Ghurye had been engaged in building up; almost single handedly, the entire first generation of Indian sociologists in post-independence period. These pioneers provided direction to shape the future of sociology in India. And, of all these, none did as much for sociology in India as Ghurye. First, his role in promoting and directing the course of research in diverse fields of Indian society as a teacher, as an institution builder and as a scholar ; and b.
|Published (Last):||21 June 2010|
|PDF File Size:||17.57 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.21 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Ghurye had been engaged in building up; almost single handedly, the entire first generation of Indian sociologists in post-independence period.
These pioneers provided direction to shape the future of sociology in India. And, of all these, none did as much for sociology in India as Ghurye. First, his role in promoting and directing the course of research in diverse fields of Indian society as a teacher, as an institution builder and as a scholar ; and b.
Ghurye excelled in both of them. He died on 28th December, at the age of 91 in Bombay. Sociology was not a school or college subject when Ghurye was a student. From the very early years, Ghurye showed a flair for Sanskrit. After passing the matriculation examination, Ghurye got himself admitted to the Elphinstone College, Bombay with Honours. He had a brilliant academic career throughout. He stood first class second at the BA examination and was awarded the Bahu Dazi prize — the blue ribbon of Sanskrit competence in the university.
None before that time had obtained a first class at the MA with Sanskrit. It won him a foreign scholarship. The scholarship was instituted by the University of Bombay to train promising young men in sociology.
Ghurye went to London School of Economics where he briefly worked with L. Rivers died in before Ghurye completed his doctoral work. In , he completed his PhD under A. Hadden on Caste and Race in India. His work was published by Routledge and Kegan Paul in in C. Sociology in Bombay developed under the leadership of G. Ghurye succeeded Geddes as head and as a Reader, took charge of the Department of Sociology at Bombay University in He was appointed as Professor in and retired in When he retired in , the University of Bombay made him an Emeritus Professor.
Ghurye was the first Emeritus Professor in Bombay University. He did not cease to be academically active after retirement from service. His last research student submitted thesis in Of these, forty have been published as books. As a teacher, Ghurye was very serious and meticulous in preparing his lectures notes. Many of his students have testified that his lectures were heavily documented.
As a research guide, he was more impressive and more successful. They include M. Srinivas, K. Kapadia, I. Karve, K. Merchant, I. Desai, A. Desai, Y. Damle, D. Narain, M. Rao, K. Venkatarayappa, A. Bopegamage, M.
Kulkarni, K. Panchnadikar, M. Sharma, D. Unwalla and many others. As an institution-builder, deservedly, the most profound impact on Indian sociology was made by Ghurye. Ghurye was the principal architect of the Department of Sociology of Bombay University and produced a batch of renowned scholars including M.
Srinivas, who is now internationally known. His students headed and many of them are still heading the departments of sociology in many universities in India. Widgery of Baroda College in Baroda. Ghurye was elected the president of the anthropological section of the Indian Science Congress in In the same year, he was also elected as the nominee to the Royal Asiatic Society and continued to hold this position till During his lifetime, he won several top honours accorded to any intellectual in India.
His 16 books, out of a total of 31 books, published during his lifetime. Several of them are noteworthy as pioneering contributions to the sociology field. Indian society, through its long historical process of growth, presents a picture of a vast mosaic of culture held together by religion, values and norms of Hinduism. As a sociologist, Ghurye feels the imperative of exploring this unifying and synthesizing process. He moves to establish his thesis with perfect case, back and forth, from the Vedic to the present-day India.
In the application of theories to empirical exercises or in the use of methodologies for data collection that legendary rigour is not somehow reflected. To put it differently, Ghurye was not dogmatic in the use of theory and methodology. He seems to have believed in practising and encouraging disciplined eclecticism in theory and methodology. Despite his training at Cambridge under W.
Rivers and his broad acceptance of the structural-functional approach, Ghurye did not strictly conform to the functionalist tradition when interpreting the complex facets of Indian society and culture, which he chose to investigate. Even Ghurye had conducted village, town and community studies. Therefore, it may be said that although trained in the craft of Indology, Ghurye was not averse to the fieldwork traditions of social and cultural anthropology.
His field survey of Sex Habits of Middle Class People in Bombay conducted in the s and published in and the monograph on the Mahadev Kolis demonstrated Ghurye was far from promoting an armchair textual scholarship.
He was an empirical field worker also. Basically interested in inductive empirical exercises and depicting Indian social reality using any source material — primarily Indological — his theoretical position bordered on laissez-faire. Similarly, when Ghurye conducted survey-type research involving primary data collection, he did not conform to accepted methodological canons.
He often ventured into generalization on the basis of scanty and unrepresentative evidence, e. Ghurye also used historical and comparative methods in his studies which have also been followed by his students. Ghurye was initially influenced by the reality of diffusionist approach of British social anthropology but subsequently he switched on to the studies of Indian society from indological and inthropological perspectives.
He emphasized on Indological approach in the study of social and cultural life in India and the elsewhere. Ghurye utilized literature in sociological studies with his profound knowledge of Sanskrit literature, extensively quoted from the Vedas, Sbastras, epics, and poetry of Kalidasa or Bhavabhuti to shed light on the social and cultural life in India. He made use of the literature in vernacular, e. The range is very wide, indeed. As the two principal branches of the Indo-European people subsequently prospered in India the Indo-Aryan and Europe the Anglo-Saxon , for example, he has shown wide similarities between these two peoples as regards the two principal institutions, viz.
Rajput architecture and funerary monuments, sadhus in India and sex in America, Shakespeare and Kalidas, castes, tribes and races, metropolitan civilization — everything was grist to his sociological mill.
This gives an extra dimension to his research. Up to , he authored thirty-one books; only five of them were written before and thirteen up to when he retired from the university service. The important works of Ghurye are as follows: 1. Culture and Society 3. Indian Sadhus 4. Bharatnatyam and Its Costume 5. Family and Kin in Indo-European Culture , 6. Cities and Civilization 7. Gods and Men 8.
Anatomy of a Rural-Urban Community 9. Religious Consciousness Social Tensions in India I and Other Explorations Whither India Vedic India The classification has not always been a neat one, sometimes a little bit of discretion had to be used but this enabled us to arrange more systematically his ideas.
These are: 1. Caste 3. Kinship, family and marriage 4. Culture, civilization and the historical role of cities 5.
Indology Perspective by G S Ghurye
Ghurye Indological Approach of G. In the application of theories to empirical exercises or in the use of methodologies for data collection he was not dogmatic. He seems to have believed in practicing and encouraging disciplined eclecticism in theory and methodology. It would be appropriate to characterize Ghurye as a practitioner of theoretical pluralism. Basically interested in inductive empirical exercises and depicting Indian social reality using any source material —primarily Indological — his theoretical position bordered on laissez-faire. Ghurye was initially influenced by the reality of diffusionist approach of British social anthropology but subsequently he switched on to the studies of Indian society from indological and anthropological perspectives. He emphasized on Indological approach in the study of social and cultural life in India and the elsewhere.
Sorry we aren't available here yet
Sociology of Conflict and Integration. Family and Marriage. He also emphasized on understanding of order and change in society. The guiding force in Indian society was the Hindu ideology.
Indological or Textual Perspective of Sociology – Explained
Indological or Textual Perspective of Sociology — Explained Article shared by : ADVERTISEMENTS: Indology, more specifically, the branch dealing with interpretation of ancient texts, and linguistic studies of problems of ancient Indian culture would be more fruitful if supplemented by archaeological, sociological, anthropological, numismatic and ethnographic evidence and vice versa. Available data in each of these fields are to be augmented by a great deal of honest and competent field work. None of the various techniques can, by itself, lead to any valid conclusion about ancient India; combined empirical operations are indispensable Siddiqi, It may also be viewed that Indological approach refers to the historical and comparative method based on Indian texts in the study of Indian society. Therefore, Indologists use ancient history, epics, religious manuscripts and texts etc. Indologists analyse social phenomena by interpreting the classical texts.