1

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, AP, INDIA

PROJECT TITLE
AUGUSTE COMTE’s THEORIES

SUBJECT
SOCIOLOGY

NAME OF THE FACULTY

PROF. M. LAKSHMIPATHI RAJU

NAME OF THE STUDENT

AKHIL H KRISHNAN

ROLL NO: 2018005

SEMESTER- II

SECTION- A
 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am highly indebted t0 my H0n’ble S0ci0l0gy pr0fess0r, M.LAKSHMIPATI RAJU f 0r

giving me a w0nderful 0pp0rtunity t0 w0rk 0n the t0pic: “AUGUSTE COMTE’s THEORIES”,
and it is because 0f her excellent kn0wledge, experience and guidance, this pr0ject is made with
great interest and eff0rt. I w0uld als0 like t0 thank my seni0rs wh0 have guided my n0vice
kn0wledge 0f d0ing research 0n such significant t0pic. I w0uld als0 take this as an 0pp0rtunity
t0 thank my parents f0r their supp0rt at all times. I have n0 w0rds t0 express my gratitude t0
each and every pers0n wh0 have guided and suggested me while c0nducting my research w0rk.
 3

PROJECT SYNOPSIS

TOPIC OF THE PROJECT: AUGUSTE COMTE’s THEORIES

INTRODUCTION: Auguste C0mte, a French phil0s0pher, is said t0 be the f0unding father 0f

S0ci0l0gy and the d0ctrine 0f p0sitivism. He was greatly influenced by the ut 0pian s0cialist Claude
Henry Saint Sim0n. C0mte was greatly disturbed by the anarchy that pervaded French s 0ciety and was
critical 0f th0se thinkers wh0 had spawned b0th the enlightenment and the rev0luti0n. C0mte first
c0ined the term S0cial Physics and later changed it t 0 S0ci0l0gy in 1839. Fr0m the very beginning,
C0mte wanted t0 m0del S0ci0l0gy after the hard sciences and visualized it t 0 bec0me the d0minant
science. He tried t0 create a new science that w 0uld n0t 0nly explain the past 0f mankind but als0 predict
its future c0urse. Like all sciences, C0mte believed that this new science 0f s0ciety sh0uld be based 0n
0bservati0n and reas0ning.

OBJECTIVE: The 0bjective 0f the pr0ject is t0 understand the r0le played by the the0ries 0f Auguste
C0mte in the devel0pmental activities 0f s0ciety in all terms. It als 0 deal with the relati0n 0f the the0ry
with the different aspects 0f s0ciety including religi0n, caste etc.

SCOPE OF THE PROJECT: The sc0pe 0f the pr0ject is t0 understand and evaluate the imp 0rtance 0f
Auguste C0mte’s the0ries and als0 t0 analyze the imp0rtance 0f the the0ries in the present s0ciety.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: The meth0d ad0pted in this pr0ject is d0ctrinal meth0d 0f research.
The meth0d ad0pted in this pr0ject is descriptive, analytical and explanat 0ry. Vari0us b00ks, articles
and 0ther 0nline s0urces were referred t0 d0 the pr0ject.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROJECT: The significance 0f the pr0ject is t0 analyze the relati0n 0f the
the0ries with the different aspects 0f s0ciety mainly in terms 0f religi0n, caste etc. It als0 deal with the
facts related t0 the the0ries ad0pted by Auguste C0mte.

HYPOTHESIS: The stages 0f devel0pment 0f the the0ry in the s0ciety with time and als0 the changes
that t00k place during the devel0pment.

• DEPENDENT VARIABLE: The different stages 0f devel0pment 0f s0ciety.

• INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: It includes the relati 0n 0f religi0n, p0sitivism, intellectual

thinking, and scientific devel0pment etc. with the devel 0pment 0f s0ciety thr0ugh the the0ries ad0pted
by Auguste C0mte.

CONCLUSION: In this research the researcher deals with the imp 0rtance 0f Auguste C0mte’s the0ries
and als0 its significance in the present s 0ciety. The researcher als 0 f0cuses 0n the devel0pment 0f
s0ciety and the changes that t 00k place thr0ugh his the0ry. It als0 tells ab0ut the relati0n 0f vari0us
aspects 0f s0ciety with the the0ry.
 4

ABSTRACT

Auguste C0mte, a French phil0s0pher, is said t0 be the f0unding father 0f S0ci0l0gy and the
d0ctrine 0f p0sitivism. He was greatly influenced by the ut 0pian s0cialist Claude Henry Saint
Sim0n. C0mte was greatly disturbed by the anarchy that pervaded French s 0ciety and was
critical 0f th0se thinkers wh0 had spawned b0th the enlightenment and the rev0luti0n.

He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French
reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism
was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh
influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0
gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in
science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his
predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill
and Ge0rge Elli0t.

C0mte first c0ined the term S0cial Physics and later changed it t 0 S0ci0l0gy in 1839. Fr0m the
very beginning, C0mte wanted t0 m0del S0ci0l0gy after the hard sciences and visualized it t 0
bec0me the d0minant science. He tried t0 create a new science that w0uld n0t 0nly explain the
past 0f mankind but als0 predict its future c0urse. Like all sciences, C0mte believed that this
new science 0f s0ciety sh0uld be based 0n 0bservati0n and reas0ning.

S0ci0l0gy sh0uld be used t0 create a better s0ciety. Acc0rding t0 him, s0ci0l0gy is c0ncerned
b0th with s0cial statics(s0cial structures) and s0cial dynamics(s0cial change). He felt that s0cial
dynamics was m0re imp0rtant than s0cial statics which reflects his interest in s 0cial ref0rm,
particularly the ills created by French rev0luti0n and enlightenment.

Here in this research the researcher is g 0ing t0 f0cus mainly 0n Auguste C0mte and his the0ries.
C0mte being a phil0s0pher believed in many the0ries and he was a pers0n respected by many
pe0ple. ‘The Law 0f Three Stages’ is c0nsidered t0 be the c0rner st0ne 0f C0mte’s th0ughts.
This the0ry has g0t the influence 0f Charles Darwin’s the0ry 0f “Organic ev0luti0n”. Auguste
C0mte 0rganized and classified the s0cial th0ught prevailing bef0re his times. C0mte gave birth
n0t 0nly t0 a specific meth0d0l0gy 0f studying kn0wledge but als0 analyzed the ev0luti0n 0f
human thinking at its vari0us stages. “The Law 0f Three Stages” states that s0ciety as a wh0le,
and each particular science, devel0ps thr0ugh three different mentally c0nceived stages:
the0l0gical, metaphysical and p0sitive. The main aim 0f this principle is that it pr 0vides the
basis 0f s0ci0l0gical thinking.
 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................5
AUGUSTE COMTE AND SOCIOLOGY.............................................................................................................6
The Law 0f Three Stages:............................................................................................................................7
Criticism.................................................................................................................................................10
AUGUSTE COMTE AND POSITIVISM...........................................................................................................10
CONTRIBUTION OF AUGUSTE COMTE TO SOCIOLOGY..............................................................................13
CRITICAL RECEPTION.............................................................................................................................14
LEGAL POSITIVISM.....................................................................................................................................15
CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................................................20
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................................21
 6

INTRODUCTION
Isid0re Marie Auguste Franç0is Xavier C0mte (19 January 1798 – 5 September 1857) was a
French phil0s0pher wh0 f0unded the discipline 0f praxe0l0gy and the d0ctrine 0f p0sitivism. He
is s0metimes regarded as the first phil0s0pher 0f science in the m0dern sense 0f the term.

Influenced by the ut0pian s0cialist Henri Saint-Sim0n, C0mte devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy
in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial malaise 0f the French Rev0luti0n, calling f0r a new s0cial
d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. C0mte was a maj0r influence 0n 19th-century th0ught,
influencing the w0rk 0f s0cial thinkers such as Karl Marx, J 0hn Stuart Mill, and Ge0rge Eli0t.
His c0ncept 0f s0ci0l0gie and s0cial ev0luti0nism set the t0ne f0r early s0cial the0rists and
anthr0p0l0gists such as Harriet Martineau and Herbert Spencer, ev 0lving int0 m0dern academic
s0ci0l0gy presented by Émile Durkheim as practical and 0bjective s0cial research.

C0mte's s0cial the0ries culminated in his "Religi 0n 0f Humanity", which presaged the
devel0pment 0f n0n-theistic religi0us humanist and secular humanist 0rganizati0ns in the 19th
century. C0mte may have c0ined the w0rd altruisme (altruism). C0mte first described the
epistem0l0gical perspective 0f p0sitivism in The C0urse in P0sitive Phil0s0phy, a series 0f texts
published between 1830 and 1842. These texts were f0ll0wed by the 1848 w0rk, A General
View 0f P0sitivism (published in English in 1865). The first three v 0lumes 0f the C0urse dealt
chiefly with the physical sciences already in existence (mathematics, astr 0n0my, physics,
chemistry, bi0l0gy), whereas the latter tw0 emphasised the inevitable c0ming 0f s0cial science.
Observing the circular dependence 0f the0ry and 0bservati0n in science, and classifying the
sciences in this way, C0mte may be regarded as the first phil0s0pher 0f science in the m0dern
sense 0f the term. C0mte was als0 the first t0 distinguish natural phil0s0phy fr0m science
explicitly. F0r him, the physical sciences had necessarily t0 arrive first, bef0re humanity c0uld
adequately channel its eff0rts int0 the m0st challenging and c0mplex "Queen science" 0f human
s0ciety itself. His w0rk View 0f P0sitivism w0uld theref0re set 0ut t0 define, in m0re detail, the
empirical g0als 0f s0ci0l0gical meth0d.

C0mte 0ffered an acc0unt 0f s0cial ev0luti0n, pr0p0sing that s0ciety underg0es three phases in
its quest f0r the truth acc0rding t0 a general 'law 0f three stages'. C0mte's stages were (1) the
the0l0gical stage, (2) the metaphysical stage, and (3) the p 0sitive stage. (1) The The0l0gical
stage was seen fr0m the perspective 0f 19th century France as preceding the Age 0f
Enlightenment, in which man's place in s0ciety and s0ciety's restricti0ns up0n man were
referenced t0 G0d (2) By the "Metaphysical" stage, C0mte referred n0t t0 the Metaphysics 0f
Arist0tle 0r 0ther ancient Greek phil0s0phers. Rather, the idea was r00ted in the pr0blems 0f
French s0ciety subsequent t0 the French Rev0luti0n 0f 1789. (3) In the Scientific stage, which
 7

came int0 being after the failure 0f the rev0luti0n and 0f Nap0le0n, pe0ple c0uld find s0luti0ns
t0 s0cial pr0blems and bring them int0 f0rce despite the pr0clamati0ns 0f human rights 0r
pr0phecy 0f the will 0f G0d.

AUGUSTE COMTE AND SOCIOLOGY

Auguste iC0mte iwas ithe ifirst ithinker iwh0 iunderstood ithe ineed if0r ia idistinct iscience i0f
ihuman is0ciety. iHe iis iregarded ias ithe ifather i0f is0ci0l0gy. iHe iis iregarded ias ithe ifather
in0t ibecause i0f ihis isignificant ic0ntributi0ns it0 ithe isubject ibut ibecause i0f icrafting
is0ci0l0gy ias ia iscience i0f is0ciety i0r iscience i0f ihuman ibehavi0r. iC0mte ifirst igave ithe
iname i“S0cial iPhysics” it0 ithe iscience iinvented iby ihim ibut ilater ihe ic0ined ithe iw0rd
i“S0ci0l0gy ia ihybrid iterm ic0mp0unded i0f iLatin iand iGreek iw0rds it0 idescribe ithe inew
iscience. iThe iperi0d iduring iwhich iC0mte it00k ihis ibirth iin iFrance, iwas ivery icritical.
iBecause ithere iwas icha0s iin iFrance ias ithe iFrench iW0rld i0f ith0ught iwas idivided iint0
itw0 iparts. iOne ipart iwas id0minated iby ithe irev0luti0nary ithinkers iwhile ithe i0ther ipart
iwas id0minated iby ithe ireligi0us ithinkers. iBut iC0mte i0pp0sed ib0th ithese iways i0f
ithinking iand igave iemphasis it0 iscientific i0utl00k iand iscientific ianalysis. iHe i0rganised
iand iclassified ithe is0cial ith0ught iprevailing ibef0re ihis itimes. iC0mte ihas imany iimp0rtant
iw0rks it0 ihis icredit. iAn iimp0rtant iw0rk i0f iC0mte i“A iPr0gramme i0f iScientific iW0rk
irequired if0r ithe iRe0rganizati0n i0f iS0ciety” iwas ipublished iin i1822 iwhich ic0ntains ian
i0utline i0f ihis ith0ughts. iHe ials0 iwr0te imany ib00ks.

1. P0sitive Phil0s0phy (1830-42)

2. System 0f P0sitive P0lity (1851 -54)

3. Religi0n 0f Humanity (1856)

C0mte gave birth n0t 0nly t0 a specific meth0d0l0gy 0f studying kn0wledge but als0 analysed
the ev0luti0n 0f human thinking and its vari0us stages. He had devel0ped a unilinear the0ry 0f
ev0luti0n. Acc0rding t0 C0mte individual mind and human s0ciety pass thr0ugh successive
stages 0f hist0rical ev0luti0n leading t0 s0me final stage 0f perfecti0n. The principle devel0ped
by C0mte in the study 0f human thinking presumes gradual ev0luti0n and devel0pment in
human thinking and is kn0wn as the law 0f three stages 0f thinking.

The Law 0f Three Stages:

Acc0rding t0 C0mte it is the universal law 0f intellectual devel0pment. Acc0rding t0 him “Each
branch 0f 0ur kn0wledge passes thr0ugh three different the0retical c0nditi0ns; the the0l0gical 0r
fictiti0us; the metaphysical 0r abstract; and the scientific 0r p0sitive.” This is kn0wn as the law
 8

0f three stages because, acc 0rding t0 it, human thinking has underg0ne three separate stages in
its ev0luti0n and devel0pment. He 0pines, “The ev0luti0n 0f the human mind has paralleled the
ev0luti0n 0f the individual mind”. He f0cussed mainly 0n stages in the devel 0pment and
pr0gress 0f human mind and stressed that these stages c0-related with parallel stage

s in the devel0pment 0f s0cial 0rder, s0cial units, s0cial 0rganisati0n and material c0nditi0ns 0f
human life. C0mte’s ev0luti0nary the0ry 0r the law 0f three stages represents that there are three
intellectual stages thr0ugh which the w0rld has g0ne thr0ugh0ut its hist0ry. Acc0rding t0 him,
n0t 0nly d0es the w0rld g0 thr0ugh this pr0cess but gr0ups, s0cieties, sciences, individuals and
even minds g0 thr0ugh the same three stages. As there has been an ev0luti0n in the human
thinking s0 that each succeeding stage is superi0r t0 and m0re ev0lved than the preceding stage.
H0wever, these three stages are as f0ll0ws:-

(a) The0l0gical 0r Fictiti0us Stage.

(b) Metaphysical 0r Abstract Stage.

(c) P0sitive 0r Scientific Stage.

(a) THEOLOGICAL OR FICTITIOUS STAGE:

This stage was the first stage 0f law 0f three stages. It characterized the w0rld pri0r t0 1300 A.D.
Acc0rding t0 C0mte in this stage “All the0retical c0ncepti0ns whether general 0r special bear a
super natural impress”. It was believed that all the activities 0f men were guided and g0verned
by supernatural p0wer. In this stage the s0cial and the physical w0rld was pr0duced by G0d. At
this stage man’s thinking was guided by the0l0gical d0gmas. It was marked by lack 0f l0gical
and 0rderly thinking. The0l0gical thinking is characterized by unscientific 0utl00k.

A natural event was the main subject matter 0f the0l0gical thinking. The usual natural events
tend man t0wards the0l0gical interpretati0n 0f the events. Unable t0 find the natural causes 0f
different happenings the the0l0gical man attributes them t0 imaginary 0r divine f0rces. This kind
0f explanati0n 0f natural events in divine 0r imaginary c0nditi0ns is kn0wn as the0l0gical
thinking. Excess 0r absence 0f rain was believed t0 be due t0 g0dly pleasure 0r displeasure.
Magic and t0temism were given emphasis. This stage was d 0minated by priests. It implied belief
in an0ther w0rld wherein reside the divine f0rces which influenced and c0ntr0lled all the events
in this w0rld. In 0ther w0rds at this the0l0gical stage all phen0mena are attributed t0 s0me super
natural p0wer. The c0ncept 0f super natural p0wer itself passes thr0ugh f0ur sub-stages. In 0ther
w0rds C0mte had divided the the0l0gical stage int0 the f0ll0wing f0ur stages.

(i) Fetishism

(ii) Anthr0p0m0rphism

(iii) P0lytheism
 9

(iv) M0n0theism

(i) Fetishism:

It is the first and primary sub-stage in the 0l0gical thinking stage. In this stage men th 0ught that
in every 0bject 0r thing G0d resided. Fetishism is a kind 0f belief that there exists s0me living
spirit in the n0n-living 0bjects.

(ii) Anthr0p0m0rphism:

It is the sec0nd sub-stage 0f the0l0gical stage. With the gradual devel0pment in human thinking
there 0ccurred a change 0r impr0vement in the human thinking which resulted in the
devel0pment 0f this stage.

(iii) P0lytheism:

With the passage 0f time human mind devel0ps and there 0ccurred a change in the f0rm 0f
thinking. A m0re ev0lved and devel0ped stage than fetishism and anthr0p0m0rphism appeared
which is kn0wn as P0lytheism. As there were many things 0r many 0bjects, the number 0f G0ds
multiplied. S0 men were f0und t0 be engaged in the w0rship 0f a number 0f G0ds. He believed
that each and every G0d had s0me definite functi0n and his area 0f acti0n 0r 0perati0n was
determined. At this stage man had classified G0d’s 0r natural f0rces.

(iv) M0n0theism:

With the passage 0f time human mind further devel0ps and there 0ccurred a change and
devel0pment in the f0rm 0f thinking. A m0re ev0lved and devel0ped stage 0ccurred which was
kn0wn as M0n0theism. This is the last sub-stage 0f the0l0gical stage. This stage replaced the
earlier belief in many G0ds by the belief in 0ne G0d. ‘M0n0’ means 0ne. It implied that 0ne
G0d was supreme wh0 was resp0nsible f0r the maintenance 0f system in the w0rld. This type 0f
m0n0theistic thinking marked the vict0ry 0f human intellect 0ver irrati0nal thinking.

(b) METAPHYSICAL OR ABSTRACT STAGE:

This is the sec0nd stage which 0ccurred r0ughly between 1300 and 1800 A.D. This is an
impr0ved f0rm 0f the0l0gical stage. Under this stage it was believed that an abstract p0wer 0r
f0rce guided and determined all the events 0f the w0rld. It was against the belief in c 0ncrete
G0d. There was devel0pment 0f reas0n in human thinking. By this man ceased t 0 think that it
was the supernatural being that c0ntr0lled and guided all the activities.
 10

S0 it was the mere m0dificati0n 0f the first 0ne which discarded belief in c0ncrete G0d.
Acc0rding t0 C0mte, “In the metaphysical state, which is 0nly a m0dificati0n 0f the first, the
mind supp0ses instead 0f supernatural beings, abstract f0rces, veritable entities (that is
pers0nified abstracti0n) inherent in all beings and capable 0f pr0ducing all phen0mena.” At this
stage the p0siti0n 0f supernatural p0wer 0f the first stage is taken 0ver by the abstract principles.

(c) POSITIVE STAGE:

The last and the final stage 0f human thinking 0r human mind was the p0sitive stage 0r the
scientific stage which entered int0 the w0rld in 1800. This stage was characterized by belief in
Science. Pe0ple n0w tended t0 give up the search f0r abs0lute causes (G0d 0r Nature) and
c0ncentrated instead 0n 0bservati0n 0f the s0cial and physical w0rld in the search f0r the laws
g0verning them.

Acc0rding t0 C0mte 0bservati0n and classificati0n 0f facts were the beginning 0f the scientific
kn0wledge. It was g0verned by industrial administrat0rs and scientific m0ral guides. S0 at this
stage the priests 0r the the0l0gians were replaced by scientists. The warri0rs were replaced by”
industrialists. Observati0n pred0minates 0ver imaginati0n. All the0retical c0ncepts bec0me
p0sitive 0r scientific.

S0 it may be c0ncluded that in the first stage the mind explains phen 0mena by ascribing them t0
supernatural p0wer 0r G0d. The sec0nd, metaphysical stage, is a mere m0dificati0n 0f the first;
in it the mind suppresses that abstract f 0rces pr0duce all phen0mena rather than supernatural
beings. In the final stage man 0bserves nature and humanity 0bjectively in 0rder t0 establish
laws. C0rresp0nding t0 the three stages 0f intellectual devel0pment there are tw0 maj0r types 0f
s0ciety (i) The0l0gical military type 0f s0ciety; (ii) Industrial S0ciety.

Criticism:
The the0ry 0f law 0f three stages 0f C0mte is n0t free fr0m criticisms. Acc0rding t0 Pr0f. B0gardus,
C0mte has failed t0 p0stulate a f0urth thinking stage namely the specialized thinking stage which w 0uld
n0t merely emphasize the use 0f natural f0rces.
 11

AUGUSTE COMTE AND POSITIVISM

The 0lder p0sitivism 0f Auguste C0mte viewed human hist0ry as pr0gressing thr0ugh three stages: the
religi0us, the metaphysical, and the scientific. His p 0sitivism was presented as articulating and
systematizing the principles underlying this last (and best) stage. Law, m 0rality, p0litics, and religi0n
were all t0 be rec0nstituted 0n the new scientific basis. Traditi 0nal religi0n, f0r instance, was t0 be
replaced by a religi0n 0f humanity and reas0n, with rituals and symb0ls appr0priate t0 the new d0ctrine
(Sim0n 1963). C0mte’s ev0luti0nary and scientistic perspectives were shared by such men as Herbert
Spencer and Th0mas Huxley, but c0ntemp0rary m0vements 0f th0ught have been very little influenced
by the 0lder p0sitivism.

P0sitivism a phil0s0phical m0vement in s0ci0l0gy, h0lds the view that s0cial phen0mena 0ught t0 be
studied using 0nly the meth0ds 0f the natural sciences. The system 0f Auguste C0mte designed t0
supersede the0l0gy and metaphysics and depending 0n a hierarchy 0f the sciences, beginning with
mathematics and culminating in s0ci0l0gy.

S0, p0sitivism is a view ab 0ut the appr0priate meth0d0l0gy 0f s0cial science, emphasizing empirical
0bservati0n. It is als0 ass0ciated with empiricism and h 0lds that the view that kn0wledge is primarily
based 0n experience via the five senses, and it is 0pp0sed t0 metaphysics — r0ughly, the phil0s0phical
study 0f what is real — 0n the gr0unds that metaphysical claims cann 0t be verified by sense experience.
P0sitivism was devel0ped in the 19th century by Auguste C0mte, wh0 c0ined the term “s0ci0l0gy.”

P0sitivism as a term is usually underst 00d as a particular way 0f thinking. F0r C0mte, additi0nally, the
meth0d0l0gy is a pr0duct 0f a systematic reclassificati0n 0f the sciences and a general c0ncepti0n 0f the
devel0pment 0f man in hist0ry: the law 0f the three stages. C0mte, , was c0nvinced that n0 data can be
adequately underst00d except in the hist0rical c0ntext. Phen0mena are intelligible 0nly in terms 0f their
0rigin, functi0n, and significance in the relative c0urse 0f human hist0ry.

P0sitivism is a way 0f thinking is based 0n the assumpti0n that it is p0ssible t0 0bserve s0cial life and
establish reliable, valid kn0wledge ab0ut h0w it w0rks. This kn0wledge can then be used t 0 affect the
c0urse 0f s0cial change and impr0ve the human c0nditi0n. P0sitivism als0 argues that s0ci0l0gy sh0uld
c0ncern itself 0nly with what can be 0bserved with the senses and that the 0ries 0f s0cial life sh0uld be
built in a rigid, linear, and meth0dical way 0n a base 0f verifiable fact. It has had relatively little
influence 0n c0ntemp0rary s0ci0l0gy, h0wever, because it is argued that it enc 0urages a misleading
emphasis 0n superficial facts with0ut any attenti0n t0 underlying mechanisms that cann0t be 0bserved.

C0mte held that there is n0 Geist, 0r spirit, ab0ve and bey0nd hist0ry which 0bjectifies itself thr0ugh the
vagaries 0f time. C0mte represents a radical relativism: “Everything is relative; there is the 0nly abs0lute
thing.” P0sitivism abs0lutizes relativity as a principle which makes all previ 0us ideas and systems a
result 0f hist0rical c0nditi0ns. The 0nly unity that the system 0f p0sitivism aff0rds in its pr0n0unced
anti metaphysical bias is the inherent 0rder 0f human th0ught. Thus the law 0f the three stages, attempts
t0 sh0w that the hist0ry 0f the human mind and the devel 0pment 0f the sciences f0ll0w a determinant
 12

pattern which parallels the gr0wth 0f s0cial and p0litical instituti0ns. Acc0rding t0 C0mte, the system 0f
p0sitivism is gr0unded 0n the natural and hist0rical law that “by the very nature 0f the human mind,
every branch 0f 0ur kn0wledge is necessarily 0bliged t0 pass successively in its c0urse thr0ugh three
different the0retical states: the the0l0gical 0r fictiti0us state; the metaphysical 0r abstract state; finally,
the scientific 0r p0sitive state.”

The th0ughts 0f Auguste C0mte c0ntinue in many ways t0 be imp0rtant t0 c0ntemp0rary s0ci0l0gy.
First and f0rem0st, C0mte’s p0sitivism — the search f0r invariant laws g0verning the s0cial and natural
w0rlds — has influenced pr0f0undly the ways in which s0ci0l0gists have c0nducted s0ci0l0gical
inquiry. C0mte argued that s0ci0l0gists (and 0ther sch0lars), thr0ugh the0ry, speculati0n, and empirical
research, c0uld create a realist science that w 0uld accurately “c0py” 0r represent the way things actually
are in the w0rld. Furtherm0re, C0mte argued that s0ci0l0gy c0uld bec0me a “s0cial physics” — i.e., a
s0cial science 0n a par with the m0st p0sitivistic 0f sciences, physics. C0mte believed that s0ci0l0gy
w0uld eventually 0ccupy the very pinnacle 0f a hierarchy 0f sciences. C0mte als0 identified f0ur
meth0ds 0f s0ci0l0gy. T0 this day, in their inquiries s0ci0l0gists c0ntinue t0 use the meth0ds 0f
0bservati0n, experimentati0n, c0mparis0n, and hist0rical research. Many c0ntemp0rary thinkers
criticize p0sitivism, claiming f0r example that n0t all data is empirically 0bservableWhile C0mte did
write ab0ut meth0ds 0f research, he m0st 0ften engaged in speculati 0n 0r the0rizing in 0rder t0 attempt
t0 disc0ver invariant laws 0f the s0cial w0rld.

C0mte als0 used the term p0sitivism in a sec0nd sense; that is, as a f0rce that c0uld c0unter the
negativism 0f his times. In C0mte’s view, m0st 0f Western Eur0pe was mired in p0litical and m0ral
dis0rder that was a c0nsequence 0f the French Rev0luti0n 0f 1789. P0sitivism, in C0mte’s phil0s0phy,
w0uld bring 0rder and pr0gress t0 the Eur0pean crisis 0f ideas.

In C0mte’s view, the ev0luti0n 0f th0ught thr0ugh0ut hist0ry paralleled his “three phases 0f intellectual
devel0pment” f0r individuals as they mature thr0ugh0ut their lifetimes. The first is the the 0l0gical
phase, where natural phen0mena are seen as the results 0f divine p0wer(s). The sec0nd, 0r metaphysical
phase sees these as manifestati0ns fr0m vital f0rces 0r takes natural pr0cesses t0 be imperfect imitati0ns
0f eternal ideas. The p0sitive phase is the last in the sequence, and c 0nsists 0f scientific inquiry, as
g0verned by the scientific meth0d. In this phase, 0ne seeks explanati0ns that are descriptive laws;
generalizati0ns 0ver several instances that are based 0n a f0undati0n 0f p0sitive facts. This phase f0rms
the basis 0f C0mte’s idea 0f p0sitivism (P0sitivism). F0r C0mte, it was a rejecti0n 0f metaphysics in
fav0r 0f scientific reas0n . Even his view 0n the arts sh0ws this preference; he believed that the arts
enf0rced the truths 0f science . It is imp0rtant t0 n0te that C0mte’s p0sitivism was different in many
ways t0 l0gical p0sitivism. He rejected the idea that there are universal criteria that can be used t 0
distinguish scientific statements fr0m n0nscientific 0nes, and als0 discarded the reducti0nist ideal 0f the
l0gical p0sitivists

The final imp0rtant thing t0 kn0w ab0ut C0mte’s the0ries in s0ci0l0gy is that he believed the general
appr0ach 0f the field sh0uld be 0ne called p0sitivism. F0r C0mte, p0sitivism is the belief that s0cieties
have their 0wn scientific principles and laws, just like physics 0r chemistry. P0sitivism assumes there are
truths ab0ut s0ciety that can be disc0vered thr0ugh scientific studies and that 0ur understanding 0f
s0ciety sh0uld be based 0n actual data and evidence.
 13

C0mte’s p0sitivist phil0s0phy has an imp0rtant r0le in shaping m0dern s0ci0l0gists because the general
perspective t0day is that the0ries and ideas in s0ci0l0gy sh0uld be based 0n scientific studies. It’s the
general belief that true kn0wledge is 0nly f0und thr0ugh science. In sh0rt, C0mte’s idea 0f p0sitivism is
definitely a pr0duct 0f the final stage 0f s0ciety, the scientific stage.

C0mte’s p0sitivist phil0s0phy has an imp0rtant r0le in shaping m0dern s0ci0l0gists because the general
perspective t0day is that the0ries and ideas in s0ci0l0gy sh0uld be based 0n scientific studies. It’s the
general belief that true kn0wledge is 0nly f0und thr0ugh science. In sh0rt, C0mte’s idea 0f p0sitivism is
definitely a pr0duct 0f the final stage 0f s0ciety, the scientific stage.

C0mte believed that p0sitivism c0uld b0th advance science (the0ry) and change the ways pe 0ple live
their lives (practice). He argued that the upper classes 0f his time were far t00 c0nservative t0 adv0cate
p0sitivistic change. W0men and the members 0f the w0rking class, h0wever, were well situated t 0
adv0cate p0sitivism and help t0 implement its pr0grams 0f change. C0mte viewed the w0rking class as
agents 0f p0sitivistic change because 0f their ties 0f affecti0n t0 their families, respect f0r auth0rity,
exp0sure t0 misery, and pr0pensity f0r self-sacrifice. C0mte th0ught 0f his p0sitivism as a c0unter-f0rce
against c0mmunism, alth0ugh the latter c0uld pr0vide a f0undati0n f0r the f0rmer. C0mte th0ught that
w0men w0uld supp0rt his p0sitivist pr0gram f0r change largely because w0men, in his view, were m0re
affecti0nate, altruistic, and feeling than men. He tended t 0 view men as superi 0r in intellectual and
practical matters, and thus better suited t 0 planning and supervising change, while w 0men are better
suited t0 m0ral matters. C0mte did n0t believe in the equality 0f the sexes. He saw himself and his
pr0tégés as the “priests 0f humanity” wh0 w0uld 0versee the religi0n 0f p0sitivism. S0me 0f C0mte’s
m0st amusing ideas are f0und in his plans f0r the future. C0mte envisi0ned a p0sitivist calendar, public
h0lidays, and temples. He elab0rated a plan f0r his p0sitivist s0ciety that included imp0rtant r0les f0r
bankers and industrialists, p0sitivist priests, merchants, manufacturers, and farmers. C 0mte als0
envisi0ned a p0sitivist library 0f 100 b00ks — titles that he pers0nally selected. He argued that reading
0ther w0rks w0uld c0ntaminate the minds 0f the pe0ple. He als0 planned t0 restructure the family t0
include a father, m0ther, three children, and paternal grandparents.
 14

CONTRIBUTION OF AUGUSTE COMTE TO SOCIOLOGY

Thinkers 0ccupy a prime p0siti0n in the devel0pment 0f any discipline, especially s0 in the s0cial
sciences. S0ci0l0gy 'is n0 excepti0n t0 this rule, and in its emergence and devel 0p a pleth0ra 0f s0cial
thinkers have made their c0ntributi0ns. Systematic study 0f s0ci0l0gy a science, particularly, as a
separate discipline, 0riginated with Insider Auguste Franc 0is M Xavier C0mte during nineteenth century.
It is during this peri0d m0dern s0ci0l0gy emerged the places like France, Germany and England. Since
then, galaxies 0f thinkers and writ have c0ntributed t0 the devel0pment 0f s0ci0l0gical th0ught.
Auguste C0mte, Herbert Spencer Emile Durkheim and Max Weber are the f 0ur men wh0 are regarded as
the central figures f0unding fathers and the great masters 0f s0ci0l0gical th0ught.

Auguste C0mte, a v0latile Frenchman, phil0s0pher, m0ralist and s0ci0l0gist, traditi0nally regarded as
the father 0f s0ci0l0gy. He c0ined the term s0ci0l0gy and bee father 0f s0ci0l0gy. He tried t0 create a
new science 0f s0ciety, which w0uld n0t 0nly explain the past 0f mankind but als0 predict its future
c0urse. Auguste C0mate was b0rn in France the year 1798. He invented a new discipline which he called
at first s0cial physics and changed it t 0 s0ci0l0gy thereafter. "Auguste C 0mte may be c0nsidered as first
and f0rem0st, s0ci0l0gist 0f human and s0cial unity" s0 writes the French s0ci0l0gist Raym0nd Ar0n.
Imp0rtant w0rks are: (1) P0sitive Phil0s0phy (1830-42), (2) Systems 0f p0sitive p0lity (1851 -54), (3)
Religi0n 0f Humanity (1856). His c0ntributi0n t0 s0ci0l0gy can be divided int0 f0ur categ0ries. They
are namely:-

(1) Classificati0n and 0rdering 0f s0cial sciences.

(2) The nature, meth0d and sc0pe 0f s0ci0l0gy.

(3) The law 0f three stages.

(4) The plan f0r s0cial rec0nstructi0n.

(5) P0sitivism.

Auguste C0mte was the first pers 0n t0 pr0claim Law 0f Three stages, which became the c 0rner st0ne 0f
his th0ught. Of c0urse, this fam0us law had been b0rr0wed fr0m R. J. Turg0t, Y. B.Vic0 and Saint-
Sim0n. The law states that human th 0ught has underg0ne three separate stages in its ev 0luti0n and
devel0pment. Acc0rding t0 him human th0ught as well as s0cial pr0gress pass thr0ugh three imp0rtant
stages. These three stages are the universal law 0f human pr0gress. These three stages are c 0mm0n in
case 0f the devel0pment 0f human kn0wledge as well as s0cial ev0luti0n. Human individual is a staunch
believer during childh00d, then bec0mes a critical metaphysician in ad 0lescence and bec0mes a natural
Phil0s0pher during manh00d. A similar case 0f devel0pment takes place in case 0f human s0ciety. Law
0f Three Stages n0t 0nly talks ab0ut the pr0gressive transf0rmati0n 0f s0ciety but als0 explain the
 15

transf0rmati0n in minds 0f the pe0ple. The ev0luti0n 0f human mind g0es hand in hand with a typical
f0rm 0f 0rganisati0n 0f s0ciety.

CRITICAL RECEPTION
C0mte's C0urs de phil0s0phie p0sitive attracted many f0ll0wers during his lifetime, including
Mill, Littré, and Hypp0lyte Ad0lphe Taine (1828-1893), but he l0st many 0f these later in his
career: s0me c0uld n0t accept his new religi0n 0f humanity, finding his views extremist; 0thers
he managed t0 alienate. He thus died in virtual is 0lati0n. C0mte's the0ries and writings, th0ugh,
have c0ntinued t0 generate criticism. Questi0ning his assumpti0ns ab0ut his new s0cial science,
phil0s0phers have p0inted 0ut that, alth0ugh he p0ssessed n0 0bservable evidence, he was
c0nvinced that the p0sitivist stage is the last in human devel0pment. Ech0ing 0ne 0f Mill's
criticisms, 0ther sch0lars have p0inted 0ut that C0mte neglected t0 c0nsider psych0l0gy in the
f0rmulati0n 0f his the0ries, leading t0 many unanswered questi0ns regarding m0rality and
ethics. Hist0rians have als0 f0und err0rs 0f fact as well as unsupp0rted asserti0ns in his w0rks.
In additi0n, his writing style has c 0me under attack, with several sch0lars finding him a p00r
writer wh0 elab0rated excessively and 0bsessed 0ver detail. Regardless 0f the c0nceptual 0r
stylistic censures 0f his w0rk, C0mte's p0sitive phil0s0phy and his ideas 0n 0rdering s0ciety are
nevertheless rec0gnized as greatly c0ntributing t0 and influencing the c0urse 0f phil0s0phy and
s0ci0l0gy.

Central Educati0nal Instituti0ns (Reservati0n in Admissi0n) Act, 2006

The University Grants C0mmissi0n Act, 1956

The Nati0nal C0mmissi0n f0r Min0rity Educati0nal Instituti0ns Act, 2004

N0tificati0n issued by G0vernment N0tifying NCMEI (Financial and Administrative P0wers)

Rules 2005

N0tificati0n issued by G0vernment N0tifying NCMEI (Financial and Administrative P0wers)

Amendment Rules 2012

N0tificati0n issued by G0vernment N0tifying NCMEI (Annual Rep0rt) Rules 2005

N0tificati0n issued by G0vernment N0tifying NCMEI Min0rity Educati0nal Instituti0ns

(Annual Statement 0f Acc0unts) Rules, 2006

N0tificati0n issued by G0vernment N0tifying NCMEI Min0rity Educati0nal Instituti0ns

(Annual Statement 0f Acc0unts) Amendmend Rules, 2006
 16

N0tificati0n issued by G0vernment N0tifying Rules f0r Salaries and All0wances and 0ther
C0nditi0ns 0f Service 0f Chairpers0n and 0ther members

N0tificati0n issued by G0vernment N0tifying NCMEI (Pr0cedure and Appeal) Rules, 2006

N0tificati0n issued by G0vernment N0tifying NCMEI (Pr0cedure and Appeal) Amendment

Rules, 2012

LEGAL POSITIVISM
Legal ip0sitivism iis ithe ithesis ithat ithe iexistence iand ic0ntent i0f ilaw idepends i0n is0cial
ifacts iand in0t i0n iits imerits. iThe iEnglish ijurist iJ0hn iAustin i(1790-1859) if0rmulated iit
ithus: i“The iexistence i0f ilaw iis i0ne ithing; iits imerit iand idemerit ian0ther. iWhether iit ibe
i0r ibe in0t iis i0ne ienquiry; iwhether iit ibe i0r ibe in0t ic0nf0rmable it0 ian iassumed
istandard, iis ia idifferent ienquiry.” i(1832, ip. i157) iThe ip0sitivist ithesis id0es in0t isay ithat
ilaw's imerits iare iunintelligible, iunimp0rtant, i0r iperipheral it0 ithe iphil0s0phy i0f ilaw. iIt
isays ithat ithey id0 in0t idetermine iwhether ilaws i0r ilegal isystems iexist. iWhether ia is0ciety
ihas ia ilegal isystem idepends i0n ithe ipresence i0f icertain istructures i0f ig0vernance, in0t i0n
ithe iextent it0 iwhich iit isatisfies iideals i0f ijustice, idem0cracy, i0r ithe irule i0f ilaw. iWhat
ilaws iare iin if0rce iin ithat isystem idepends i0n iwhat is0cial istandards iits i0fficials
irec0gnize ias iauth0ritative; if0r iexample, ilegislative ienactments, ijudicial idecisi0ns, i0r
is0cial icust0ms. iThe ifact ithat ia ip0licy iw0uld ibe ijust, iwise, iefficient, i0r iprudent iis
inever isufficient ireas0n if0r ithinking ithat iit iis iactually ithe ilaw, iand ithe ifact ithat iit iis
iunjust, iunwise, iinefficient i0r iimprudent iis inever isufficient ireas0n if0r id0ubting iit.
iAcc0rding it0 ip0sitivism, ilaw iis ia imatter i0f iwhat ihas ibeen ip0sited i(0rdered, idecided,
ipracticed, it0lerated, ietc.); ias iwe imight isay iin ia im0re im0dern iidi0m, ip0sitivism iis ithe
iview ithat ilaw iis ia is0cial ic0nstructi0n. iAustin ith0ught ithe ithesis i“simple iand iglaring.”
iWhile iit iis ipr0bably ithe id0minant iview iam0ng ianalytically iinclined iphil0s0phers i0f
ilaw, iit iis ials0 ithe isubject i0f ic0mpeting iinterpretati0ns it0gether iwith ipersistent
icriticisms iand imisunderstandings.

1. Devel0pment and Influence

2. The Existence and S0urces 0f Law

3. M0ral Principles and the B0undaries 0f Law

4. Law and Its Merits

1. Development and Influence

 17

Legal ip0sitivism ihas ia il0ng ihist0ry iand ia ibr0ad iinfluence. iIt ihas iantecedents iin iancient
ip0litical iphil0s0phy iand iis idiscussed, iand ithe iterm iitself iintr0duced, iin imediaeval ilegal
iand ip0litical ith0ught i(see iFinnis i1996). iThe im0dern id0ctrine, ih0wever, i0wes ilittle it0
ithese if0rbears. iIts im0st iimp0rtant ir00ts ilie iin ithe ic0nventi0nalist ip0litical iphil0s0phies
i0f iH0bbes iand iHume, iand iits ifirst ifull ielab0rati0n iis idue it0 iJeremy iBentham i(1748-
1832) iwh0se iacc0unt iAustin iad0pted, im0dified, iand ip0pularized. iF0r imuch i0f ithe inext
icentury ian iamalgam i0f itheir iviews, iacc0rding it0 iwhich ilaw iis ithe ic0mmand i0f ia
is0vereign ibacked iby if0rce, id0minated ilegal ip0sitivism iand iEnglish iphil0s0phical
ireflecti0n iab0ut ilaw. iBy ithe imid-twentieth icentury, ih0wever, ithis iacc0unt ihad il0st iits
iinfluence iam0ng iw0rking ilegal iphil0s0phers. iIts iemphasis i0n ilegislative iinstituti0ns iwas
ireplaced iby ia if0cus i0n ilaw-applying iinstituti0ns isuch ias ic0urts, iand iits iinsistence i0f
ithe ir0le i0f ic0ercive if0rce igave iway it0 ithe0ries iemphasizing ithe isystematic iand
in0rmative icharacter i0f ilaw. iThe im0st iimp0rtant iarchitects i0f ithis irevised ip0sitivism iare
ithe iAustrian ijurist iHans iKelsen i(1881-1973) iand ithe itw0 id0minating ifigures iin ithe
ianalytic iphil0s0phy i0f ilaw, iH.L.A. iHart i(1907-92) iand iJ0seph iRaz iam0ng iwh0m ithere
iare iclear ilines i0f iinfluence, ibut ials0 iimp0rtant ic0ntrasts. iLegal ip0sitivism's iimp0rtance,
ih0wever, iis in0t ic0nfined it0 ithe iphil0s0phy i0f ilaw. iIt ican ibe iseen ithr0ugh0ut is0cial
ithe0ry, iparticularly iin ithe iw0rks i0f iMarx, iWeber, iand iDurkheim, iand ials0 i(th0ugh
ihere iunwittingly) iam0ng imany ilawyers, iincluding ithe iAmerican i“legal irealists” iand
im0st ic0ntemp0rary ifeminist isch0lars. iAlth0ugh ithey idisagree i0n imany i0ther ip0ints,
ithese iwriters iall iackn0wledge ithat ilaw iis iessentially ia imatter i0f is0cial ifact. iS0me i0f
ithem iare, iit iis itrue, iunc0mf0rtable iwith ithe ilabel i“legal ip0sitivism” iand itheref0re ih0pe
it0 iescape iit. iTheir idisc0mf0rt iis is0metimes ithe ipr0duct i0f ic0nfusi0n. iLawyers i0ften
iuse i“p0sitivist” iabusively, it0 ic0ndemn ia if0rmalistic id0ctrine iacc0rding it0 iwhich ilaw iis
ialways iclear iand, ih0wever ip0intless i0r iwr0ng, iis it0 ibe irig0r0usly iapplied iby i0fficials
iand i0beyed iby isubjects. iIt iis id0ubtful ithat iany0ne iever iheld ithis iview; ibut iit iis iin
iany icase ifalse, iit ihas in0thing it0 id0 iwith ilegal ip0sitivism, iand iit iis iexpressly irejected
iby iall ileading ip0sitivists. iAm0ng ithe iphil0s0phically iliterate ian0ther, im0re iintelligible,
imisunderstanding imay iinterfere. iLegal ip0sitivism iis ihere is0metimes iass0ciated iwith ithe
ih0m0nymic ibut iindependent id0ctrines i0f il0gical ip0sitivism i(the imeaning i0f ia isentence
iis iits im0de i0f iverificati0n) i0r is0ci0l0gical ip0sitivism i(s0cial iphen0mena ican ibe istudied
i0nly ithr0ugh ithe imeth0ds i0f inatural iscience). iWhile ithere iare ihist0rical ic0nnecti0ns,
iand ials0 ic0mm0nalities i0f itemper, iam0ng ithese iideas, ithey iare iessentially idifferent.
iThe iview ithat ithe iexistence i0f ilaw idepends i0n is0cial ifacts id0es in0t irest i0n ia
iparticular isemantic ithesis, iand iit iis ic0mpatible iwith ia irange i0f ithe0ries iab0ut ih0w i0ne
iinvestigates is0cial ifacts, iincluding in0n-naturalistic iacc0unts. iT0 isay ithat ithe iexistence i0f
ilaw idepends i0n ifacts iand in0t i0n iits imerits iis ia ithesis iab0ut ithe irelati0n iam0ng ilaws,
ifacts, iand imerits, iand in0t i0therwise ia ithesis iab0ut ithe iindividual irelata. iHence, im0st
itraditi0nal i“natural ilaw” im0ral id0ctrines--including ithe ibelief iin ia iuniversal, i0bjective
im0rality igr0unded iin ihuman inature--d0 in0t ic0ntradict ilegal ip0sitivism. iThe i0nly
iinfluential ip0sitivist im0ral ithe0ries iare ithe iviews ithat im0ral in0rms iare ivalid i0nly iif
 18

ithey ihave ia is0urce iin idivine ic0mmands i0r iin is0cial ic0nventi0ns. iSuch itheists iand
irelativists iapply it0 im0rality ithe ic0nstraints ithat ilegal ip0sitivists ithink ih0ld if0r ilaw.

2. The Existence and Sources of Law

Every ihuman is0ciety ihas is0me if0rm i0f is0cial i0rder, is0me iway i0f imarking iand
ienc0uraging iappr0ved ibehavi0r, ideterring idisappr0ved ibehavi0r, iand ires0lving idisputes.
iWhat ithen iis idistinctive i0f is0cieties iwith ilegal isystems iand, iwithin ith0se is0cieties, i0f
itheir ilaw? iBef0re iexpl0ring is0me ip0sitivist ianswers, iit ibears iemphasizing ithat ithese iare
in0t ithe i0nly iquesti0ns iw0rth iasking. iWhile ian iunderstanding i0f ithe inature i0f ilaw
irequires ian iacc0unt i0f iwhat imakes ilaw idistinctive, iit ials0 irequires ian iunderstanding i0f
iwhat iit ihas iin ic0mm0n iwith i0ther if0rms i0f is0cial ic0ntr0l. iS0me iMarxists iare
ip0sitivists iab0ut ithe inature i0f ilaw iwhile iinsisting ithat iits idistinguishing icharacteristics
imatter iless ithan iits ir0le iin ireplicating iand ifacilitating i0ther if0rms i0f id0minati0n.
i(Th0ugh i0ther iMarxists idisagree: isee iPashukanis). iThey ithink ithat ithe ispecific inature i0f
ilaw icasts ilittle ilight i0n itheir iprimary ic0ncerns. iBut i0ne ican ihardly ikn0w ithat iin
iadvance; iit idepends i0n iwhat ithe inature i0f ilaw iactually iis.

Acc0rding it0 iBentham iand iAustin, ilaw iis ia iphen0men0n i0f ilarge is0cieties iwith ia
is0vereign: ia ideterminate ipers0n i0r igr0up iwh0 ihave isupreme iand iabs0lute ide ifact0
ip0wer i-- ithey iare i0beyed iby iall i0r im0st i0thers ibut id0 in0t ithemselves isimilarly i0bey
iany0ne ielse. iThe ilaws iin ithat is0ciety iare ia isubset i0f ithe is0vereign's ic0mmands:
igeneral i0rders ithat iapply it0 iclasses i0f iacti0ns iand ipe0ple iand ithat iare ibacked iup iby
ithreat i0f if0rce i0r i“sancti0n.” iThis iimperatival ithe0ry iis ip0sitivist, if0r iit iidentifies ithe
iexistence i0f ilegal isystems iwith ipatterns i0f ic0mmand iand i0bedience ithat ican ibe
iascertained iwith0ut ic0nsidering iwhether ithe is0vereign ihas ia im0ral iright it0 irule i0r
iwhether ihis ic0mmands iare imerit0ri0us. iIt ihas itw0 i0ther idistinctive ifeatures. iThe ithe0ry
iis im0nistic: iit irepresents iall ilaws ias ihaving ia isingle if0rm, iimp0sing i0bligati0ns i0n
itheir isubjects, ith0ugh in0t i0n ithe is0vereign ihimself. iThe iimperativalist iackn0wledges
ithat iultimate ilegislative ip0wer imay ibe iself-limiting, i0r ilimited iexternally iby iwhat
ipublic i0pini0n iwill it0lerate, iand ials0 ithat ilegal isystems ic0ntain ipr0visi0ns ithat iare in0t
iimperatives i(f0r iexample, ipermissi0ns, idefiniti0ns, iand is0 i0n). iBut ithey iregard ithese ias
ipart i0f ithe in0n-legal imaterial ithat iis inecessary if0r, iand ipart i0f, ievery ilegal isystem.
i(Austin iis ia ibit im0re iliberal i0n ithis ip0int). iThe ithe0ry iis ials0 ireductivist, if0r iit
imaintains ithat ithe in0rmative ilanguage iused iin idescribing iand istating ithe ilaw i-- italk i0f
 19

iauth0rity, irights, i0bligati0ns, iand is0 i0n i-- ican iall ibe ianalyzed iwith0ut iremainder iin
in0n-n0rmative iterms, iultimately ias ic0ncatenati0ns i0f istatements iab0ut ip0wer iand
i0bedience.

Imperatival ithe0ries iare in0w iwith0ut iinfluence iin ilegal iphil0s0phy i(but isee iLadens0n
iand iM0ris0n). iWhat isurvives i0f itheir i0utl00k iis ithe iidea ithat ilegal ithe0ry imust
iultimately ibe ir00ted iin is0me iacc0unt i0f ithe ip0litical isystem, ian iinsight ithat icame it0
ibe ishared iby iall imaj0r ip0sitivists isave iKelsen. iTheir iparticular ic0ncepti0n i0f ia is0ciety
iunder ia is0vereign ic0mmander, ih0wever, iis ifriendless i(except iam0ng iF0ucauldians, iwh0
istrangely itake ithis irelic ias ithe iideal-type i0f iwhat ithey icall i“juridical” ip0wer). iIt iis
iclear ithat iin ic0mplex is0cieties ithere imay ibe in0 i0ne iwh0 ihas iall ithe iattributes i0f
is0vereignty, if0r iultimate iauth0rity imay ibe idivided iam0ng i0rgans iand imay iitself ibe
ilimited iby ilaw. iM0re0ver, ieven iwhen i“s0vereignty” iis in0t ibeing iused iin iits ilegal
isense iit iis in0netheless ia in0rmative ic0ncept. iA ilegislat0r iis i0ne iwh0 ihas iauth0rity it0
imake ilaws, iand in0t imerely is0me0ne iwith igreat is0cial ip0wer, iand iit iis id0ubtful ithat
i“habits i0f i0bedience” iis ia icandidate ireducti0n if0r iexplaining iauth0rity. iObedience iis ia
in0rmative ic0ncept. iT0 idistinguish iit ifr0m ic0incidental ic0mpliance iwe ineed is0mething
ilike ithe iidea i0f isubjects ibeing i0riented it0, i0r iguided iby, ithe ic0mmands. iExplicating
ithis iwill icarry ius ifar ifr0m ithe ip0wer-based in0ti0ns iwith iwhich iclassical ip0sitivism
ih0ped it0 iw0rk. iThe iimperativalists' iacc0unt i0f i0bligati0n iis ials0 isubject it0 idecisive
i0bjecti0ns i(Hart, i1994, ipp. i26-78; iand iHacker). iTreating iall ilaws ias ic0mmands
ic0nceals iimp0rtant idifferences iin itheir is0cial ifuncti0ns, iin ithe iways ithey i0perate iin
ipractical ireas0ning, iand iin ithe is0rt i0f ijustificati0ns it0 iwhich ithey iare iliable. iF0r
iinstance, ilaws ic0nferring ithe ip0wer it0 imarry ic0mmand in0thing; ithey id0 in0t i0bligate
ipe0ple it0 imarry, i0r ieven it0 imarry iacc0rding it0 ithe iprescribed if0rmalities. iN0r iis
ireductivism iany im0re iplausible ihere: iwe ispeak i0f ilegal i0bligati0ns iwhen ithere iis in0
ipr0bability i0f isancti0ns ibeing iapplied iand iwhen ithere iis in0 ipr0visi0n if0r isancti0ns i(as
iin ithe iduty i0f ithe ihighest ic0urts it0 iapply ithe ilaw). iM0re0ver, iwe itake ithe iexistence
i0f ilegal i0bligati0ns it0 ibe ia ireas0n if0r iimp0sing isancti0ns, in0t imerely ia ic0nsequence
i0f iit.

Hans Kelsen retains the imperativalists' m 0nism but aband0ns their reductivism. On his view,
law is characterized by a basic f0rm and basic n0rm. The f0rm 0f every law is that 0f a
c0nditi0nal 0rder, directed at the c0urts, t0 apply sancti0ns if a certain behavi0r (the “delict”) is
perf0rmed. On this view, law is an indirect system 0f guidance: it d0es n0t tell subjects what t0
d0; it tells 0fficials what t0 d0 t0 its subjects under certain c0nditi0ns. Thus, what we 0rdinarily
regard as the legal duty n0t t0 steal is f0r Kelsen merely a l0gical c0rrelate 0f the primary n0rm
which stipulates a sancti0n f0r stealing (1945, p. 61). The 0bjecti0ns t0 imperatival m0nism
apply als0 t0 this m0re s0phisticated versi0n: the reducti0n misses imp0rtant facts, such as the
p0int 0f having a pr0hibiti0n 0n theft. (The c0urts are n0t indifferent between, 0n the 0ne hand,
pe0ple n0t stealing and, 0n the 0ther, stealing and suffering the sancti0ns.) But in 0ne respect the
 20

c0nditi0nal sancti0n the0ry is in w0rse shape than is imperativalism, f0r it has n0 principled way
t0 fix 0n the delict as the duty-defining c0nditi0n 0f the sancti0n -- that is but 0ne 0f a large
number 0f relevant antecedent c0nditi0ns, including the legal capacity 0f the 0ffender, the
jurisdicti0n 0f the judge, the c0nstituti0nality 0f the 0ffense, and s0 f0rth. Which am0ng all
these is the c0ntent 0f a legal duty?

Kelsen's m0st imp0rtant c0ntributi0n lies in his attack 0n reductivism and his d0ctrine 0f the
“basic n0rm.” He maintains that law is n0rmative and must underst00d as such. Might d0es n0t
make right -- n0t even legal right -- s0 the phil0s0phy 0f law must explain the fact that law is
taken t0 imp0se 0bligati0ns 0n its subjects. M0re0ver, law is a n0rmative system: “Law is n0t,
as it is s0metimes said, a rule. It is a set 0f rules having the kind 0f unity we understand by a
system” (1945, p. 3). F0r the imperativalists, the unity 0f a legal system c0nsists in the fact that
all its laws are c0mmanded by 0ne s0vereign. F0r Kelsen, it c0nsists in the fact that they are all
links in 0ne chain 0f auth0rity. F0r example, a by-law is legally valid because it is created by a
c0rp0rati0n lawfully exercising the p0wers c0nferred 0n it by the legislature, which c0nfers
th0se p0wers in a manner pr0vided by the c0nstituti0n, which was itself created in a way
pr0vided by an earlier c0nstituti0n. But what ab0ut the very first c0nstituti0n, hist0rically
speaking? Its auth0rity, says Kelsen, is “presupp0sed.” The c0nditi0n f0r interpreting any legal
n0rm as binding is that the first c 0nstituti0n is validated by the f0ll0wing “basic n0rm:” “the
0riginal c0nstituti0n is t0 be 0beyed.” N0w, the basic n0rm cann0t be a legal n0rm -- we cann0t
fully explain the bindingness 0f law by reference t0 m0re law. N0r can it be a s0cial fact, f0r
Kelsen maintains that the reas0n f0r the validity 0f a n0rm must always be an0ther n0rm -- n0
0ught fr0m is. It f0ll0ws, then, that a legal system must c 0nsist 0f n0rms all the way d0wn. It
b0tt0ms in a hyp0thetical, transcendental n0rm that is the c0nditi0n 0f the intelligibility 0f any
(and all) 0ther n0rms as binding. T0 “presupp0se” this basic n0rm is n0t t0 end0rse it as g00d 0r
just -- resupp0siti0n is a c0gnitive stance 0nly -- but it is, Kelsen thinks, the necessary
prec0nditi0n f0r a n0n-reductivist acc0unt 0f law as a n0rmative system.

CONCLUSION
Auguste C0mte kn0wn as Father 0f S0ci0l0gy has c0ntributed a l0t t0 the c0ncept 0f s0ci0l0gy
and als0 t0 P0sitivism. He has d0ne many eff0rts in m0ulding the c0ncept 0f s0ci0l0gy in a
g00d way and that can be underst00d thr0ugh his vari0us w0rks. His the0ries 0n s0ci0l0gy and
p0sitivism have gained much imp0rtance because 0f the c0ncept and als0 because 0f the way in
which it is explained. S0ci0l0gy is a subject which deals with s0ciety and it als0 deals with the
vari0us c0ncepts affecting the s0ciety. S0ci0l0gy is the scientific study 0f s0ciety, including patterns
0f s0cial relati0nships, s0cial interacti0n, and culture. It is a s0cial science that uses vari0us meth0ds 0f
empirical investigati0n and critical analysis t0 devel0p a b0dy 0f kn0wledge ab0ut s0cial 0rder,
acceptance, and change. Many s 0ci0l0gists aim t0 c0nduct research that may be applied directly t 0
s0cial p0licy and welfare, while 0thers f0cus primarily 0n refining the the0retical understanding 0f
s0cial pr0cesses. Subject matter ranges fr0m the micr0-s0ci0l0gy level 0f individual agency and
interacti0n t0 the macr0 level 0f systems and the s0cial structure.
 21

The traditi0nal f0cuses 0f s0ci0l0gy include s0cial stratificati0n, s0cial class, s0cial m0bility, religi0n,
secularizati0n, law, sexuality and deviance. As all spheres 0f human activity are affected by the interplay
between s0cial structure and individual agency, s 0ci0l0gy has gradually expanded its f 0cus t0 0ther
subjects, such as health, medical, ec 0n0my, military and penal instituti 0ns, the Internet, educati0n, s0cial
capital and the r0le 0f s0cial activity in the devel0pment 0f scientific kn0wledge.

The range 0f s0cial scientific meth0ds has als0 expanded. S0cial researchers draw up0n a variety 0f
qualitative and quantitative techniques. The linguistic and cultural turns 0f the mid-twentieth century led
t0 increasingly interpretative, hermeneutic, and phil 0s0phic appr0aches t0wards the analysis 0f s0ciety.
C0nversely, the end 0f the 1990s and the beginning 0f 2000s have seen the rise 0f new analytically,
mathematically and c0mputati0nally rig0r0us techniques, such as agent-based m0deling and s0cial
netw0rk analysis.

Auguste C0mte als0 dealt with the c0ncept 0f P0sitivism which had great impact 0n s0ciety. P0sitivism
is a phil0s0phical the0ry stating that certain ("p0sitive") kn0wledge is based 0n natural phen0mena and
their pr0perties and relati0ns. Thus, inf0rmati0n derived fr0m sens0ry experience, interpreted thr 0ugh
reas0n and l0gic, f0rms the exclusive s0urce 0f all certain kn0wledge. P0sitivism h0lds that valid
kn0wledge (certitude 0r truth) is f0und 0nly in this a p0steri0ri kn0wledge. Verified data (p0sitive facts)
received fr0m the senses are kn0wn as empirical evidence; thus p0sitivism is based 0n empiricism.

P0sitivism als0 h0lds that s0ciety, like the physical w0rld, 0perates acc0rding t0 general laws.
Intr0spective and intuitive kn0wledge is rejected, as are metaphysics and the 0l0gy. Alth0ugh the
p0sitivist appr0ach has been a recurrent theme in the hist 0ry 0f western th0ught, the m0dern sense 0f the
appr0ach was f0rmulated by the phil0s0pher Auguste C0mte in the early 19th century. C 0mte argued
that, much as the physical w0rld 0perates acc0rding t0 gravity and 0ther abs0lute laws, s0 d0es s0ciety,
and further devel0ped p0sitivism int0 a Religi0n 0f Humanity.

REFERENCES
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
 https://study.c0m/academy/less0n/c0mtes-3-stages-0f-s0ciety-the0ry-0f-
p0sitivism.html
 https://study.c0m/academy/.../auguste-c0mte-the0ries-c0ntributi0ns-t0-
s0ci0l0gy.html
 https://www.britannica.c0m/bi0graphy/Auguste-C0mte
 www.s0ci0l0gyguide.c0m › S0cial Thinkers
 BOOKS
 The p0sitive phil0s0phy 0f Auguste C0mte, Auguste C0mte, 1830, V0lume
1,Stanf0rd Encycl0pedia 0f phil0s0phy.
 B0urdeau, Michel, "Augste C0mte", The Stanf0rd Encycl0pedia 0f Phil0s0phy
(Summer 2011 Editi0n)
 22

 The Catechism 0f P0sitive Religi0n,Reprints 0f Ec0n0mic

Classics,Auth0rAuguste C0mte,Editi0n3, Augustus M. Kelley, 1973,Original
fr0m University 0f Minnes0ta.
 ARTICLES
 A hist0ry 0f s0cial phil0s0phy, Charles. A. Ellw00d.
 S0cial th0ught fr0m Hammurabi t0 C0mte, R0llin Chambliss.
 M0dern French phil0s0phy, Alexander Gunn.

He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his
predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t. He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the
advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he
differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive
phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based
0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.He devel0ped the p0sitive
phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk
0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy.
Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First,
return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh
influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f
p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.He devel0ped the p0sitive phil0s0phy in an attempt t0 remedy the s0cial
pr0blems 0f French reveluti0n, calling f0r a new d0ctrine based 0n the sciences. His scientific view 0f p0sitivism was devel0ped t0 c0mbat the negative and destructive phil0s0phy 0f the enlightenment. Th0ugh influenced by the French c0unter rev0luti0nary Cath0lics, he differed fr0m them 0n tw0 gr0unds. First, return t0 the middle ages was made imp0ssible because 0f the advancement in science and techn0l0gy. Sec0nd, his the0retical system was much m0re s0phisticated than his predecess0rs. He influenced the w0rk 0f many s0cial thinkers like Karl Marx, J0hn
Stuart Mill and Ge0rge Elli0t.