<<

in a Rapidly

Changing

K. A. BUSIA, GHANA

Visiting Professor of Sociology, Institute of Social Studies, The Hague

THE emphasis on social change is a recognition of the predominant social fact of our time. Social changes are taking place in all countries in the world. In Africa and Asia, as in America and Europe, science and technology, and the contacts of peoples and cultures present challenges, opportunities and urges to achieve higher standards of living, larger freedom and higher human dignity, social welfare and . In some countries, the efforts to achieve all these goals simultaneously have resulted in social changes that have the dimensions of a which profoundly affects every aspect of national life : its culture, politics, economics,. , morality and social relations, as well as most realms of individual personality. This situation dictates the problems of sociology, as of the other social scienceg; for sociology is inevitably involved in the social situation, and its problems are dictated by the social setting. The concern of sociology with social change is not new. From the time of Comte to the present day, sociologists have studied and reflected upon the phenomenon of social change. They have tried to answer the questions that men have asked about society. Why does it change, and where does the change tend ? P Sociologists have provided many theories in an endeavour to the cause or the direction of social explain change. ' Comte thought he had discovered in social change a relation between intellectual and social development which he stated in his well-known theory that history showed that human thought passed through three stages : the theological, the metaphysical and the positive. Durkheim saw in social change a change from primitive segmentary society to an organic one marked by the division of labour. Tonnies believed social change showed a development from Gemeinschaft, a spontaneous natural unity, to Gesellschaft, a type of unity cha- racterized by associations formed for various purposes and interests. Marx saw ' the cause of social change in technological development and the conflict between classes for its control. Pareto saw social change to arise from an alternation in the types of the elite who control society. Hobhouse suggested four criteria for studying social development: growth in scale, in efficiency, in freedom and in 67 68 mutuality of service. Spengler saw social change as the natural process of birth, growth, maturity and decay. Vcblen saw social change chiefly caused by econo- mic forces. Toynbee's monumental historical explains social change in terms of the rise and fall of civilizations. To explain social change, Sorokin has " formulated a cyclical theory of what he calls " cultural super-systems which succeed one another. These examples, chosen from the many theories of social change, illustrate the diversity of explanations that have been given. How relevant are these theories for the understanding of the problems of the social changes taking place today ? P To test them in the light of the contemporary situation may itself prove a rewarding task for sociology. The Japanese, for example, did not consider Comte applicable to their situation in the last century. When his theories were first published in Japan in 1873, they did not appeal to the Japanese who considered them too conservative ; on the other hand, when Spencer's " Social Statics " was translated in Japanese in 1877, it was widely read, and it appeared in thirty translations between 1877 and 1890. Spencer's radi- calism, his defence of individual rights and laissez faire, appeared to have more relevance to the Japanese situation at that time. Thus the formulation as well as the acceptance of social theory are both influenced by the social situation. No theory of social change has yet been accepted as satisfactorily and adequately applicable to every situation. Each theory has drawn attention to some important factor of change. The different factors that have been selected by different writers for emphasis suggest that social change results from a multi- plicity of causes and appears to follow different directions : cyclical, or spiral, or linear. Such a conclusion only challenges further research for more exact know- ledge, and the search continues. It is one of the dominant interests of sociologists today. It should be noted, however, that Marxist sociologists do not accept this conclusion. They contend that the multiple factor theory is untenable. To them, Marx has already provided a theory applicable to all . They insist that their studies have confirmed the basic principles enunciated by Marx that, ( to quote from a recent paper on " Sociology in the U.S.S.R." by Mr. Fedoseev, a corresponding member of the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences) " the decisive cause in the process of historical development lies ultimately in the production of material goods and that the real creators of history are the masses ". He goes on to add : " In our age of rapid social changes, it is natural that great interest is paid to the main trend of historical development. The study of the most important social changes has shown that in the 20th century the concentration and the socialization of the means of production has become of decisive import- ance. The social outcome of this economic process is the fact that the private capitalist mode of production is being superseded by a socialist one. is the inevitable outcome of the concentration and the socialization of the means of production." Alongside this quotation from a Russian author, I wish to one from a