1.

Karl Marx
Marx invented an entirely new sociological movement. Marxism refers to the belief that society
is imbalanced when a few own the means of production while the rest create the goods and services.
It is a backbone in communist belief systems.
I am amazed by Karl Marx because I am with him in his fight, I also believe that the society is
imbalanced when only few own the means of production while the rest create the goods and services.
Just like in our society today, there are a lot of workers who give their all, who give their best but are
treated unfairly, and the "boss" or owners are getting richer and richer without doing anything. There
should be justice and fairness to everyone in the society, poor or rich, uneducated or not. We should
all be united and we should help each other be successful.
2. Henri Saint Simon
He is one of the chief founders of Christian socialism. Socialism, social and economic doctrine
that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources.
According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with
one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and
everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole,
therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
Henri Saint Simon's belief should be taught to everyone. There should be equality for
everyone. Especially with the lands and other natural resources. All men and women should be
entitled to their own property, even though they do not have the money to pay for them. This will
make them work for their food and money, and in that way they can already pay for what is due.
3. Auguste Comte
Auguste Comte's contribution in sociology is that he advocated the use of positivism for
studying and understanding society. He coined the term 'sociology'. He was credited as the 'father of
sociology'.
I do not agree with Comte's theory, positivism. Not all rules are valid because they are only
made for the people with "powers" to benefit. Some of the rules only make the rich richer and the
poor poorer or make the situations worse.
4. Herbert Spencer
Spencer believed that society grew in two ways. The first was movement from a very simple
society to one that was quite complex. The other involved society changing from being militant to
becoming more industrial.
I agree with Spencer's first theory, that the society was first simple then became complex. As
we can see in our society today, there are a lot of changes. One example is communication. Before, it
was hard to communicate with others who are far. The only communication they have are writing of
letters. Now we have cellular phones and internet. But some of these changes are only making the
people's lives worse, they are making the people lazy and make a lot of them do bad things, like
robbery and alike.
5. Emile Durkheim
In 1893, Durkheim published his first major work, The Division of Labor in Society, in which he
introduced the concept of "anomie", or the breakdown of the influence of social norms on individuals
within a society. In 1895, he published The Rules of Sociological Method, his second major work,
which was a manifesto stating what sociology is and how it ought to be done. In 1897, he published
his third major work, Suicide: A Study in Sociology, a case study exploring the differing suicide rates
among Protestants and Catholics and arguing that stronger social control among Catholics results in
lower suicide rates.
Durkheim's work make us realize what the society is and why is our society unfair, because it
categorizes people by their social or economic status. People should not be classified because of
what he has or what he does not have. There should not be any classification of persons. We are all
created equally by or creator and that should remain like that.
6. Karl Mannheim
He is the founder of the sociology of knowledge, the study of the relationship between
human thought and the social context within which it arises, and of the effects prevailing ideas have
on societies. It is not a specialized area of sociology but instead deals with broad fundamental
questions about the extent and limits of social influences on individual's lives and the social-cultural
basics of our knowledge about the world. Complementary to the sociology of knowledge is the
sociology of ignorance including the study of nescience, ignorance, knowledge gaps or non-
knowledge as inherent features of knowledge making.
Mannheim's studies are very interesting. It deals with the human mind and relates it to the
social context. This is useful for use future nurses to understand people and give them the care they
need. By understanding the people around us, we would know how to cope everywhere we are.
7. Max Weber
Max Weber illustrated how social institutions are dependent on each other. In his major work,
he showed that when a change occurred in the religious institution during the sixteenth century, it
contributed to a change in the economic institution. Previously, most people thought of religion and
economics being autonomous and completely separated from each other. Weber showed how the
emerging values of Protestantism supported the development of modern capitalism. He also
introduced the idea that bureaucracy would be the wave of the future. He distinguished three types of
legitimate authority in societies: traditional, charismatic, and rational-legal. He did not favor Traditional
(the son of the chief becoming the new chief) or charismatic (a person led by virtue of having a
"magnetic" personality). For example, the son of the chief could be an idiot and a charismatic person
could make bad decisions. He preferred rational-legal leadership, which is typical of bureaucratic
governments. People occupy position based on competency, and powers and responsibilities are
clearly spelled out. He also said that sociology must adopt "Vershtehan," a kind of subjective
understanding of the phenomenon being studied.
I agree with Max Weber's belief, he preferred rational-legal leadership. It is better to be ruled
by a person who truly knows what his purpose is, he does what needs to be really done and he
shows his people that he is really worthy of being the ruler or leader.
8. Vilfredo Pareto
Pareto seems to have turned to sociology for an understanding of why his abstract
mathematical economic theories did not work out in practice, in the belief that unforeseen or
uncontrollable social factors intervened. His sociology holds that much social action is non-logical and
that much personal action is designed to give spurious logicality to non-rational actions. We are
driven, he taught, by certain "residues" and by "derivations" from these residues. The more important
of these have to do with conservatism and risk-taking, and human history is the story of the alternate
dominance of these sentiments in the ruling elite, which comes into power strong in conservatism but
gradually changes over to the philosophy of the "foxes" or speculators. A catastrophe results, with a
return to conservatism; the "lion" mentality follows. This cycle might be broken by the use of force,
says Pareto, but the elite become weak and humanitarian and shrinks from violence.
Pareto's 80-20 rule is kind of amazing but I don't really understand how he came up with that
rule or theory and how it will help the people.