Does sociology have 'first principles of society'?

This is an interesting question. If I were to give a direct answer, it would be: In sociology, there isn't a single, universally accepted "first principle" like F=ma in physics or 1+1=2 in mathematics.

But what makes this topic fascinating is 'why not' and 'what comes closest.'

You can think of first principles as breaking something down into its most fundamental, core, irreducible 'building blocks,' and then understanding the entire system starting from these blocks. Physics studies the material world, and its 'building blocks' are relatively stable, such as atoms, forces, and energy.

However, sociology studies people and the societies formed by countless individuals. This introduces several major challenges:

1. The 'building blocks' themselves are too complex. The 'building blocks' of society are people. But each person has their own thoughts, emotions, desires, learns, changes, deceives, and cooperates. You can't define a person in the same way you define an electron.
2. The relationships between 'building blocks' are highly variable. Interactions between people create new things like culture, institutions, power, and morality. These, in turn, profoundly influence each individual. It's like building a castle with LEGO bricks, only for the castle to come alive and start changing the shape and color of its own bricks.
3. No 'God's-eye view'. In physics, researchers can, to some extent, remain detached. But in studying society, the researcher themselves is part of society; your perspective and background will influence your research.

Therefore, sociology doesn't have an 'ultimate building block' that everyone agrees upon.

However, prominent sociologists have attempted to find the 'first principles' or 'fundamental starting points' for their respective theories. You can think of them as different 'martial arts schools,' each with its own 'secret technique':

• School 1: Structuralism (Representative: Émile Durkheim)

  • Core Principle: "Social Fact."
  • Simply put, there are things in society, visible or invisible, that exist independently of you and exert significant coercive power over you. Examples include laws, morals, currency, and language. These things exist when you are born, and even if you dislike them, you must abide by their rules. You cannot arbitrarily decide that the RMB is worthless, nor can you run naked in the street without consequences. This school believes that these 'social facts' are the most fundamental 'building blocks' of society, and we should start from them to understand society.

• School 2: Action Theory (Representative: Max Weber)

  • Core Principle: "Social Action."
  • This school places less emphasis on external frameworks and more on people. They believe that the essence of society lies in countless individuals engaging in meaningful actions. The key lies in the word 'meaning.' When you clock in for work, it's not just a physical displacement; its meaning is 'this is my job,' 'I need to earn money to support my family.' To understand society, one must understand the motivations and meanings behind people's actions. The building blocks are not cold, rigid structures, but warm, thinking individuals.

• School 3: Conflict Theory (Representative: Karl Marx)

  • Core Principle: "Class Struggle."
  • This school's view is more direct. They believe that the most fundamental starting point of society is conflict, especially the fundamental conflict of interests between those who control resources (employers) and those who do not (workers) in productive activities. This conflict is the core driving force behind social change. In their view, things like laws, culture, and morality are often merely tools created by the ruling class to maintain their own interests.

In summary:

Sociology does not have a single, unified 'first principle'; rather, it has several 'candidate' fundamental starting points. Some scholars believe the foundation of society lies in external structures and norms, others in internal individual actions and meanings, and still others in conflicts of interest between groups.

This is precisely the charm of sociology. It acknowledges the complexity of the world and offers you more than one 'pair of glasses' to observe this society we live in—a society that is both familiar and strange.