Alatas Teaching Social Theory as Alternative Discourse

7/31/2019 Alatas Teaching Social Theory as Alternative Discourse

1/7

MULTIVERSITY

november 12, 2011 vol xlvi no 46 EPW Economic & Political Weekly48

Teaching Social Theory as Alternative Discourse

Syed Farid Alatas

The social sciences are taught in the developing world in

a Eurocentric manner. This has contributed to the

alienation of social scientists from local and regional

scholarly traditions. Further, courses in sociology and the

other social sciences generally do not attempt to correct

the Orientalist bias by introducing non-western thinkers.

This paper highlights the contributions of Filipino

thinker and activist Jos Rizal and draws attention to a

course that used the theme of Eurocentrism to provide a

critical stance from which to understand the discipline

of sociology.

Syed Farid Alatas ([email protected]) is at the National Universityof Singapore.

Orientalism denes the content of education in such a waythat the origins of the social sciences and the question ofalternative points of view are not thematised. It is thislack of thematisation which makes it highly unlikely that the worksof non-European thinkers would be given the same attention asEuropean and American social theorists such as Karl Marx,Max Weber, Emile Durkheim and others. Orientalism is a thoughtstyle that is not restricted to Europeans. The social sciences aretaught in the third world in a Eurocentric manner. This hascontributed to the alienation of social scientists from local andregional scholarly traditions. Further, courses in sociology andthe other social sciences generally do not attempt to correct theOrientalist bias by introducing non-western thinkers.

If we take the 19th century as an example, the impression given isthat during the period that Europeans such as Marx, Weber,Durkheim and others were thinking about the nature of societyand its development, there were no thinkers in Asia and Africadoing the same. The absence of non-European thinkers in theseaccounts is particularly glaring in cases where non-Europeans didinuence the development of social thought. Typically, a history ofsocial thought or a course on social thought and theory would cover

theorists such as Montesquieu, Giovanni Battista Vico, AugusteComte, Herbert Spencer, Marx, Weber, Durkheim, Georg Simmel,Ferdinand Toennies, Werner Sombart, Karl Mannheim, VilfredoPareto, William Graham Sumner, Lester Ward, Albion WoodburySmall, and others. Generally, non-western thinkers are excluded.

Here it is necessary to make a distinction between Orientalismas the blatantly stereotypical portrayal of the Orient that wasso typical of 19th century scholarship, and the new Orientalismof today that is characterised by the neglect and silencing ofnon-western voices. If at all non-Europeans appear in the textsand courses, they are objects of study of European scholars andnot knowing subjects; that is, sources of sociological theories and

ideas. This is what is meant by the silencing or marginalisation ofnon-western thinkers.

Universalising the Canon

It seems tting, therefore, to provide examples of social theoristsof non-European backgrounds who wrote on topics and theorisedproblems that would be of interest to those studying the broad rangeof macro processes that have become the hallmark of classicalsociological thought and theory. In my own teaching, I have beenconcentrating on Ibn Khaldun and Jose Rizal (Alatas 2009). Iwould like to say a few words about the latter, as I believe that

his work is of particular interest to us in south-east Asia.Filipino thinker and activist Rizal (1861-1896) was probably therst systematic social thinker in south-east Asia. As a social thinker,


2/7

MULTIVERSITY

Economic & Political Weekly EPW november 12, 2011 vol xlvi no 46 49

he raised original problems and treated them in a creative way.He lived during the formative period of sociology but theorisedabout the nature of society in ways not done by western sociolo-gists. He provides us with a different perspective on the colonialdimension of the emerging modernity of the 19th century.

Rizal was born into a wealthy family. His father ran a sugarplantation on land leased from the Dominican order. As a result,

he was able to attend the best schools in Manila. He continued hishigher studies at the Ateneo de Manila University and then theUniversity of Santo Thomas. In 1882, he departed for Spain,where he studied medicine and the humanities at the UniversidadCentral in Madrid. Rizal returned to the Philippines in 1887. Thiswas also the year that his rst novel,Noli Me Tangere (Touch MeNot) was published. The novel was a reection of exploitativeconditions under Spanish colonial rule and enraged the Spanishfriars. It was a diagnosis of the problems of Filipino society and areection of the problems of exploitation in Filipino colonial society.His second novel,El Filibusterismo (The Revolution), published in1891, examined the possibilities and consequences of revolution.

If we were to construct a sociological theory from Rizals works,three broad aspects can be discerned. First, we have his theory ofcolonial society, a theory that explains the nature and conditionsof colonial society. Second, there is his critique of colonial know-ledge of the Philippines. Finally, there is his discourse on themeaning and requirements for emancipation. In Rizals thought,the corrupt Spanish colonial government and its ofcials oppressedand exploited Filipinos, while blaming their backwardness ontheir alleged laziness. His project was to show that the Filipinoswere actually a relatively advanced society in precolonial times,and that their backwardness was a product of colonialism. This

required a reinterpretation of Filipino history.During Rizals time, there was little critique of the state of

knowledge about the Philippines among Spanish colonial andFilipino scholars. Being well acquainted with Orientalist scholar-ship in Europe, he was aware of what would today be referred toas Orientalist constructions. This can be seen from his annota-tion and republication of Antonio de Morgas Sucesos de las IslasFilipinas (Historical Events of the Philippine Islands), which rstappeared in 1609. De Morga, a Spaniard, served eight years inthe Philippines as lieutenant governor general and captaingeneral and was also a justice of the supreme court of Manila(Audiencia Real de Manila) (1890-1962: xxxv).

Rizal republished this work with his own annotation to correctwhat he saw as false reports and slanderous statements found inmost Spanish works on the Philippines, as well as to bring to lightthe precolonial past that was wiped out from the memory ofFilipinos by colonisation (1890-1962: vii). This included the destruc-tion of pre-Spanish records such as artefacts that would havethrown light on the nature of pre-colonial society (Zaide 1993: 5).Rizal found Morgas work apt as it was, according to Ocampo, theonly civil history of the Philippines written during the Spanishcolonial period, other works being mainly ecclesiastical histories(1998: 192). The problem with ecclesiastical histories, apart from

falsications and slander, was that they abound in stories of devils,miracles, apparitions, etc, these forming the bulk of the volumi-nous histories of the Philippines (de Morga, 1890-1962: 291 n 4).

For Rizal, therefore, existing histories of the Philippines werefalse and biased as well as unscientic and irrational. What hisannotations accomplished were the following: They provide examples of Filipino advances in agriculture andindustry in precolonial times. They provide the coloniseds point of view on various issues. They point out the cruelties perpetrated by the colonisers.

They furnish instances of hypocrisy of the colonisers, parti-cularly the Catholic church. They expose the irrationalities of the churchs discourse oncolonial topics.

Rizal noted that the miseries of a people without freedomshould not be imputed to the people but to their rulers (1963b: 31).His novels, political writings and letters provide examples suchas the conscation of lands, appropriation of labour of farmers,high taxes, forced labour without payment, and so on (1963c).Colonial policy was exploitative despite the claims or intentionsof the colonial government and the Catholic church. Rizal wasextremely critical of the boasted ministers of God [the friars]andpropagators of light (!) [who] have not sowed nor do they sowChristian morals, they have not taught religion, but rituals andsuperstitions (1963b: 38). This position required him to critiquecolonial knowledge of the Filipinos. He went into history toaddress the colonial allegation concerning Filipino indolence.This led to an understanding of the conditions for emancipationand the possibilities of revolution.

Lazy Myths

Bearing in mind the reinterpreted account of Filipino history,Rizal undertakes a critique of the discourse on the lazy Filipino

that was perpetuated by the Spaniards. The theme of indolence incolonial scholarship is an important one that formed a vital partof the ideology of colonial capitalism. Rizal was probably the rstto deal with it systematically. This concern was later taken up bySyed Hussein Alatas in his seminal workThe Myth of the LazyNative (1977), which contains a chapter entitled The Indolence ofthe Filipinos, in honour of Rizals essay of the same title (1963a).

The basis of Rizals sociology is his critique of the myth ofthe indolent Filipino. It is this critique and the rejection of theidea that the backwardness of Filipino society was due to theFilipinos themselves that provide the proper background forunderstanding his criticisms of the clerical establishment and

colonial administration. In his The Indolence of the Filipinoshe denes indolence as little love for work, lack of activity(1963a: 111). He then refers to indolence in two senses. First, thereis indolence in the sense of the lack of activity caused by thewarm tropical climate of the Philippines that requires quiet andrest for the individual, just as cold incites him to work and toaction (1963a: 113). His argument is as follows:

The fact is that in the tropical countries severe work is not a goodthing as in cold countries, for there it is annihilation, it is death, it isdestruction. Nature, as a just mother knowing this, has thereforemade the land more fertile, more productive, as a compensation. Anhours work under that burning sun and in the midst of pernicious

inuences coming out of an active nature is equivalent to a days workin a temperate climate; it is proper then that the land yield a hundred-fold! Moreover, dont we see the active European who has gained


3/7

MULTIVERSITY


strength during winter, who feels the fresh blood of spring boil in hisveins, dont we see him abandon his work during the few days of hischangeable summer, close his ofce, where the work after all is nothard for many, consisting of talking and gesticulating in the shadebeside a desk run to watering places, sit down at the cafes, strollabout, etc? What wonder then that the inhabitant of tropical coun-tries, worn out and with his blood thinned by the prolonged and exces-sive heat, is reduced to inaction? (1963a: 113)

What Rizal is referring to here is the physiological reaction tothe heat of a tropical climate, which strictly speaking, as S H Alatasnoted, is not consistent with his own denition of indolence; that is,little love for work. The adjustment of working habits to a tropicalclimate should not be understood to be a result of laziness or littlelove for work (Alatas 1977: 100). There is a second aspect to Rizalsconcept of indolence (1963a: 114) that is more signicant, socio-logically speaking. This is indolence in the real sense of the term;that is, little love for work or the lack of motivation to work.

The evil is not that a more or less latent indolence [in the rst sense,that is, the lack of activity] exists, but that it is fostered and magnied.

Among men, as well as among nations, there exist not only aptitudes

but also tendencies toward good and evil. To foster the good ones andaid them, as well as correct the bad ones and repress them would bethe duty of society or of governments, if less noble thoughts did notabsorb their attention. The evil is that indolence in the Philippines is amagnied indolence, a snowball indolence, if we may be permittedthe expression, an evil which increases in direct proportion to thesquare of the periods of time, an effect of misgovernment and back-

wardness, as we said and not a cause of them.

A similar point was made by Gilberto Freyre (1956: 48) in thecontext of Brazil.

And when all this practically useless population ofcaboclos and light-skinned mulattoes, worth more as clinical material than they are as an

economic force, is discovered in the state of economic wretchednessand non-productive inertia in which Miguel Pereira and BelisrioPenna found them living in such a case those who lament our lack ofracial purity and the fact that Brazil is not a temperate climate at oncesee in this wretchedness and inertia the result of intercourse, foreverdamned, between white men and black women, between Portuguesemales and Indian women. In other words, the inertia and indolenceare a matter of race ... All of which means little to this particularschool of sociology. Which is more alarmed by the stigmata of misce-genation than it is by those of syphilis, which is more concerned withthe effects of climate than it is with social causes that are susceptibleto control or rectication; nor does it take into account the inuenceexerted upon mestizo populations above all, the free ones by thescarcity of foodstuffs resulting from monoculture and a system of

slave labour, it disregards likewise the chemical poverty of the tradi-tional foods that these peoples, or rather all Brazilians, with a regionalexception here and there, have for more than three centuries con-sumed; it overlooks the irregularity of food supply and the prevailinglack of hygiene in the conservation and distribution of such products.

Rizals important sociological contribution was his raising theproblem of indolence to begin with as well as his treatment of thesubject, particularly his view that indolence was not a cause ofthe backwardness of Filipino society. Rather it was the back-wardness and disorder of Filipino colonial society that causedindolence. For Rizal, indolence was a result of the social andhistorical experience of the Filipinos under Spanish rule. We may

again take issue with him as to whether this actually constitutesindolence as opposed to a reluctance to work under exploitativeconditions. What is important, however, is his attempt to deal

with the theme systematically. He examined historical accountsby Europeans from centuries earlier which showed Filipinos to beindustrious. This included de Morgas writings. Therefore, indo-lence must have social causes and these were to be found in thenature of colonial rule. Rizal would have agreed with Freyre.

It was not the inferior race that was the source of corruption, but theabuse of one race by another, an abuse that demanded a servile con-

formity on the part of the Negro to the appetites of the all-powerfullords of the land. Those appetites were stimulated by idleness, by awealth acquired without labour ... (1956: 329)

Freyre suggested that it was the masters rather than the slaveswho were idle and lazy. He referred to the slave being at theservice of his idle masters economic interests and voluptuouspleasure (1956: 329).

Correcting the Biases

A course on social theory that corrects the Eurocentric bias shouldnot just focus on non-western thinkers. It should also criticallydeal with western thinkers that make up the canon. This is whata colleague and I have done in our course on Social Thought andSocial Theory, a discussion of which was carried out in the journalTeaching Sociology (Alatas and Sinha 2001). The discussion in therest of this section is drawn from that paper.

Given that sociological theory is of western origin, we decidedthat the theme of Eurocentrism was an appropriate, if not sole,point of orientation that could provide a critical stance from whichto understand the discipline of sociology. We were very careful indening Eurocentrism. We made it clear to the students that Euro-centrism was not conned to Europeans and Americans and thatnot all western scholars were necessarily Eurocentric. Further,

Eurocentrism was commonly an attribute of non-western scholars.Eurocentrism refers to a particular position or perspective that isfounded on a number of problematic claims and assumptions. Wewere also careful to point out that the various theorists discussedin the course were Eurocentric in different ways. For example,Marx and Weber made explicitly Eurocentric statements aboutthe so-called Orient. Much of Durkheims Eurocentrism, on theother hand, has to do with his silence on non-western questions.

It is also necessary to state that the recognition of Eurocentrismin the writings of western social thinkers such as Marx, Weberand Durkheim is neither surprising nor a recent discovery. Whatis surprising, however, is that the critique of Eurocentrism has till

now failed to reshape or revolutionise the way we think aboutsociological theory and its history. Although many have claimedfor some decades now that there are aspects of Marxs, Webersand Durkheims writings that are Eurocentric, this awarenesshas not yet translated into new readings of social theory and thehistory of sociology.

As a starting point for dealing with these issues, the studentswere required to read an essay by Immanuel Wallerstein onEurocentrism (1996). While there is no new conceptualisation ofEurocentrism in this essay, it provides a concise and readableaccount of the ways in which the social sciences are Eurocentric.

Eurocentric historiography yielded accounts according to whichwhatever Europe was dominant in (bureaucratisation, capitalism,democracy, and so on) was good and superior and that such


4/7

MULTIVERSITY


dominance was explained in terms of characteristics peculiar toEuropeans. Thus Europe considered itself to be a unique civilisa-tion in the sense that it was the site of the origin of modernity, theautonomy of the individual (vis--vis family, community, state,religion), and non-brutal behaviour in everyday life. The ideathat European society was progressive (industrialisation, demo-cracy, literacy, education) and that this progress would spread

elsewhere became entrenched in the social sciences. Further,social science theories assumed that the development of moderncapitalist society in Europe was not only good, but also would bereplicated elsewhere and that, therefore, scientic theories werevalid across time and space.

Our objective in rereading social theory and its history was notmerely to identify other founding fathers of sociology, such asRizal, but also to ask how we should reread Marx, Weber orDurkheim from a non-Eurocentric perspective. It was thereforenecessary to expose those aspects of their works that were clearlyEurocentric in their orientation and to suggest how it would bepossible to have a Marxist, Weberian or Durkheimian understand-ing of society that was relieved of the Eurocentric assumptions.This was achieved by, for example, reading Marx on the Asiaticmode of production and colonialism in India (Marx and Engels1968). While we did not exclude Marxs many other writings, wedid make it a point to include topics that continue to be routinelyexcluded in sociological theory courses and textbooks today.

The need to revamp the teaching of sociological theory in thisway can be seen to be all the more important when it is realisedthat Eurocentrism is not only found in European and NorthAmerican scholarship, but also permeates the social sciences inAsia and Africa in various ways.

(i) In the Ignorance of Our Own Histories: In textbooks used inAsia and Africa, there tends to be less information on these partsof the world because they are invariably written in the US orthe UK. For example, we know more about the daily life of theEuropean pre-modern family than that of our own. The Europeanhistorical context is the dening one because sociology arosein the context of the transition from feudalism to capitalism.Normal development is dened as a move from feudalism tocapitalism, and that is the normal thing to study. The object ofstudy is dened by this bias of normal development. In our ownsocieties, while the priority is to study modern capitalist societies

as well, the problem is that we begin with European pre-capitalistsocieties and draw attention to our own pre-capitalist societies toshow that they constituted obstacles to modernisation.

(ii) In Changing Constructions: Eurocentric constructions ofour societies are so real and compelling and remain so until analternative construction, which may be equally Eurocentric, isgenerated. For example, it was widely held that values, attitudesand cultural patterns as a whole change in the process ofmodernisation and that such change was inevitable (Rudolphand Rudolph 1967; Kahn 1979). However, the successful develop-

mental experiences of East Asia in the 1980s and early 1990s ledto the idea that it was traditional cultural patterns such as thosefounded on Confucianism that explained growth. But the Asian

nancial crisis in 1997 laid that theory to rest and Confucianismand Asian values were even implicated in the economic decline.

(iii) In the Imitation of Theories: The market being oodedwith North American and British theoretical, methodologicaland empirical works, there tends to be a wholesale adoption ofthem and a consequential lack of originality, particularly in the

areas of theory and methodology. There is an uncritical con-sumption of imported theories, techniques and research agendas.

In view of these problems, we stressed to our students that theyshould be cognisant of the context in which social thought andtheory emerged; gauge its utility for the study of non-westernsocieties; and be conscious of the Eurocentric aspects of sociologybecause these detract from its scientic value. In dealing with thetheme of Eurocentrism in the course, we presented to our studentsthe assessments of specic aspects of the works of Marx, Weberand Durkheim. Here I discuss the example of Marx.

Non-European Marx

There was no attempt on our part to do away with traditionaltopics such as the transition from feudalism to capitalism, circu-lation and production, alienation, class consciousness, the state, andideology. What we did do, however, was to work into the readingsand discussions the three objectives stated above. For example, wesuggested to the students that the signicance of Marxs discussionon the transition from feudalism to capitalism is that it viewed anemergent bourgeois class and a weak decentralised state in feu-dal society as preconditions for the rise of capitalism. Studentswere asked to think about what this implied for non-Europeansocieties. Did it imply that these preconditions were non-existent

in non-European societies? If this was Marxs view, to what extentwas it a fact? Or could it be seen as a Eurocentric view?

In line with Eurocentric assumptions that Europe was unique,it was assumed that such prerequisites were not to be found outsideEurope and that pre-capitalist modes of production outsideEurope were obstacles to capitalist development. An examplewas the Asiatic mode of production on which students wereassigned readings. We pointed out to the students that in Marxscharacterisation of the Asiatic mode of production, he was oftenfactually wrong in his pronouncements on Asiatic economiesand societies, and that informing his political economy were Ori-entalist assumptions that viewed non-European societies as

backward contrasts to Europe.We also stressed that recognitionof the problems associated with Marxs characterisation of theAsiatic mode of production (India and Algeria) did not suggestthat his concept of the mode of production has to be jettisonedfrom sociological theory. As a matter of fact, it was important toengage in a critique of Marxs Asiatic mode of production thesisto separate it from the more valid concepts and ideas in his work.

Discussions on the Eurocentric aspects of Marxs thought wouldmake it possible to engage in a more critical interpretation of ourown histories while retaining the valid and universal aspects ofMarxs theory. An example is an article on colonial ideology in

British Malaya that we assigned (Hirschman 1986). Through thisarticle, we were able to show the usefulness of Marxs concept ofideology for a critique of various Eurocentric ideas of the colonisers.


5/7

MULTIVERSITY


Although conventional topics such as class consciousness, the state,and ideology were discussed, we always made it a point to includereadings on contemporary third world societies to make it clearto students that there were universal aspects of the thought ofMarx that are relevant to regions and areas outside his own. Inother words, the expos of Eurocentrism was both a critique ofMarx, to the extent that his views were informed by the Oriental-

ist wisdom of his time, and a rescue of Marx, to the extent thatthere are universal elements in his theoretical contributions.

The Captive Mind, Academic Dependency and Teaching

My interest in this topic is due in large part to the lifelong con-cerns of my late father, Syed Hussein Alatas (1928-2007), withthe role of intellectuals in developing societies. On this topic, hewrote a number of works that developed themes such as thecaptive mind (1969a, 1972, 1974) and intellectual imperialism(1969b, 2000). The idea of intellectual imperialism is an impor-tant starting point for the understanding of academic depend-ency. According to Alatas, intellectual imperialism is analogousto political and economic imperialism in that it refers to thedomination of one people by another in their world of thinking(2000: 24). Intellectual imperialism was more direct in the colo-nial period, whereas today it has more to do with the control andinuence the west exerts over the ow of social scientic knowl-edge rather than its ownership and control of academic institu-tions. Indeed, this form of hegemony was not imposed by theWest through colonial domination, but accepted willingly withcondent enthusiasm by scholars and planners of the formercolonial territories and even in the few countries that remainedindependent during that period (Alatas, S H 2006: 7-8).

Intellectual imperialism is the context within which academicdependency exists. Academic dependency theory theorises theglobal state of the social sciences. Academic dependency isdened as a condition in which knowledge production of certainsocial science communities are conditioned by the developmentand growth of knowledge of other scholarly communities towhich the former is bound. The relations of interdependencebetween two or more scientic communities, and between theseand global transactions in knowledge, assume the form ofdependency when some scientic communities (those located inthe knowledge powers) can expand according to certain criteriaof development and progress, while other scientic communities

(such as those in the developing societies) can only do this as areection of that expansion, which generally has negative effectson their development.

This denition of academic dependency parallels that ofeconomic dependency in the classic form, which Theotonio dosSantos pointed out,

By dependence we mean a situation in which the economy of certaincountries is conditioned by the development and expansion of anothereconomy, to which the former is subjected. The relation of inter-dependence between two or more economies, and between these and

world trade, assumes the form of dependence when some countries(the dominant ones) can expand and be self-sustaining, while other

countries (the dependent ones) can do this only as a reection of thisexpansion, which can have either a positive or a negative effect ontheir immediate development (1970: 231).

The psychological dimension of this dependency, conceptua-lised by S H Alatas as the captive mind (1969a, 1972, 1974), isthat the academically dependent scholar is a passive recipient ofresearch agendas, theories and methods from the knowledgepowers (Alatas, S F 2003: 603). It is no coincidence that the greateconomic powers are also the great social science powers,according to Garreau (1985: 64, 81, 89) and Chekki (1987),

although this is only partially true as some economic powers areactually marginal as social science knowledge producers, Japanbeing an interesting example.

In earlier work, I had listed ve dimensions of academicdependency. These are (a) dependence on ideas; (b) dependence onthe media of ideas; (c) dependence on the technology of education;(d) dependence on aid for research and teaching; (e) dependenceon investment in education; and (f) dependence of scholars indeveloping societies on demand in the knowledge powers fortheir skills (2003: 604). I would like to add a sixth dimension,dependence on recognition. Dependency on recognition of ourworks manifests itself in terms of the effort to enter our journalsand universities into international ranking protocols. Our univer-sities and journals strive to attain higher and higher places in therankings. Institutional development as well as individual assess-ment are undertaken to achieve a higher status in the rankingsystem, with systems of rewards and punishments to provide thenecessary incentives that centre on promotion, tenure and bonuses.The consequences of this form of dependency include a de-emphasison publications in local journals, to the extent that they are notlisted in international rankings. The result of this is the under-development of social scientic discourse in local languages.

The problem is not coming up with alternative ways of teach-

ing the social sciences. Nor has it to do with difculties of deve-loping adequate or relevant textbooks and readings. These can beeasily done. Rather, it has to do with the psychological problemof mental captivity and the structural constraints within whichthis takes place, that is, academic dependency.

Conclusion

The idea behind promoting scholars such as Rizal and Ibn Khaldunand a host of other well-known and lesser-known thinkers inAsia, Africa, Latin America, Eastern Europe and also Europe andNorth America, is to contribute to the universalisation of sociology.Sociology may be a global discipline but it is not a universal one

as long as the various civilisational voices that have something tosay about society are not rendered audible by the institutions andpractices of the discipline.

While the critique of Orientalism in the social sciences is wellknown, this has yet to be reected in the teaching of basic andmainstream social science course in most universities around theworld. Basic introductory courses in the social sciences are gener-ally biased in favour of American or British theoretical perspec-tives, illustrations and reading material. On the other hand, thelogical consequence of the critique of Orientalism in the socialsciences is the development of alternative concepts and theories

that are not restricted to western civilisation as their source. But,for this to be done, the critique of Orientalism must become awidespread theme in the teaching of the social sciences.


6/7

MULTIVERSITY


References

Alatas, Syed Farid and Vineeta Sinha (2001): Teach-ing Classical Sociological Theory in Singapore:The Context of Eurocentrism, Teaching Sociology,29 (3), pp 316-31.

Alatas, Syed Farid (2003): Academic Dependencyand the Global Division of Labour in the SocialSciences, Current Sociology, 51 (6), pp 599-613.

(2006): Alternative Discourses in Asian SocialScience: Responses to Eurocentrism (New Delhi:Sage).

(2009): Religion and Reform: Two Exemplars forAutonomous Sociology in the Non-Western Con-text in Sujata Patel (ed.), The ISA Handbook of

Diverse Sociological Traditions (London: Sage).Alatas, Syed Hussein (1969a): The Captive Mind and

Creative Development in K B Madhava (ed.),International Development (New York: OceaniaPublications).

(1969b): Academic Imperialism, Lecture at theHistory Society, University of Singapore, 26 Sep-tember.

(1972): The Captive Mind in Development Studies,International Social Science Journal, 34 (1), pp 9-25.

(1974): The Captive Mind and Creative Develop-ment,International Social Science Journal, 36 (4),pp 691-99.

(1977): The Myth of the Lazy Native: A Study of theImage of the Malays, F ilipinos and Javanese fromthe 16th to the 20th Century and Its Function in the

Ideology of Colonial Capitalism (London: FrankCass).

(2000): Intellectual Imperialism: Denition, Traits,and Problems, Southeast Asian Journal of SocialScience, 28 (1), pp 23-45.

(2006): The Autonomous, the Universal and theFuture of Sociology, Current Sociology, 54 (1), pp7-23.

Chekki, D A (1987):American Sociologica l Hegemony:Transnational Explorations (Lanham: UniversityPress of America).

de Morga, Antonio (1890-1962): Historical Events ofthe Philippine Islands by Dr Antonio de Morga,published in Mexico in 1609, Recently Brought to

Light and Annotated by Jose Rizal, Preceded by aPrologue by Dr Ferdinand Blumentritt, Writingsof Jose Rizal, Vol VI, National Historical Institute,Manila.

Dos Santos, Teotonio (1970): The Structure of De-pendence,American Economic Review, LX.

Freyre, Gilberto (1956). The Masters and the Slaves(Casa-grande and Senzala): A Study in the Devel-opment of Brazilian Civilisation (New York:Knopf).

Garreau, Frederick H (1985): The Multinational Ver-sion of Social Science with Emphasis upon theDiscipline of Sociology, Current Sociology, 33 (3),pp 1-169.

Hirschman, Charles (1986): The Making of Race inColonial Malaya: Political Economy and RacialIdeology, Sociological Forum, 1 (2), pp 330-61.

Kahn, Herman (1979): World Economic Development:1979 and Beyond (London: Croom Helm).Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels (1968): On Colonialism

(Moscow: Progress Publishers), pp 35-41; 81-87.Ocampo, Ambeth R (1998): Rizals Morga and Views

of Philippine History, Philippine Studies, 46,pp 184-214.

Rizal, Jos (1963a): The Indolence of the Filipino,Political and Historical Writings, National HistoricalInstitute, Manila, pp 111-39.

(1963b): The Truth for All,Political and HistoricalWritings, National Historical Institute, Manila,pp 31-38.

Rudolph, Lloyd and Susanne Rudolph (1967): ThePlace of Tradition in Modernisation,Development

Digest (Washington DC: National Planning Asso-ciation), pp 62-66.

Wallerstein, Immanuel (1996): Eurocentrism and ItsAvatars: The Dilemmas of Social Science, Paperpresented to Korean Sociological Association-International Sociological Association East Asian

Regional Colloquium on The Future of Sociologyin East Asia, Seoul, 22-23 November.

Zaide, S (1993): Historiography in the Spanish Periodin Philippine Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences(Quezon City: Philippine Social Science Council),pp 4-19.

Appendix

National University of Singapore, Department

of Sociology, Sc3101: Social Thought and SocialTheory, Session 2005-2006 (Semester Ii),Lecturers and Tutors: Syed Farid Alatas and

Vineeta Sinha, Lectures: Monday 8 am to 10 am;Venue: LT 9

Course Description

This course aims to develop a critical apprecia-tion of classical social thought and theory. We

will concentrate on the contributions of vemajor thinkers, Harriet Martineau (1802-1876),Karl Marx (1818-1883), Jose Rizal (1861-1896),Max Weber (1864-1920) and Emile Durkheim(1857-1917). These thinkers, among others, offered

novel analyses of the rise of modernity and thenature of modern society. What are the large-scale sociological processes in the makingof modern society? What are its antecedents?What are its characteristic tendencies? And

what are its human consequences? What is therelevance of these theories to our own condi-tion today? In attempting to address these basicquestions, this course will take us back to theclassics that have shaped the development ofsociology. How did each theorist grapple withthe problem of modernity? What are the afni-ties and contrasts in their analyses? What is liv-ing or dead in their works in the light of the

contemporary world as we experience it? Inwhat ways can their ideas and arguments, theirconcepts and methods, still inform our analy-ses of the world we live in? What is the practical

value of social theory? And what does the disci-pline of sociology mean for us? These are ques-tions that students are encouraged to pursue

without settling for quick and easy answers.

Reference

Irv ing M Zeitlin (1997): Ideology and the Developmentof Sociological Theory, 6th ed, Upper SaddleRiver (New Jersey: Prentice Hall), available atNUS Coop.

Course Requirements

In addition to lecture and tutorial attendance,students are required to complete a term paper.Details of the term paper can be found on theIVLE for this module. Tutorial attendance andparticipation (20%) and the term project (20%)comprise 40% of the nal assessment. Studentsare also required to view the movies, Brazil,andJose Rizal. Viewing times are announced inthe course outline below but you may also viewthem on your own at other times.

Lectures and Readings

Note:All readings are required and are to becompleted prior to attending lectures. A coursereader will be available.

Introduction to the Course

Housekeeping matters (9 January 2006)

Course outlineLecture and reading scheduleTutorialsWhat Is Sociological Theory? (9 January 2006)

Why only Marx, Weber and Durkheim?Modern capitalist society and its traits

Social forces behind the rise of sociological theoryEuropean domination, Eurocentrism and andro-centrismNon-western social thinkersImmanuel Wallerstein, Eurocentrism and Its

Avatars: The Dilemmas of Social Science.Paper presented to the KSA-ISA Joint East AsianColloquium on The Future of Sociology in East

Asia, Seoul, November 22-23, 1996.Mary Jo Deegan, Transcending a PatriarchalPast: Teaching the History of Women in Socio-logy, Teaching Sociology 16, 1988, 141-150.

The Problem of Androcentrism

Classical Theory Minus Gender (16 January2006)

AndrocentrismFemale invisibility

Artemis March, Female Invisibility in Andro-centric Sociological Theory, Insurgent Socio-logist, Vol XI, 2, 1982, pp 99-107.R A Sydie, Sex and the Sociological Fathers,Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology,

Vol 31, 2, 1994, pp 117-138.

Harriet Martineau (1802-1876)

The First Woman Sociologist? (16 January

2006)

Demarcating the object of studyMartineaus methodology: Science of moralsand mannersPaul L Riedesel, Who Was Harriet Martineau?

Journal of the History of Sociology, 3, 2, 1981,pp 63-80.Harriet Martineau,How to Observe Morals and

Manners, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers,1838/1988, pp 13-22, 71-77, 223-231.Martineaus Sociological Insights (23 January

2006)

Sociology of slaveryEthnic relations/racismWomens studies

Harriet Martineau, Society in America, editedby S M Lipset, New Brunswick: TransactionPublishers 1836/1962, pp 47-56, 291-314, 355-357.

Karl Marx (1818-1883)

Feudalism, Capitalism and the Asiatic Mode

of Production (23 January 2006)

An outline of Marxs sociological theoryThe feudal systemThe rise of the capitalist mode of productionand its relevanceOriental despotismKarl Marx, The Transition from Feudalism toCapitalism in R C Edwards, M Reich and

T E Weisskopf (ed.), The Capitalist System: ARadical Analysis of American Society, EnglewoodCliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1972, pp 61-66.


7/7

MULTIVERSITY


Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, On Colonialism(Moscow: Progress Publishers), 1968, pp 35-41;81-87.Suniti Kumar Ghosh, Marx on India,Monthly

Review, 35, 1984, pp 39-53.Alienation, Class and Class Consciousness

(6 February 2006)

The theory of surplus value

The pauperisation thesisAlienationBourgeois, proletarians, and communistsClass consciousnessKarl Marx, The Economic and Philosophic

Manuscripts of 1844 (New York: InternationalPublishers), 1982, pp 106-119.Karl Marx, Selected Writings in Sociology andSocial Philosophy, T B Bottomore, trans (New

York: McGraw-Hill), 1956, pp 178-191 [stop atline 2]; pp 200-201 [start at The history ...].Capitalism and the State (6 February 2006)

The capitalist stateThe ruling class

Karl Marx, The Relation of State and Law toProperty in The German Ideology (New York:International Publishers), 1970, pp 79-81.William Domhoff, State and Ruling Class inCorporate America,Insurgent Sociologist, 4, 3,1974, pp 3-16.Ideology (13 February 2006)

Ideology and the sociology of knowledgeColonial ideologyKarl Marx, Ruling Class and Ruling Ideas, inThe German Ideology, pp 64-68.Charles Hirschman, The Making of Race inColonial Malaya: Political Economy and RacialIdeology, Sociological Forum, 1, 2, 1986,

pp 330-61.

Max Weber (1864-1920)

The Origins of Modern Capitalism (13 Febru-

ary 2006)

An outline of Webers theoryAn idealist theory of the development of capitalismThe Protestant ethic and the rise of capitalismThe metaphor of the iron cageWeber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit ofCapitalism (New York: Charles Scribners Sons),1958, ch 2, pp 47-53 [stop at ...before kings];ch 4, pp 95-128; ch 5, pp 170-183 [from This

worldly Protestant ...].

20 February 2006 Film viewing session Brazil in Theatrette I 8 am

No lecture scheduled

The Protestant Ethic Thesis and Southeast

Asia (27 February 2006)

Weberian Orientalism?Southeast Asian interpretations of WeberThe relevance of Max Weber to Southeast AsiandevelopmentSyed Hussein Alatas, The Weber Thesis andSoutheast Asia in idem,Modernisation and SocialChange: Studies in Social Change in Southeast Asia(Sydney: Angus and Robertson), 1972, pp 1-20.

Andreas Buss, Max Webers Heritage and

Modern Southeast Asian Thinking on Develop-ment, Southeast Asian Journal of Social Science12, 1, 1984, pp 1-15.

Rationalisation, Social Action and Bureaucracy

(27 February 2006)

The types of social actionThe types of rationalisationBureaucracy and excessive rationalisationWeber, Economy and Society, Vol 1 (Berkeley:University of California Press), 1978, pp 22-26,85-86.

Weber, The Social Psychology of World Religionsin Hans H Gerth and C Wright Mil ls (ed.),FromMax Weber: Essays in Sociology (New York:Oxford University Press), 1958, p 293.Weber,Economy and Society, Vol 2, pp 956-58.Gerald E Caiden, Excessive Bureaucratisation:The J-Curve Theory of Bureaucracy andMax Weber through the Looking Glass in

Ali Farazmand (ed.),Handbook of Bureaucracy(New York: Marcel Dekker), 1994, pp 29-40.Webers Comparative Sociology of Religion:

The Religion of China (6 March 2006)

Economic ethicChinese traditionalismConfucian rationalism and Puritan rationalismWeber and EurocentrismWeber, The Religion of China (New York: TheMacmillan Press), 1964, pp 142-170.Stephen Molloy, Max Weber and the Religionsof China: Any Way Out of the Maze?, British

Journal of Sociology 31, 3, 1980, pp 377-400.

Emile Durkheim (1858-1917)

Durkheims Project: Dening Sociology

(6 March 2006)

The realm of the socialSociology as scienceSociological explanationEmile Durkheim, The Rules of Sociological

Method, Steven Lukes, ed., translated byW D Halls (New York: Free Press), 1895/1982,pp 50-59, 119-146, 175-208.Mike Gane, A Fresh look at Durkheims Socio-logical Method in Pickering and Martins (ed.),

Debating Durkheim, 1994, pp 66-85.The Problem of Modernity (13 March 2006)

Durkheims theoretical trajectoryMechanical and organic solidarityColonialism and Durkheims theory of socialchangeNormal division of labourEmile Durkheim, The Division of Labour in Society(New York: Free Press), 1933, pp 79-82, 105-10,

200-06, 226-28.Edward Tiryakian, Revisiting Sociologys FirstClassic: The Division of Labour in Society andIts Actuality, Sociological Forum, Vol 19, No 1,1994, pp 3-15.The Problem of Modernity (contd) (13 March

2006)

Abnormal division of labourAnomie, egoism and individualismIndividual happiness and freedomEmile Durkheim, The Division of Labour inSociety (New York: Free Press), 1933, pp 353-57,374-78, 389-93, 396-409.Stejpan G Mestrovic,Anomie and the Unleash-

ing of the Will, Emile Durkheim and the Refor-mation of Sociology (New Jersey: Rowman andLittleeld), 1988, ch 4.

20 March 2006 Film viewing session Jose

Rizal in Theatrette I 8 am

No lecture scheduled

Applying Durkheims Method: Suicide (27

March 2006)

Social integrationTypology of suicideEmile Durkheim, Suicide: A Study in Sociology

(New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul), 1952,pp 41-53, 145-151, 378-384.Steven Lukes, Alienation and Anomie in PeterHamilton, Suggested Readings from Emile

Durkheim: Critical Assessments, Vol II (London:Routledge), 1990, pp 77-97.

Jose Rizal (1861-1896)

The Development of Colonial Society (27

March 2006)

Colonial exploitationThe question of indolent nativesJose Rizal, Filipino Farmers, Political and

Historical Writings, National Historical Institute,

Manila, 1963, pp 19-22.Rizal, The Truth for All,Political and HistoricalWritings, National Historical Institute, Manila,1963, pp 31-38.Rizal, The Indolence of the Filipino, Politicaland Historical Writings, National HistoricalInstitute, Manila, 1963, pp 111-139.Rizal and the Enlightenment (3 April 2006)

The Enlightenment and the ChurchRizal and reasonRaul J Bonoan, S J, The Rizal-Pastells Corre-

spondence (Quezon City: Ateneo de ManilaPress), 1994, pp 40-57; 75-79.The Revolution (3 April 2006)

El FilibusterismoJose Rizal [video recording]; a GMA Networklm, produced by Butch Jimenez, Jimmy Duavitand Marilou Diaz-Abaya; directed Marilou Diaz-

Abaya, Manila, 1999.Jose Rizal, Mi ltimo Adis (My Last Farewell),inDr Jose Rizals Mi ltimo Adis in Foreign and

Local Translations, Vol 1, National HistoricalInstitute, Manila, 1989, pp 1-3; 38-40.

Conclusion

Major Themes (10 April 2006)

Eurocentrism and androcentrismIdealism and materialism

The problem of freedomKarl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique ofPolitical Economy (Moscow: Progress Publishers),1970, preface.Max Weber, General Economic History (NewBrunswick: Transaction Books), 1981, ch 22.C Wright Mills, Freedom and Reason in TheSociological Imagination (London: Oxford Uni-

versity Press), 1959.

available at

EBS News Agency1180, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh 160 022

Ph: 2703570

Documents

Alatas Teaching Social Theory as Alternative Discourse