Modern sociological
knowledge is of a complex inner structure. As any other sciences, historically
sociology developed in two basic directions – fundamental and applied. But
sociologists, representatives of different paradigms, used different criteria
and concepts for defining one and the same event and phenomenon that resulted
in confusing. So nowadays, sociological knowledge is structured as follows.

The first structure is macro- and micro-sociology. The
point is that for the first decades of its existence sociology developed in Europe as macro-sociology pretending to reveal global
laws of the society, and this aim is reflected in its name. But soon
micro-sociology appeared to stop philosophizing about the society in general
and get down to learning human behaviour in different social conditions, motivations
of human deeds, mechanisms of interpersonal interactions etc.

Since then the development of sociology has gone along
two parallel directions that were of little correlation with each other.
Macro-sociologists operated with the concepts "society”, "social system”,
"social institution”, "civilization”, "culture” etc. It means they used
abstract categories. Micro-sociologists preferred discussing stimuli of human
behaviour and people’s reactions, factors determining their certain deeds, deviant
behaviour etc.

Macro-sociology is sociology investigating
large-scale social systems and historically long processes taking place in the
society. Another area of its interest is tendencies of the society’s development
in general. As macro-sociology is often referred to as a fundamental science,
most of its attention is paid to social institutions such as the family, religion,
education etc. and to political and economic systems of social order It also
studies interrelations between different parts of the society and dynamics of
their changing.

Micro-sociology is sociology studying
small-scale social structures, groups and direct interpersonal relationships.
The object of micro-sociological research is a human as a member of the group,
association or community.

So a criterion for differentiation between macro- and micro-sociology
is basically their contents: macro-sociology is destined to study laws, factors
and perspectives of development of the society and its largest parts
(civilizations) while micro-sociology studies relationships between groups and
individuals.

The second structure is fundamental theoretic and applied empirical
sociologies. Fundamental theoretic sociology gives answers to
questions what is investigated (i.e. it defines the object and subject of research)
and how to investigate (i.e. main methods of sociology are meant). Fundamental
sociology is to get new knowledge on social development. That’s why it concerns
with social and philosophic comprehension of most general problems of the
society’s development and functioning and a personality’s place in it. That’s
why its concepts are characterized by a high level of abstraction. Fundamental
sociology does not investigate such definite units as a social group or social
process, and this point presents its most distinctive feature. It is the
fundamental level where sociology realizes its interrelations with other sciences
such as philosophy, history, psychology etc.

Applied empiric sociology studies and
suggests ways of influence on social reality and social communities. It is to
give conception about real processes of social development, being engaged in
forecasting, projecting and forming a social policy, working out
recommendations for social governance. It is also to find out means to achieve
socially important goals, implement propositions of fundamental sociology and
methods of social planning and forecasting. So the criterion for
differentiating between fundamental and applied sociology is the character of
sociological knowledge: abstract and practical.

Some researchers thought that development of macro-sociology lead to
formation of modern fundamental sociology, so as development of micro-sociology
– to applied sociology. The idea has a ration to exist but it can’t be accepted
true in full measure. Macro- and micro-sociology have two levels, both
fundamental and empiric ones. Macro-sociologists (E. Durkheim, M. Weber, F.
Toennis, P.A. Sorokin) were very active in carrying out empiric sociological
researches, and micro-sociologists (representatives of the American sociological
school G. Mead, G. Homans, P. Blau) became founders of most significant sociological
theories. It only means that macro- and micro-sociology developed both as
fundamental and applied.  

The third structure came to existence not long ago. Sociology is a relatively
young science that historically emerged from social philosophy and psychology.
First sociological theories were fundamental, being based on observations,
conclusions and generalizations of different sides of social life. To work out
such a theory a researcher needs exact data of certain social facts which
constitute the society’s structure and the process of changing. These data are
obtained with methods of empiric research (interviews, observations,
experiments etc.). Gathered empiric facts are processed and generalized; after
doing it, a researcher can make primary theoretic conclusions about definite
phenomena of social life. Fundamental theories and empiric researches should be
closely connected as pure theorizing without knowing definite facts of social
realm becomes impracticable. At the same time empiric researches which are not
supported with fundamental theoretic conclusions cannot explain the nature of
most social phenomena.   

In the first third of the XX century a sharply increased level of
empiric researches demanded a universal theoretic apparatus to explain the
results of research. But the apparatus of fundamental sociology couldn’t be
applied to studying such various social phenomena as the family, deviant
behaviour, social governance etc. In its turn, fundamental sociology was in
great need of empiric information as empiric researches were carried out, as a
rule, to meet narrow-practical, utilitarian needs and it was hard to make up an
entity of them. It resulted in creating a breakout between fundamental
sociology and empiric researches that became an obstacle in the way of developing
sociology and prevented researchers from uniting their efforts.

However, the way out was found in formation of one more level of sociological
knowledge under the name of middle range theories. The term was
introduced by an American sociologist Robert Merton who, in his work "Social
theory and social structure” published in 1949, stated a number of propositions
of middle range theories – concepts of manifest and latent function, social dysfunction,
referent group etc. Middle range theories, to R. Merton’s mind, had to unite
empiric generalizations and theoretic conceptions to counterbalance T.
Parsons’s universal theory.

Levels of sociological knowledge

Grand/ all- sociological theories

Learning social structures

Learning social development, integration and disintegration processes

Learning a personality’s development

Learning models, methods and techniques of sociological reseach

	Social institutions	Social communities	Social processes
Middle range theories	Sociology of family Sociology of science Sociology of education Sociology of religion Sociology of labour Sociology of arts etc.	Sociology of small groups Sociology of organization Sociology of crowd Sociology of strata, classes Ethnosociology Feminist sociology etc.	Sociology of conflicts Sociology of town Sociology of social movements Sociology of deviant behaviour Sociology of mobility and migration etc.

Primary generalization of empiric data

Carrying out empiric sociological researches in social groups and institutions

At present there exist a number of middle range theories that occupy an
intermediate place between theories of the grand or all-sociological level
and empiric generalization of primary sociological information. They are aimed
at generalizing and structuring empiric data within definite areas of
sociological knowledge (the family, organization, deviant behaviour, conflict
etc.) applying both the ideas and terminology borrowed from fundamental sociological
theories and specific concepts, definitions formed only for the given branch of
sociological research.

When emerged, middle range theories
created a number of indisputable advantages. First, researchers were given a
possibility to make up solid theoretic grounds for investigating definite areas
of human activities, not applying to the conceptual apparatus of fundamental
theories; second, middle range theories allow to exercise close interaction
with people’s real life as the subject of their research.

Middle range theories gave birth to rather a narrow
specialization of sociologists who work, for instance, only in the area of the
family or management, gather empiric data, generalize them and make theoretic
conclusions within the given area of applied sociological knowledge. That’s why
these theories bear an applied, or branch character. At the same
time, applied theories enabled to increase effectiveness of fundamental
researches because sociologists were given an opportunity to generalize
theoretic outcomes in separate sociological branches without constant applying
to first-hand empiric data.

All middle range theories can be conditionally divided
into three groups: those of social institutions, social communities and
specialized social processes. Theories of the first group investigate complex
social dependences and relationships; those of the second one consider
structural units of the society (social groups, classes, communities etc.);
those of the third one study social processes and changes.

In each group the number of middle range theories is
constantly increasing as far as learning the society is deepening, and
sociology as a science is developing. Sociologists, who study applied social
problems, work out a specific conceptual apparatus, carry out empiric
researches of their issues, generalize the given data, make theoretic
generalizations and combine them into a theory within their own branch. 

Thus, sociology is not some monosemantic or homogeneous
formation because it includes different levels of sociological knowledge.
Although at each of the given levels the notion of the subject of research,
goals and objectives are given a definite expression to, in all cases sociology
is represented as a scientific system. It means that its main goal is to get
scientific knowledge about the society on the whole or about its parts and
subsystems.  

BASIC
CONCEPTS

Applied empiric sociology – sociology which
studies and suggests ways of influence on social reality and social communities,
gives conception about real processes of social development, being engaged in
forecasting, projecting and forming a social policy, working out
recommendations for social governance, and finds out means to achieve socially
important goals, implement propositions of fundamental sociology and methods of
social planning and forecasting.

Fundamental theoretic
sociology – sociology which gets new knowledge on social development;
it gives answers to questions what is investigated (i.e. it defines the object
and subject of research) and how to investigate (i.e. main methods of sociology
are meant); its theories and concepts are characterized by a high level of
abstraction.

Macro-sociology – sociology which investigates
large-scale social systems, historically long processes taking place in the
society, tendencies of the society’s development in general.

Micro-sociology – sociology which studies
small-scale social structures, groups and direct interpersonal relationships;
its object is a human as a member of the group, association or community.

Middle range theories – branch of
sociological knowledge aimed at generalizing and structuring empiric data about
certain areas of social reality, it applies both the ideas and terminology
borrowed from fundamental sociological theories and specific concepts,
definitions formed only for the given branch of sociological research.

Social fact – a socially
meaningful event or a totality of homogeneous events typical for a certain sphere
of the society or certain social processes.

Social law – relatively stable
and systematically reproduced relationships between peoples, nations, classes,
social-demographic and professional groups, between the society and social
organization, society and labour collective, society and family, society and
personality etc.

Social reality (social world) – a result of purposeful
or sensible human behaviour; its basic aggregated indicator is culture
(individualistic approach); something with its own life having an external and
compulsory character to an individual (i.e. his behaviour is determined by
reality) and materializing human consciousness (positivistic approach).