For the time being, it's enough to say that sociologists are interested in
the history, and the structure of the large
configurations that are formed by human beings.
The scientific study of human societies became an institutionalized
discipline told at universities at the end of the 19th century and
that implies that some of the classic sociologist
that we discuss here were not university professors at all.
Some of them never called themselves sociologists.
They were amateurs.
But amateurs in the best sense of the word.
The fact that their study of social life was done
in known institutionalized surroundings had its advantages.
There is something fresh and innocent about books by.
Who never had to worry about tenure.
Whose chapters were never scrutinized by academic committees or peer reviewers.
But the disadvantage may have been that a few of the classic
authors got carried away by their own arguments, because they lectured and
wrote for people who worshiped them, as was the case of August Comte,
who clearly missed the objections of a critical audience, as we will see.