CHAPTER III 

 SOCIOLOGICAL METHODOLOGY 



Both Comte and Spencer defined life in terms of progressive 

 adaptation between an organism and its environment and both* 

 conceived society as a quasi-biological organism, though not 

 agreeing in their conception of society nor of the process of adjust- 

 ment. Comte^s concept was a logical fiction, so also, to a con- 

 siderable degree, the process of social evolution as formulated by 

 him. Spencer attempted to describe in mechanical terms the 

 historical process by which society, considered for the most part 

 as a sovereign group, is progressively adapted to its environment 

 so also that of the various social institutions; but most of his 

 time was devoted to a study of origins and his method, the logical 

 classification of concepts, failed to give him genetic order, and led 

 him to neglect the study of social forces. Comte was in advance / 

 of Spencer in emphasizing the power of mind over matter thus] 

 making place for active adaptation. 



From Comte and Spencer the development of theories of social 

 progress, of methods of sociological investigation, and as a result 

 of these, the development of the doctrine of adaptation as the key 

 to social philosophy, was along several different lines. Some 

 pushed further than these two the method of classification as a 

 means of attaining knowledge of the social structure and process 

 such as Littre, De Roberty, De Greef, Lacombe and A. Wagner, f 

 Some used the same analogical method as they and elaborated the 

 concept of society as a quasi-biological organism, chief among 

 whom were Lilienfeld and Schaffle. Others making use of the 

 neo-Darwinian formula, as Nietzsche, Kidd, and Lapouge, j 

 endeavored to explain social progress in terms of struggle and 

 survival. Others interpreted society as a quasi-psychological 

 organism as Le Bon, MacKenzie, Fairbanks, Ely, Giddings and | 

 Baldwin. Others, still, sought to analyze and evaluate social 



