Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe paper traces the growth of sociology in India through three phases. The first phase, it argues, begins in the 30s with the slow consolidation of the discipline. In this phase, sociology was associated with the Indological perspective and the social was perceived in culturist terms and analysed through the prism of the past, in and through Sanskrit texts. In the second phase, which begins in the early 60s, when University education expands in India, this indigenous perspective is re‐framed. There is a shift from textual studies to empirical investigation and the village becomes the site for studying Indian civilization. This paper makes a detailed analysis of the social anthropological perspective of M.N. Srinivas whose theories on village and caste influenced the sociological imagination in this phase. The third phase starts in the late 70s with the growth of social movements of the subalterns which challenge the received culturist nationalist sociological imagination. Today sociology together with other social sciences are at crossroads in India due to the impact of neoliberalism. The latter has encouraged privatisation of education, decreased state funding in material and human resources and an increased state control on academia. All three have affected the autonomy of the teachers and as well the University system and thus the efforts to chart a new sociological imagination in which the Indian social is perceived in global comparative terms. It is difficult to assess which turn sociology in India will take in these circumstances.

The article engages with the literature that has emerged since the 1990s in urban studies in India and in this context, discusses the nature of India's urban modernity. It suggests that scholars in India participate and engage with the global discussion on urban studies by removing themselves from the epistemic confusions of colonial episteme and of methodological nationalism that has bound sociology in India. It suggests that contemporary processes of capitalism have enveloped the entire territory of the country into an urban space with the mobile upper classes termed 'middle classes' and the state policies linking unevenly the so-called rural and urban areas through new forms of capitalist accumulation. These organise specific patterns of spatial inequalities and exclusions and in turn fuel contradictory processes of politics relating to gender, caste, ethnicity and religiosities. The focus of the urban studies should be to analyse the way the global intersects with regions and localities as these are being spatially constituted in the context of uneven urbanisation.

This article traces traditions of sociological thinking in India and suggests that in order to write the disciplines' history, it is important to identify the episteme that governs these traditions. It suggests that there are two broad epistemes that have defined sociology as a discipline in India—colonial modernity and methodological nationalism—and it argues that they organise theories, perspectives, methodologies and methods, teaching and research practices of the discipline. The history of the imprint of these epistemes is investigated at four levels: first, in the way one or both defined the discipline's identity and, thus, organised its characteristic mode of thinking methodologically; second, in the way this identity defined its theoretical direction and the theories that it borrowed, adapted to and reframed; third, in the way the first two organised its professional orientation and made it choose its identity as an academic discipline whose main role is restricted to teaching and research within academic institutions at an expense of a public orientation; and fourth, the way the aforementioned three defined its geographical compass, limiting its queries to national concerns wherein the macro became reduced to the micro abjuring discussions on global debates. This article suggests that today there is a crisis in the received epistemes, and in this context, it becomes imperative to take command to define a new episteme which intersects the local, regional, national and global concerns, is theoretical and methodologically eclectic and is comparative in nature.

This article suggests that paradigmatic changes took place in sociological traditions in India from the late 1970s to the 1990s in a manner similar to the catalytic changes occurring in the same period in different sociological traditions across the globe. In the case of sociology in India, it was feminist questionings of the systems of family, caste, religion and other tradition–modern dualities that introduced key re-conceptualisations. The article suggests that feminist studies posed theoretical and methodological challenges at four levels: first, these theories have argued that institutional and non-institutional forms of power flow through all forms of economic, social and cultural relationships; second, given that in India these inequities were organised during the colonial period, they assert that a historical and an interdisciplinary approach is imperative for the study of the 'social'; third, these positions outlined a theory of intersection that explored the way economic and cultural inequalities and exclusions were organically connected; and lastly, they suggest a need to complicate the concepts of agency and experience, given that actors/agents can, and do, represent both dominant and subaltern positions in their life cycles. The article contends that the feminist interrogations unsettled the received sociological paradigm on sociology of India in significant ways, creating new possibilities for more eclectic and parallel paradigms to emerge.