Sociology demonstrates the need to take a much broader view of why we

are as we are, and why we act as we do. It teaches us that what we

regard as natural, inevitable, good or true may not be such, and that the
givens of our life are strongly influenced by historical and social forces.
Understanding the subtle yet complex and profound ways in which our
individual lives reflect the contexts of our social experience is basic to the
sociological outlook.
A sociologist is someone who is able to break free from the immediacy of
personal circumstances and put things in a wider context.
The generality of this definition allows it to not only include all human
social activity, but to include other social phenomena such as micro and
macro social systems.
Based on these definitions, some sociologists have defined sociology as
the knowledge of social activity, while others have said that it is the
knowledge of social system.
Studding sociology will not change your life but it should change the way
you look at life, at people and at society, both in this country and
worldwide.
Provides knowledge of human social actions and allows for the prediction
of social actions, as well as their effects and consequences. Needless to
say, the predictions of sociology are much more complex and difficult to
come by than those of natural science, due to the fact that human actions
are intentional and consciously chosen.
It is due to these benefits and the fact that sociology are able to judge and
critique social actions that they provide sociologist the opportunity to
react appropriately and take correct stances vis--vis social phenomena.
It is usually classed as one of the social sciences (along with subjects like
psychology) and was established as a subject in the late 18th century
(through the work of people like the French writer Auguste Comte).
However, the subject has only really gained acceptance as an academic
subject in the 20th century through the work of writers such as Emile
Durkheim, Max Weber and Talcott Parsons.
One name that you may have heard of Karl Marx (the founder of
modern Communism) has probably done more to stimulate peoples

interest in the subject than anyone else, even though he lived and wrote
(1818 - 1884) in a period before Sociology became fully established as an
academic discipline.
With the establishment of positivism and the growth of the natural
sciences a new type of social science [sociology] that borrowed its
methodology from those sciences took shape.
The French revolution had introduced significant changes into society
and the growth of industrialization was altering the traditional to create a
science of society that could explain the laws of social world just as
natural science explained the functioning of the physical world.
Although Comte recognized that each scientific discipline has its own
subject matter, he believed that they all share a common logic and
scientific method aimed at revealing universal laws. Just as the discovery
of laws in the natural world allows us to control and predict events
around us, uncovering the laws that govern human society could help us
shape our destiny and improve the welfare of humanity.
The positive stage ushered in by the discoveries and achievements of
Copernicus, Galileo and Newton, encouraged the application of scientific
techniques to the social world.9 Comte regarded sociology as the last
science to develop, but as the most significant and complex of all
sciences.
In the late nineteenth century, mile Durkheim played a central role in
formally establishing sociology as a scientific discipline committed to the
systematic and empirical study of social facts.
Although Durkheim drew on aspects of Comte's writings, Durkheim
thought much of his work too speculative and vague, believing that
Comte had not successfully carried out his programme to establish
sociology on a scientific basis.
Comte's law of the three stages claims that human efforts to understand
the world have passed through theological stage; thoughts were guided by
religious ideas and the belief that society was an expression of God's will.
In his first major work, the division of labor in society (1893), Durkheim
presented an analysis of social change, which argued that the advent of
the industrial era meant the emergence of a new type of solidarity.

We can analyze the religious beliefs and customs of a society, for

example, by showing how they relate to other institutions within it, for
the different parts of a society develop in close relation to one another.
At the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries,
despite the fact that empirical methods were still considered to be the
main means of acquiring knowledge, more balanced approaches to
sociology came into currency.
Max Weber (d. 1920) was influenced by Dilthey and founded a new type
of sociology that relied less on the methodology of the natural sciences.
Much of his work was also concerned with the development of modern
capitalism and the ways in which modern society was different from
earlier forms of social organization.
In Weber's view, economic factors are important, but ideas and values
have just as much impact on social change.
These hypothetical constructions can be very useful, however, as any
situation in the real world can be understood by comparing it to an ideal
type.
It is important to point out that by 'ideal' type Weber did not mean that
the conception was a perfect or desirable goal.
Social action theories pay greater attention to the action and interaction of
members of society in forming structures that underpin society and
influence human behaviour. Here, the role of sociology is seen as
grasping the meaning of social action and interaction rather than in
explaining what forces external to people cause them to act the way they
do.
It was different from that of natural science and hence could not be
known simply by observation and experimentation. Rather, he proposed
that the subject was meaningful behaviour and actions that could only be
known by understanding or interpreting their meanings.
Weber, scientific or positivist sociology, precisely due to its empirical
nature, cannot provide value judgments; it cannot assess the social ideals
and values of different societies, nor can it speak with any authority about
a possible utopia.

Purpose: The ultimate purpose of interpretive sociology is not to critique

and make judgment of the values of a social system, but rather to
understand social phenomena so as to be able to predict and control it.
At the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries
sociology started to distance itself from the natural sciences because it
was realized that the subject matter of the two is divergent.
Critical sociology or critical theory is often used very loosely to include
thinkers like Foucault, the post structuralists or those influenced by
Nietzsche, Marx and Freud, and indeed some even go so far as to apply
the term to almost any critical approach to the humanities at all.
With their humane sensitivity, the Early Frankfurt School members were
appalled by the political events around them and sought refuge in what
they perceived as an institution of like-minded colleagues.
From among his many seminal works, those of particular note for critical
theorists are his earlier more philosophical studies including The German
Ideology, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts, Communist Manifesto
and A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy.
The ideas of Karl Marx contrast sharply with those of Comte and
Durkheim, but like them, he sought to explain the changes that were
taking place in society during the time of the industrial revolution.
Most of his work concentrated on economic issues, but since he was
always concerned to connect economic problems to social institutions, his
work was, and is, rich in sociological insights.
Capitalism is a system of production that contrasts radically with
previous economic orders in history, involving as it does the production
of goods and services sold to a wide range of consumers. ... The mass of
the population make up a class of wage work, or working class, who do
not own the means of their own livelihood, but have to find employment
provided by the owners of capital.
Many conflict theorists trace their views back to the writings of Marx,
whose work emphasized class conflict but Weber has also influenced
some.

Critical sociology and the sociological views prevalent at the end of the
twentieth century differ from the sociology of the nineteenth century in
terms of subject matter, methodology, and purpose.
Subject matter: Critical sociology, just like interpretive sociology, does
not see its subject matter to be of the type used in natural science.
Purpose: Critical sociology is not just an instrumental science so as to be
limited to social facts and serving the status quo, or to the prediction or
prevention of social activity. Rather, it is a science that makes value
judgments on social norms and provides prescriptions for moving on
from the status quo towards more ideal states.
Before the dominance of materialism, some thinkers from the Muslim
world, such as Frb and Ibn Sn, and before them some Greek
philosophers, such as Aristotle, classified the sciences according to their
subject matters.
Practical philosophy on the other hand included all those sciences whose
subject matter is produced by means of human cognition and will.
The above divisions show that Muslim thinkers, and some Greek
philosophers, were not only aware of human and social sciences, but were
also aware of the distinctions between these sciences and the theoretical
sciences of natural science, mathematics, and metaphysics.
Muslim thinkers have traditionally been aware of the difference in subject
matter of the practical and theoretical sciences and hence have never held
social science to be akin to natural science.
This branch of sociology realized the need to transcend the level of
empirical and instrumental science and felt the need to reach a higher
level of knowledge that would enable it to make value judgments. But
then it came across a stumbling block; as it was not able to discern a
criterion of judgment that is both higher than the social and historical
effects of man, and that is universally valid.
But philosophers and thinkers, who, alongside sensible and experimental
means, include the intellect as an independent source of knowledge and
cognitive content, are not faced with this problem and are able to make
judgments regarding values and norms without much difficulty.

This intellect, with the help of the senses, uses empirical methods to
acquire knowledge of natural existents; and without any help from the
senses, uses abstractive methods to acquire knowledge of mathematical
and metaphysical facts or principles.
Hence when social science uses the full potential of the intellect and
revelation, it becomes able to make judgments about social values and
norms based on true knowledge and proper science.
Not only does the practical intellect resolve sociologys difficulties vis-vis value judgments and prescriptions, it sheds light on the enigma of the
difference between social and human phenomena on the one hand and
natural phenomena on the other.
We saw earlier that practical science, which includes the human and
social sciences, applies itself to those things and matters that come about
by human cognition and volition.
These mentally posited phenomena are studied in the practical science
that is in the human and social sciences.
For the most part we are oblivious to the knowledge and awareness that
enables us to carry out our day-to-day tasks. When we consider some of
these tasks such as walking, talking, driving, greeting friends, shopping,
or any other task we think that we do these things automatically and
without any special knowledge, or that the knowledge involved in them is
not very important.
When you enter the house of the host, your awareness is especially
heightened and you become self-conscious of every act you do and how
the strangers there will perceive it. This leads us to the conclusion that all
of our social actions as well are done with some type of knowledge.
This body of common awareness is known as common knowledge and is
that common store of facts and knowledge that is used when we interact
with others in our society.
We human beings, upon entering a social world that is inhabited by
others, share a body of knowledge and awareness with them
We normally become aware of air and its importance for us when there is
a drastic change in it, or when we have a problem in using it.

For instance, when we meet a group of people who do not speak the same
language as we do, we become aware of the knowledge that we have of
our own language and its differences with the other language.
Solving problems: We saw that man becomes aware of common
knowledge only when a difficulty arises during its use.
Hence when an issue is raised in the public sphere, it affords the
opportunity for progress and advancement in the sciences.
Supporting research: Depending on the beliefs and values ingrained in
any body of common knowledge, it can play a supporting role for
cognitive researches.
Preventing research: Depending on the beliefs and values ingrained in a
particular culture and its common knowledge, cognitive research is
discouraged. If the beliefs and values of the public are not compatible
with some sciences or even all sciences, then they will prevent research
into and proliferation of those sciences.
The influenza virus causes illness; a decrease in a commodity causes an
increase in its price; two plus two is four. These are all examples of
cognitive and scientific facts and laws.
All societies accept and support those sciences that they need and that are
not in opposition to their beliefs and values. And they reject those
sciences that they either do not need or which are opposed to their values.
Some cultures reject cognitive knowledge entirely, while others do not
accept any belief until it has been verified by a cognitive or scientific
approach.
But because they are not able to reason, it becomes possible for man to
sometimes use those super senses of animals to set traps for them. The
animal that gets caught in one of these traps is not able to escape from it,
despite the fact that the trap is extremely simple.
Rational knowledge is acquired when man applies discursive thought and
demonstration to things that he has previously sensed or to natural
phenomena that are supra sensible.
Demonstration and reasoning when it pertains to sensible things is called
empirical reasoning, and when it pertains to non-sensible or supra-

sensible realities it is called abstract reasoning or non-empirical

reasoning.
The instruments, source, and methodology of intuitive knowledge are
different from that of sensorial and rational knowledge.
The instruments of intuitive knowledge are the heart and inner being of
man; he comes to have awareness of many material and immaterial
realities by recourse to his inner self and without using sensorial or
rational means. For instance, certain animals are able to distinguish a
friendly person from a hostile one at a single glance and without any
previous experience.
Revelation in its special sense is a type of intuitive knowledge that is
particular to the prophets of God and is for the purpose of the guidance of
mankind.
In a particular period of its history, the modern social world due to
reasons that can be traced to its common knowledge and cultural
predilections gave preference to this part of cognitive knowledge.
In this subject of science you learned about fields of study that depended
upon sensory data acquired from the natural or physical realm by means
of experimentation and observation.
What this division and difference in terminology means is that cognitive
or scientific knowledge is that knowledge that can be either affirmed or
negated by way of the senses.
Limiting the meaning of science to empirical science is a relatively new
phenomenon whose history, even in the Western world, does not go back
very far; in fact it goes back to only the second half of the nineteenth
century.
Whats more, the senses are the material instruments of human
knowledge, and when they were used concertedly, they helped man to
gain mastery and dominance over the natural world.
Limiting the cognitive knowledge of society to empirical knowledge is
itself a social phenomenon that appeared in a certain period of the history
of the Western social world.

In a world that for particular cultural and historical reasons limited the
cognitive to empirical knowledge, the knowledge of society itself become
limited to its empirical aspects. In the nineteenth century, when
empiricism and sensationalism were ascendant, sociology, using the
method of experimentation, treated its subject matter as if it was a natural
or physical phenomenon.
Auguste Comte (d. 1857), a positivist philosopher and systemiser of
sociology, held the opinion that any knowledge that is not acquired by the
senses and experimentation is not cognitive or scientific.
The dominance of empiricism meant that the vast majority of the
knowledge of human society that existed in the past on account of it not
having used empirical methods and of having used rational devices was
now considered unscientific.
A purely sensorial and empirical approach to the social sciences, like
empiricism itself, did not last for more than a century in the modern
world.
The problem with this approach of the critical sociologists was that when
they brought common knowledge came to the fore, they drove cognitive
knowledge into the background and made any representation of the latter
dependent upon the changing common mind of society.
In the general sense, it refers to the faculty that is responsible for any and
all types of awareness or knowledge that is the result of the researches of
the human mind.
The intellectual cum rational approach to social sciences is only possible
in those cultures that accept rational knowledge as a valid means of
science.
What does the intellectual mean or rational social sciences are those
sciences that make use of the intellect in the specific sense both the
theoretical and the practical intellect. This type of social science is
particular to those societies that accept this level of intellectuality as a
valid means of cognitive content. In the Islamic as well as the Hellenic
world the theoretical and the practical intellect were given prominence
and it is for this same reason that rational expositions of social
phenomena exist in them.

In societies where empiricism is dominant, or in cultures where common

knowledge has taken the place of the theoretical and practical intellects,
rational social sciences cannot exist.
Rational social science, with recourse to the theoretical intellect, is able to
apply itself to the spiritual dimensions of man and the world and,
consequently, to discern human perfections and felicity. Moreover,
rational social science with the help of sensorial data and the empirical
intellect, as well as the aid of common knowledge and collective
consciousness, can access the instrumental sciences that are needed to
manage social phenomena.
The rational approach also does not reduce the theoretical and practical
intellects to the level of common knowledge and hence allows for the
cognitive knowledge of different societies and cultures.
One drawback to the rational approach occurs in that situation where it
limits knowledge to only the rational and does not validate empirical and
intuitive means of acquiring knowledge.
The supernatural beings of the mythological realm though are not
referred to the One Absolute being, but rather, are seen as multiple and
multifarious gods.
They accommodate their actions to demonic inspirations and mythical
themes; meaning that all their social interactions are guided by and victim
to the whims and vagaries of a pantheon of idols and gods.
In such a world, all levels of intellectuality are rejected other than the
common knowledge based upon the historical heritage of their ancestors.
This is because the man given to myths dominates the natural world by
recourse to supernatural forces and their associated occult sciences such
as magic, sorcery, and astrology.
The Absolute is Perfect and free of all defects, such as ignorance or
impotence, and free of perfections that are limited, such as limited
knowledge or limited power.
This Being has many names that indicate the perfections held, such as:
Omniscient, almighty, living, sustainer, holy, but the name Allah is the
one that indicates all of these perfections.

This type of unity and unicity of God implies that all other things are not
independent of His knowledge, will, and other attributes.
The revelatory knowledge of the prophets speaks to the issues that man
encounters in this world and that pertain to his culture and common
knowledge of reality. The prophets came to solve the problems of man
and to free him from impediments that social systems place in the way of
his growth and sublimity. Divine revelation, while it addresses itself to
the natural and social problems of mankind, does not by this reason base
itself in the natural order or on common human knowledge.
As for common knowledge that is based on hindsight and the scientific
heritage of ancestors, they see it as valid only to the extent that it does not
oppose the various cognitive levels of rational knowledge or revelatory
knowledge.
It is because of this that all sciences, without exception, are nothing but
the knowledge of Gods signs. The natural sciences apply themselves to
the external or natural signs, while the human sciences apply themselves
to the internal or human signs, and the social sciences apply themselves
to the social signs of God.
In the same way that the Quran calls on man to deliberate upon the
phenomena of the natural order, it calls on him to be observant of the
phenomena of the social order as well.
The Quran also provides some elements and facts of social knowledge to
man by way of revelation. Some of the sciences that the Quran teaches
man by way of revelation are sciences that procure his felicity; they are
sciences that cannot be learned by empirical or rational means. God
speaks to His prophet about this type of knowledge by saying, and He has
taught you what you could not have known.
Quranic social knowledge, because it is based on revelation and the full
range of the levels of the intellect, it is not limited to simple observation
or a mere description of social laws, but rather, it includes prescriptions
with regards to values and norms, as well as grounded criticism.

In accordance with the unitive perspective of the Quran with respect to

man and the world, it has paints a unique picture of human society, going
on to promulgate the laws and principles that animate societies.
The life of a society: Every society is the outcome of the work of human
beings and is as a living organism that has laws of its own.
...The centrality of truth in a unitive society: A unitive or Taw hid society
accords with mans original human nature and paves the way for the
spiritual felicity and the eternal life of man. Such a society does not
revolve around the beliefs and customs of its ancestors, but rather, by a
rational critique of the history of its ancestors and by taking lesson from
them, it is cantered around the truth.
Tests and tribulations: Human beings create a social system by means of
freely willed actions [based on limited knowledge].
The clouds in the sky are moving, the water in the river is flowing, trees
give fruit, blood circulates in the arteries of a human being, farmers sow
seeds and reap harvest, and we too are busy with our daily activities. ...
A writer or an artist, for instance, composes an article or produces a work
of art only after having consciously conceived of the work at hand, and
then applying his will towards its realization.
Given the above definition of human activity, it is clear that many of the
activities and movements that take place within the human body cannot
be considered as human activity. Hence involuntary acts such as the
beating of the heart of a man, or the growth of the cells in his body, are
not called human activity because they are not self-conscious acts of the
will.
But if we were to become unaware with respect to the words that we
speak and their meanings, we would not be able to converse.
The difference between the two can be understood by noting that it is
possible that a person is aware and cognizant of the correctness of an act,
but does not willfully choose to do it; or conversely, he is aware of the
incorrectness of an act, but he chooses to do it.
Or, for example, when a student raises his hand in class, this implies that
he is seeking permission from the teacher.

For example, a person acts differently during childhood than he does in

his adult years, or, for instance, his demeanor varies, depending upon
whether he is among friends or strangers.
Involuntary: This type does not depend on the will of the agent, and is a
natural consequence.
In this example, the act of learning is an involuntary and natural
consequence of his action of studying.
The social nature of a human act is on account of the fact that its
accompanying cognizance and willing takes into consideration others and
their particularities or actions.
Similarly, a person does not normally start singing in the middle of the
road, this is because he assumes that passers-by might object or at least
give him funny looks. Hence such a person might choose to sing in the
shower, or in a place that is appropriate for such an act. Sometimes there
are no other people around to observe the act, but the human agent takes
them into consideration nonetheless for instance when a person climbs
the wall of someone elses house in the middle of the night.
Of course, the routines we follow from day to day are not identical, and
our patterns of activity at weekends usually contrast with those on
weekdays. And if we make a major change in our life, like leaving
college to take up a job, alterations in our daily routines are usually
necessary; but then we establish a new and fairly regular set of habits
again.
For example: A social norm is that type of social activity that has gained
public acceptance; and social values are those values that are accepted,
esteemed and cherished by one and all in any given society. If there
were no social activity, then no norm would take shape; and similarly,
none of the social ideals and values, such as truth, justice, security,
freedom, or felicity, would be realized.
The above can be illustrated by a simple example: Let us suppose that a
person is all-alone in a room and starts to smoke a cigarette. The act of
smoking now becomes a social activity, and, as such, is susceptible to
norms and values. He can now honor the right of others to unpolluted air
(an introduction of a value) by putting out his cigarette (an inception of a
norm).

Once social norms and values are implemented by way of social activity
whether by teaching and inculcation or by external sanctions such as
rewards and punishments the phenomena of socialization and social
control come into play. Hence, educating people about how harmful
smoking is and prohibiting it in public spaces are examples of these two
social phenomena.
The ways in which people live their everyday lives are greatly affected by
the broader institutional framework, as is obvious when the daily cycle of
activities of a traditional culture is compared with life in an industrialized
urban environment.
While we may choose to send an acquaintance an e-mail message on the
Internet, we can also choose to fly thousands of miles to spend the
weekend with a friend.
We would not build up a picture of the whole corporation in this way,
since some of its business is transacted through printed materials, letters,
the telephone and computers.
One of the most important differences is that the method and order seen
between the different members of the social world is not a natural,
existential, or mechanistic phenomenon, but something that has come
about as a result of human awareness and willpower.
Laborers, farmers, students, teachers, as well as social sub-systems such
as the educational system, the family... are all parts and members of the
social world.
Whenever a generation is not able to protect its culture and is not able to
pass it on to the following generation, the social world of that generation
either collapses or changes
We know for certain that earthquakes or droughts are physical
phenomena belonging to the world of nature, and hence from this
perspective they are not a part of the social world.
Hence earthquakes, droughts, and harsh climatic conditions are
phenomena belonging to the natural world, but due to the connection they
have with mans social life and actions, they are considered to be a part of
the social world.

Division according to social system: Last year you learned about the
concept of social system and came to understand that social facts and
phenomena can be divided according to the social system or sub-system
that they belong to.
Social scientists use this criterion to create a continuum ranging from
whole societies (or even more macroscopic world systems) on one end, to
social systems, and finally to the social acts of individuals on the other
end.
On one end of the continuum are those phenomena that are more sensible
or material, such as residential and office buildings or external actions; on
the other end are those phenomena that are purely subjective, such as
beliefs, ideals, and social values.
Some parts or social units are easily changed and the changes are not very
consequential for society at large, while other can even be eliminated
without this posing a danger to the subsistence of the social world.
Finally, there are those parts that, if changed, bring about fundamental
changes to the social world, such that it becomes a new world altogether.
Those parts and units of the social world that are more open to change
and that are not fundamental to it are called the superficial layers of the
social world.
There are social units and phenomena in the deepest layers of the social
world that have profound and far-reaching effects on the other
phenomena, while themselves being practically immutable.
Language, whether spoken or written, is basically a set of symbols that
are used in many human activities; this set being one of the most basic
and most superficial social phenomena.
But so long as the changes that pertain to those symbols do not occur on
the deeper or more fundamental social levels, they do not lead to a
change of the social world.
A society that limits the world to the material and terrestrial realm giving
its heart and soul to it forms its ideals, values, norms, and symbols in
accordance with this limitation. But a society whose existential horizon
extends beyond the merely terrestrial world, posits a position for man and

his ideals, values, rights and responsibilities, in accordance with this

higher perspective.
During the course of our life, if we see only the world that we were born
into, we might be tempted to conclude that the social world only has a
single form. But when we become aware of other societies that even
now exist in other parts of the world, or when we study the history of past
peoples, we quickly reach the conclusion that social worlds are not the
same and that they are of different types.
But when it comes to the social actions of human beings, we see that they
are variegated, and because of these differences, we can even say that
they are live in different worlds.
The social world is not a mechanistic system with purely historical
causes, but rather, it is an organic whole that rests upon the self-conscious
and creative nature human beings.
The differences in the levels of understanding amongst men, as well as
the variance of their willpowers and free choices, is the fundamental
cause for the formation of different human worlds.
For instance, the population of a society might increase or decrease; its
economy might be growing or declining; or its language and accent might
change, but despite these changes the social world maintains its identity.
But those changes that pertain to the deeper levels of the social world are
of the type that changes one social world into another social world.
But the differences that pertain to symbols, norms, and the like so long as
they are not consequent upon the deeper layers are the type of differences
that remain within a single social world.
They had their own key concepts in that time, and it was precisely these
concepts and meanings that Islam removed from their social world to
create the Islamic world.
With the advent of the fundamental concepts and ideas of Islam, the key
concepts of the age of ignorance, such as polytheism, racism, and
tribalism, along with their outward symbols, were eradicated and
destroyed.

The social world that is posited and willed by man into the created order
brought into realization by his actions has consequences that are beyond
his intentions and his will.
Men are born into a world that was created by their ancestors a world in
which beliefs, values, laws, rules, norms, and symbols have already been
set.
With a change of the social world, the old consequences will no longer
exist, but with the coming of a new social world, a whole new set of
consequences will be created that will in turn affect the social actions of
the members of this new world.
So while on the one hand every social world provides new potentials and
new horizons to man in accordance with its beliefs, ideals, and values.
On the other hand it is possible that given the inherent limitations of
social ideals and norms, it will ignore or suppress other human potentials.
Other worlds impede the development of the terrestrial and material
aspects of human existence and with their ascetic approach do not make
use of mans potential for making the earth to flourish.
Theoreticians and sociologists have had very many discussions on the
particularities of this world and have expounded on the opportunities and
the limitations that it has created for mankind.
Ascendancy of Rational Methods for Practical Ends: What is meant by
rational here is instrumental reason, and by ends those goals that can be
achieved here in this material world.
Iron Cage: That is, those who had intentions of dominating this world
slowly became captives of a bureaucracy that is like an iron cage and
starts to enclose all aspects of their existence.
They hold that human society is like a living organism that goes through
various stages of growth in its lifecycle. The stages are different from
one another and different human societies are like these different stages
of growth.
Those who believe that all societies have one single path of growth and
development are a victim of a one-dimensional view of history.

As the division of labor expands, people become increasingly dependent

upon one another, because each person needs goods and services that
those in other occupations supply.
How do those who see societies to be like different living organisms that
co-exist in a parallel or collateral fashion explain the differences between
them?
Fundamental meanings and ideas those that were seen to lie in the
deepest of social layers and that act as pillars of society give rise to a
world that is in consonance with and a consequence of those self-same
meanings. Hence according to this perspective, different social worlds are
not situated in a linear progression, but rather, they are parallel worlds
having their own geniuses.
One of the ways that we can divide and categorize the different social
worlds is along the lines of their beliefs dividing the worlds into the two
groups of sacred and profane.
Profane culture, sometimes also called secular or mundane culture, is
that culture whose beliefs, ideals, and values pertain to this material and
terrestrial world. In this culture, other worlds are either rejected or are
engaged and accepted only to the degree that they have use in fulfilling
the mundane and pragmatic desires of man.
Secular society uses all of mans potentials for the sake of this material
world and its progress; forgetting in the process mans spiritual needs.
But what is clear is that every culture that has developed after the
Renaissance in the West is strongly identified with secular culture and its
liberal mores.