Abstract:
Growing number of scholars in sociology has come to terms that sociology, like everything else, is a
product of particular historical conditions. As there is sociology of everything. You can turn on your
sociological eye no matter where you are or what you are doing, taking for example, the latent reasoning usuallyadopted by sociologist in viewing issues as against some others who ignorantly engage in manifest deductions.Being a sociologist means never having to be bored, considering the whole gamut of issues it concerns itself withon daily basis. Sociologists engage extensively in questions linked to the causes and consequences ofdevelopment, and their findings often entail surprising policy implications and mitigations. The consensusamong leading development studies scholars accepts the era of modern development as commonly deemed tohave commenced with the inauguration speech of Harry S. Truman in 1949. In Point Four of his speech, withreference to Latin America and other poor nations, he said that “for the first time in history, humanity possess
(ed) the knowledge and skill to relieve the suffering of these people”(Rist). Development studies has since takengreater interest in lessons of past development experiences of Western nations, human security, people-orientedapproach to understanding and addressing global security threat, implications of inequality to insecurity andeffect of insecurity in one region on global security. This paper is of the view that the vision and mission ofdevelopment sociology arising from the historical and philosophical standpoint is imminent for a proper graspof the discipline’s orientations by legend and budding scholars in development studies
Machine summary:
"In this sense, the discipline emerged out of the interest in understanding economic, social, and political processes today labeled as "development" ( Rao and Walton 2004).
Development in a sociological context by Oberle (1972 as cited in Odia, 2015) is a process or set of processes characterized by (a) the consequences of general sustained economic growth, and (b) sets of natural, human, technological, cultural, financial, and organizational conditions".
They wanted those countries to develop through liberal processes of politics, economics, and socialization; that is to say, they wanted them to follow the western liberal capitalist example of so-called "First World state".
Dependency theorists rejected the notion that increased contact between core and periphery would foster the diffusion of modern values and argued instead that increased external contact would produce the "development of underdevelopment" (Frank 1967) because of the persistence of asymmetrical economic exchange relations between periphery and the more powerful center (Dos Santos 1971; Hechter 1975).
However, sociological research also emphasizes the persistent importance of the domestic political and social patterns and local cultural practices and traditions in mediating the effects of global economic flows (Putnam, Leonardi and Nanetti 1993; Saxenian 1994).
Based on Weberian ideas, the new comparative institutionalism emphasizes the critical role of the state's capacities and its autonomy vis-a-vis civil society in impacting development outcomes (Becker 1983; Goodwin 2001; Katzenstein 1985; Mahoney 2001; Mann 1986; Skocpol 1979; Waldner 1999)."