Comte Vs SpencerEssay title: Comte Vs SpencerAuguste Compte and Herbert Spencer were two of sociology’s first great theorists. Both Compte and Spencer studied society and the many ways in which people in society interact. Both theorists agree on certain issues pertainning to society and social science, yet they completely differ on their views of the function of sociology.
Spencer and Compte both realize that there is an order of co-existance in society. Society itself is made up of several components and parts which are subject to change and progress, thus altering society as a whole with these changes.
With regards to the function of sociology, Compte believed that sociology was important due to the fact that it acted as a guide for people in order to make a better society. Compte saw evolution as very important and believed that every society went through three stages. These include; the theological stage, the abstract stge and the positive stage. Spencer on the other hand believed that sociology was necessary to demonstrate that people in society should not interfere with the “natural processes”. Spencer’s theories on evolution focused more on a different set of three basic laws. These include; the law of persistence of force, the law of the undestructibility of matter and the law of the continuity of motion.
The Laws of Relativity
It is important to recognize that some of our theories of sociology are flawed. However, the laws of relativity, and the laws of mechanics, can be used to explain social problems, rather than merely as a means of defining them. It is also necessary for people to realize that as individuals we are all individuals, and that we can be treated as such by other people because our actions can affect other people. We use this knowledge in order to better understand why social and evolutionary dynamics have evolved. In other words, social and evolutionary dynamics were never intended to replace the laws of relativity.
Spencer’s theories of sociology did not merely apply to the social evolution of social animals, i.e., the development of a species, but also were of course based on a social law theory. Spencer made a critical difference in a number of ways within his work. Specifically, he argued that a “relational force” was necessary under a social law theory to make it practical for a social society. Spencer argued that such an “relational force” would need to be developed after human society has evolved through life, including natural selection. (Seth Cowie, “The Relational Force (1988),” in Philo: The Philosophical Investigations of Phil Ollie (ed.), p. 91-127.) However, it is important to acknowledge that, as Spencer believes, the social evolution of society is not the same as that of evolution itself.
Society Evolution
Spencer’s idea of evolution began with his concept of a social theory. A social cause and effect might be considered as a new social cause and effect. Spencer found that society evolved through the process of evolution. Societies could evolve through this process by providing the social force necessary to support social evolution. However, many of his arguments were based upon what he refers to as the three “laws of evolution‼”, where the first is a logical foundation that can be applied to explain all social phenomena. (1) A social evolution is any kind of evolution that takes place when the physical and psychological components of society begin to cooperate in creating societies. The three laws of evolution can be thought of as having three purposes.
Social causes are a necessary condition to ensure that this social system will adapt to the group’s needs and preferences. These causes can also be used to motivate and drive individuals in order to move more efficiently with the group. These social causes act as social vehicles, but the forces acting on them often result in groups of individuals and animals interacting at an even slower rate. Societies may also need social and environmental causes to survive, reproduce, and thrive. Society should develop and maintain these social mechanisms with the full consent of the members (3). Society is the development within the group of animals that enables the organism to respond optimally
Compte saw society in two major categories, the first was theological (military) which looked at the power of religion spiritual leaders as well as priests and those with intellectual power. The second was scientific (industrial) where there