could not be explained by the present bodies of knowledge. There was a need for another discipline, which could explain these changes, find solutions and may predict them also. Thus, emergence of sociology can be understood at 2 levels 1) General context- Rising problems due to industrial revolution and rising middle class.2) Immediate context was the French Revolution.Development of modern techniques such as survey method, interviews for studying social sciences scientifically helped the subject of Sociology grow scientifically.Sociology was, thus, first conceptualised by French philosophers "Saint Simon" and "August Comte" during the late 18th century.{pardon the editing, as I had written my answer in MS-Word, and lost all the formatting here, that's why those arrows above }---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8. Write short note: Sociology as a science of society.The founding forefathers of sociology recognized it as the supreme science dealing with most complex things called Human beings. They tried and develop hierarchy of science and put sociology at the top of it crowning it as queen of all science but it remain subjected to acrimonious debate not be concluded and still going .Positivist see sociology as a science based on the use of objective observation, search for correlations, causal relationships and laws using inductive approach. Popper went to the extent of arguing that as science cannot claim the theory to be truth as it is always possible to get it falsified later on so in true sense any theory can claim to be getting nearer to the truth and thus scientific sociology is not only possible but also desirable.On the other hand Phenomenologist rejects the idea of scientific sociology because according to them the social world cannot be objectively classified and measured and all classification reflects the subjective categories. Kuhn arguing on the line of scientific paradigm claim that since science commit itself to a particular paradigm as a rule and anomalies are exception, sociology as general has variety of paradigm such as Marxism, Functionalism etc thus it cannot claim to be science and if anything it is pre scientific discipline.Again some sociologist like Kalpan, lynch and Gomm argues that the experiments of science also takes place in the social context and only those theory gets acceptance which confirms to prevailing societal values like Darwins theory of evolution get accepted because other societal values like capitalism, laissez fare economy it was fitted.Thus the distinction between sociology and science is false as theory originating from both will have to confirm the societal values in order to get the acceptance. Realist like Bhaskar and sayer also believe that it is both possible and desirable to sociology to be scientific and see physical and social science as similar to each other. Thus the debate still going on. maestromaestro September 2013Sociology as an interpretative disciplineDefinition: Interpretive sociology is a theoretical perspective based on the idea that a sociological understanding of behavior must include the meaning that social actors give to what they and others do. When people interact, they interpret what is going on and this is what gives social life its patterned quality.Background: The positivistic approach to sociology tends to assume that society can shape the behavior of its members almost completely through socialization.However there is a section of sociologists(Non-positivists) who regards the above view as an attempt to reduce man to a passive being. They seek to reflect the pattern of meaning in a set of observation they have made and emphasize on the importance of underlying meanings in order to understand social behavior.Max Weber (1864-1920) was the founder of "interpretive (Verstehen ) sociology". According to him, sociology makes critical interpretations on social action. Weber argues that social reality is characterized by "geist" or "consciousness". Due to the presence of consciousness, people ascribe meaning to the situations around them which include other people too. The meaning influence the subsequent behaviour. Consequently, any attempt to understand social reality must take into account these meaning and motives. The meaning ascribed by the people are partly determined by the cultural norms and partly shaped by the individual actors. Another school of thought is Symbolic Interactionism who believe that it is through symbols(eg: language) that meanings, motives and attributes are conveyed. Thus an understanding of symbols can help in understanding the meanings conveyed by actors involved in the interacting situation.The methodology of symbolic interactionism as advocated by Herbert Blumer demands that the sociologist must attempt to grasp the actor's view of social reality. Since action is directed by actor meanings the sociologist must catch the process of interpretation through which the actors construct their action. This means, he must take the role of the acting unit whose behaviour he studies.There is another set of sociologists identified as Ethnomethodologists who try to analyze the commonsense nature of social interactions. They say that the aim of sociology should not be simply to identify and record the meanings that people have ascribed to situation but to understand the ways in which they generate those meanings in the first place. The emphasis is upon the study of ways in which people in actual situation of interaction come to see what the other person is meaning. Method of Research: The account of information which interpretative sociologists require to substantiate their analysis is quite different from the information needed by positivistic sociologists even those methods of data collection which are used by positivist sociologist are also made use of by interpretative sociologist. Eg: Weber relied on official statistical records and historical documents in his study of 'The Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism' accompanied by extensive verbatim recording of conversational exchange among the actors involved.The other methods of data collection used by interpretative sociologists include the case-studies, use of life histories, personal diaries and correspondence and other biographical records to provide insights into the subjective dimension of the social behaviour. maestromaestro September 201311) Highlight the problem of objectivity and value-neutrality in Social Research. Elaborate, with suitable examples, the limitations associated with the tools of measurement in Social Science Research.Sociology being a science aspires for the goal objectivity but it continues to be an elusive goal at the practical level. All research is guided by certain viewpoints which involve subjectivity. 1)The ideological biases acquired in the course of education and training has a bearing on the choice of the topic of research. 2)Subjectivity can also creep in at the time of formulation of hypotheses. All sociological theories are limited to particular groups whose viewpoints and interests they represent. Thus formulation of hypotheses will automatically introduce a bias in the sociological research. 3)Another level at which subjectivity creeps in the course of research is that of collection of empirical data. No technique of data collection is perfect. In case of participant observation the observer acquires a bias in favour of the group he is studying. While in non-participant observation of the sociologist belongs to a different group than that under study he is likely to impose his values and prejudices. In all societies there are certain prejudices which affect the research studies. In case of interview as a technique the data may be influenced by context of the interview, the interaction of the participants, and participant's definition of the situation and if adequate rapport does not extend between them there might be communication barriers.Eg:MN Srinivas has written that in doing village studies using direct observation method, he was treated as a brahmin and thereby looked up at suspicion by the resident non-brahmins in the village and thereby his research was not able to maintain value -neutrality as the responses are biased based on the researcher's caste.Weber also admitted that complete objectivity cannot be attained in sociological research, so to overcome this problem he asked the researcher to go for subjective understanding of objective reality thereby giving a balance between fact and value.In that manner though there is a bit of subjectivity involved in deciding the topic of research but while conducting research he should not be influence by subjective understanding of individual's preferences where he need to maintain objectivity.Thus sociology cannot be completely value free which is also not desired. maestromaestro September 2013@ aman8770 i couldn't assign questions yesterday(though being my turn) due to ganesh chaturdi n being very busy...can i assign questions today?? aman8770aman8770 September 2013@maestroFirst of all check your inbox to get access to the group folder.Question assignment is not a big issue but let it go in a circular fashion so next is the turn of M 6 and after that M 1 and so on.Find attachment for giving today's assignment. It is little bit unclear at some places but for today's assignment giving task it is fit. ShkkShkk September 2013Q5. Comment on the reasons why neo-idealists and symbolic interactionists are critical of 'positivism' in Sociology. (2009, 30Marks) Answer The positivists initial viewpoint that what can be seen is real was challenged by idealists viewpoint that what can be thought is real. Idealists put forward the case of religion, motivation, altruism etc. which cannot be seen yet influence an individual.The positivist assumptions of early Sociologists were in turn questioned by the idealists tradition mainly drawing from Hermeneutics which implies the study of interpretation. This was in contrast to positivists ideology of emphasizing only on macro aspects of phenomenons.George Herbert Meads book Mind, Self and Society, 1932 suggested views which were critical of positivism. He laid the foundation of Symbolic Interactionism representing a transition from positivism. He advocated that-- Every social action is a result of interaction; these interactions form the basis of social reality.- Peoples behavior in a particular situation should be interpreted based on socialization and role play.This contradicted the earlier stance of positivists that an individual is merely a receiver in the society. Cooley in his theory of looking-glass self has furthered the criticism on positivism by emphasizing on symbolic interactionism.Also, the idealist school received new impetus in various ideologies which developed in response to criticism of positivism. These neo-idealists pointed towards various drawbacks in positivism such as - Alfred Schutz had a view that every phenomenon is subjected to multiple meanings and thus one generalization is not applicable across societies as advocated by positivists.- Harold Garfinkel suggested that reality must be studied from peoples perspective and not from a researchers perspective as suggested by positivists.Further neo-idealists - rejected the use of any particular method,- denied the possibility of any theory,- pointed to irrelevance of testability and - futility of objectivity, though subjectivity was also not desired. Although in the present context much of the enthusiasm or obsession for positivism is lost but it remains a perspective which provided initial motivation for Sociology to establish and develop as a distinct body of knowledge.You can also subscribe my channel/page "Sleepy Classes" on youtube. All the best :) vayamvayam September 201320. Short notes on Comparative method in Sociology.Right since the inception of the subject,different methods have been employed by sociologist to study the society and comparative method happens to be one of them.Broadly comparative method has been defined as method in which different societies or different groups within the same society are compared.However, August Comte ,claimed,the father of sociology,has used the comparison of human and non-human characteristics in his sociological study.This same line of research had been taken forward by Herbert Spencer in his evolutionary approach .However,Comparative method is not a method confined only to sociology, it has been used by different social sciences, such as philosophy,political science in their respective study. In the realm of sociology it gained currency with the 19th century when different sociologists like Durkheim(Division of labour, Suicide), Spencer(evolutionary view of society),used the method in their research work. Durkheim,in his work, rules of sociological method,has clearly set out the significance of comparative method.He claims that ,social explanation consists entirely on establishing causal connection.In the case of natural sciences, the same could be achieved by using experimentally verifiable results.But sociology do not have any such direct method and comparative method could be used as a method of indirect experiment.Durkheim's work "Division of labour in soceity", has compared the legal systems of different societies, and tested that an increase in the division of labour is accompanied by a change in the nature of social integration or solidarity.Similarly,in "Suicide",Durkheim compares cultural & social norms of different societies in order to establish their connection with the rate of suicide. Max weber has also used the comparative method in his work"Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism" by comparing religious belief of different societies and how those beliefs engendered capitalism in some societies and the contrary in others.So, it is evident that comparative method has been in vogue among sociologists but the method has also been subjected to criticism. Critics claim that what appears to be similar institutions in different societies may be very different in different settings and therefore, comparative method should be confined to comparison of similar societies. vayamvayam September 2013AllotmentIn order for wider coverage,I have clubbed the shorter questions together(write accordingly) M1 Q no. 3 & 6 M2 Q no. 2 & 8M3 Q no. 4M4 Q no. 7M5 Q no.11M6 Q no 12 & 15@aman8770 I have not received your email aman8770aman8770 September 2013@ all answer writing group MembersAre any of you interested in working collectively for GS .If yes than i have very good and feasible plan .Right now for IR portion which will cover everything for the current mains till now.Time required is 10 to 15 hours if everybody is ready (for this particular section IR) ouput will be comprehensive notes covering everything for IR.Plan will be discussed and notes will be shared among the participating member only.Thank you aman8770aman8770 September 2013@ vayamAre you saying you don't have access to group folder of answer writing if yesthen drop your email id in my forumias inbox. vayamvayam September 2013@aman8770 Pl check , I have sent the msg aman8770aman8770 September 2013@vayamI think you have access to the group folder even then i have added you again . Check your email. vayamvayam September 2013@aman8770 Ty mate aman8770aman8770 September 2013@all members of answer writing groupTo clarify my point what i am talking about in the context of IR I have uploaded my self made notes from The Hindu and other news papers on Indo Sri Lanka relationMy purpose is not to make bulky notes but mere around 70 pages of whole important current affair notes of IR which will be made by us only by the full proof method( which i will tell )so that we will not miss any thing important in IR for mains Most importantly this can be done in not more than 10 to 12 hours and after that we will not need any crap coaching notes in this regard.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Q. Importance and sources of - Hypothesis in social research.Social research refers to a systematic study of ones chosen subject for arriving at both new and valid conclusions. A theory is formulated on the facts collected and hypothesis is generated. Thus hypothesis is a deductive statement which needs to be proved inductively.The importance of hypothesis is that the reliability of a theory lies in the testability of its hypothesis. A hypothesis needs to be empirically validated for a reliable theory. The hypothesis-testing model seeks to find generalizable result which can be applied universally. An example can be Emilie Durkheims study of suicide which tries to establish a theory about suicide rates from the available suicide statistics.Source of hypothesis is in the theory construction itself. Theoretical research leads to preparation of conceptual frame that helps in systemizing, classifying and interrelating relevant data. In quantitative research hypothesis tries to establish a relation between two variables i.e. independent and dependent variable. To test the hypothesis, it has to be exposed to a situation that can show it to be false. If hypothesis survives the effort then it is proved true and theory is established.However, a hypothesis only posits a logical relationship between phenomena and may not correspond to every case. Similarly all social science variables are not capable of being measured statistically. Still hypothesis has come in handy in establishing relation between measurable variables, thus aiding social research significantly. ShkkShkk September 2013@preeti27 -The question you have just uploaded was alloted to me. Looks like there's some confusion. I'm M2 and I was given Q2, 8 today. Nevertheless, I'll do your questions (of M1's).You can also subscribe my channel/page "Sleepy Classes" on youtube. All the best :) horizon_21horizon_21 September 2013@aman8770 count me also for IR preeti27preeti27 September 2013@Shkk really sorry...I got confused...nyway u can definitely give inputs to my answer... ShkkShkk September 2013@preeti27 -It was Q8 of Chapter 3.And I was given Q2 as well. So you do that as well. I'll do your questions. Ok with you?You can also subscribe my channel/page "Sleepy Classes" on youtube. All the best :) ShkkShkk September 2013@preeti27 -Also you have not yet submitted your previous assignment :Topic : Sociology as Science M1 : Q4.Please do that as well. It's an important question.You can also subscribe my channel/page "Sleepy Classes" on youtube. All the best :) ShkkShkk September 2013@aman8770 -Now we have 4 people for IR.You, me, @vayam and @horizon_21We can start a new page to collaborate or you can suggest otherwise.You can also subscribe my channel/page "Sleepy Classes" on youtube. All the best :) preeti27preeti27 September 2013@shkkyes I would do them.. preeti27preeti27 September 2013@shkkwhat u ppl r doing for the ethics paper.As in thr r lot of case studies available but I am unable to find theory part.Any book to follow...I m totally clueless abt it. aman8770aman8770 September 2013@All Regarding IRFirst of all let me tell you people very confidently that what i am suggesting for IR is very much useful for our purpose as i have well researched the thing before implementing it.In general studies you need to know the source from where question is coming and remember it can not be any coaching material neither any guide book so it will be something very common like NCERT IGNOU and other's commonly available material to name a few so what we need to do is to find out for particular section where is the source and after confirming it's credibility we can well read it from there only to get maximum out put and that is what i am doing.As people are asking about what to read in ethics ,looking at the sample paper i think they are going to ask two things concept and their application now look at the syllabus and try to note down all the concept at one place and read them from any where , application part need to be practiced by your own or you can well find some suitable case studies some where In the end i would like to acknowledge you the fact that all the coaching and other people are doing guess work this year and it is done by the people who don't understand UPSC so why not do the same thing by ourselves at least we know the UPSC better by the virtue of the fact that we have been preparing it for the long time and have personal experience of it.All the people showing interest for IR would be contacted by today evening and we don't need any separate thread for it.Thank you horizon_21horizon_21 September 2013Write short note : A good HypothesisIn any Scientific Methodology ,tentative statement is formulated which postulate logical determinate relationship between two or more aspect of reality.These tentative statement are called hypothesis and these aspects of reality are called variables.Such formulated hypothesis is tested with observable data which if proven becomes thesis and proven more often then called Theory.In common parlance a hypothesis is a mere assumption or some supposition to be proved or disproved. But in a research study a hypothesis is a formal question that the researcher intends to resolve. Hypothesis is usually considered as the principal instrument is research. So it should be good and supported by some evidence. A research hypothesis should be good if it must possess certain characteristics such as It should be clear,precise and properly state the relationship between the variables..It mus be testable and falsifiable i.e rejectable with observable data,besides test of verifiability of any hypothesis lies in test of potential falsifiability.Hypothesis should make use of concepts which can be operationalized.The reliability of a Theory rest on the Testability of its hypothesis.Hypothesis is in this sense form the core over which validity of the Theory lies.This is supplement to the @preeti27 answer as her answer covers the basic part in elaborate manner. horizon_21horizon_21 September 2013Q. What are the uses of Bogardus social distance scale and of Likert scale ? DiscussThe Bogardus scale is a psychological testing scale created by Emory S. Bogardus to empricially measure social distances between various racial and ethnic groups.He followed seven relationships in serial order towards increasing social distance containing questions as would marry,close friends,will work in office etc and included 2 extreme relationship such as would allow only as a visitor to my country,would exclude them from my country etc.Respondants were given instruction to give their first reaction only in each case.After collecting the information from the respondants,percentage of actual response was calculated and was dipicted on graph.In the graph,the greater the height of curve,the smaller is the social distance.Similarly more steep the fall in reference to extreme questions,the less is the social distance.Bogardus applied this scale to measure the social distance of American in respect of other racial groups such as English,Swedish,Polos and Korean.He found that for English people the height of the curve was greatest and also there was steep fall in the curve while for the Korean it was opposite,thus indicating that social distance is sufficently great and there is strong feeling of aversion in the minds of American people for them.Thus Borgardus Scale introduced a new dimension in measurement of the Qualitative data using the statistical techniques.It opened up new avenue to disclosure inter-relatioinships in the society. Even though Borgardus Scale had its own limitation such as form of attitude towards a particular groups changes over time and first feeling might not convey the accurateresponse to a particular group as the response is formed after a deliberate thought process,it was widely used in the later researches.Likert Scale is also referred as "Technique of summated ratings".It is basically a attitude scale.Likert was the first to apply the method of internal consistency to attitude measurement.Likert scale make use of a series of propositions,expressing a wide range of attitude from extremely positive to extremely negative. Each proposition usually call for a response by using generally 5 words such as strongly approve,approve,undecided,disapprove ,strongly disapprove.Respondants are asked to register their response for the propositions.Then a total score for each respondant is calculated using either arbitary method or sigma method.Likert Scale is the most widely used approach to scaling responses in survey research.The most outstanding feature of this scale is its simplicity and reliablity.It has helped to quantify the social phenomena which was considered complex,intangible and therefore incapable of numerical expression .Quantitative description has afforded objective measurement and through which the exact magnititude of the problem can be known which is its greatest advantage.Thanked by 1vision009 aman8770aman8770 September 20134. What is subjective method in social research? Examine Focus Group Discussion (FGD) as a technique for Data collection, with suitable examples.Methodology in the social research is the process applied by social scientist in order to collect data and theory formulation in social science. Broadly some social scientist prefer to use scientific methods and collect quantitative data where as others see this process inappropriate to study human beings and thus go for qualitative data collection and apply subjective method for the research. Usually subjective method is seen to have more depth and associated with richer data collection in form of words as compared to statistics. Examples include Unstructured Interviews, Participant observation etcGroup interviews is a process similar to above mentioned process which is applied to make respondents more reflective and opened discussion. Focus Group Discussion(FGD) is a kind of group interviews which is often used by Social psychologist. According to Bryman they emphasize on the joint construction of meaning thus lead to in depth understanding of the issue. Focus groups can lead to greater probing of why people do things and they allow the researcher to observe how people do things and they allow the researcher to observe how people construct meaning in groups.They are generally favoured by interactionists and also seen as the more naturalistic way than one to one interviews as it allows people to retain their social setting in which they generally resides and thus gives better understanding of social reality. On the other hand some limitation of this method is also there as pointed out by social scientist as the answers given may be influenced by the most prominent members of the group and thus will render the method not fit for collecting systematic data.There are several examples where FGD is used some of them include study of open defecation by government specially in rural areas of the country, Opinion poll conducted by political parties before election (Recently AAP has conducted the pre poll opinion and it says that they are hopeful of getting 47% of people support).In conclusion it can be said that social reality is dynamic which required combination of different method to unravel it. aman8770aman8770 September 2013Find the attachment for the assignment of the day .I request M 1 (preeti 27) to take the lead.Also i request members to recognize and remember their membership id so that confusion can be avoidedplease try to do answer writing on daily basis and avoid any delay for your own benefit.also regarding unclear question in previous attachmentno 6 it is Theory of social change and reaction of functionalist to his views.no 11. short note on Alienation.no 17 it is social stratification.Other thing is fine i think but even then if any doubt in please post it here and also request people having question bank to help in this regard.Also i have uploaded compilation topic 2 in the group folder.Thank you aman8770aman8770 September 2013@AllFor IR work i have created a separate group folder and shared with the people interested (Including me 5 members)Please check it and if you people are ready show your intent here (send message in my forumias inbox)so that i can proceed further.Thank you vayamvayam September 201312.Write Short note: the limitations of Questionnaire as a technique of data collection.Ans: Questionnaire is one among the various methods used by sociologists for investigation in their sociological research. Questionnaire is a quantitative method of data collection,wherein,a set of questions in the same order is asked to a set of populace.They tend to take the form of structured InterviewTwo modes of Questionnaires:- 1.Open ended (respondents are free to answer , no limited set of options) 2. Closed - Fixed set of options to choose fromPractical Limitations of questionnaire:- i)Postal questionnaire- A set of questions are sent by post. The return rate in generally low in such questionnaires. There is a possibility of a biased result by virtue of response by a particular cross section of respondents.ii)Over Phone-In this mode ,disadvantaged groups tend to be underrepresented and it is difficult to ask sensitive questions to respondents over the phone. iii)Emailing- Not all the members of the society may be having access to internet and computers and this may result in a lopsided result of the questionnaire.Limitations raised by other schools of thoughti)Interactionist :-They have criticized the "statistical form of data collection such as questionnaires as inadequate in predicting human behaviouras they tend to ignore the meanings and motives that respondents attach with the questions in the questionnaire viz. the same question and options may be given different meaning and interpreted differently by the respondents.These meanings can't be predicted unless the researchers are present with the repondents.ii)Phenomenologists :- They go a step ahead and question the very concept of Questionnaire and criticise them as "artificial creation of researcher.To them , such methods tend to have a researcher-imposition , as the researcher impose their meanings and motives by way of "their" questions and options. Also, coding in case of open ended questions and operationisation of the concepts tend to have a character of researcher-imposition. Other Limitations:i)Respondents may lie, undermining the validity of the data.ii)It has limited use in attitudinal survey.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Q3. Short note on Reliability and Validity. (2011, 12 Marks)Answer Reliability It refers to the consistency of scores (or measurements). It is reflected in reproducibility of the scores. A test is