Bonus been exist. To make a simple definition,

Bonus Assignment



relationship between sociology and economy has become more up to date in this
21st century crisis days. Approximately for 20 years, the
relationship between both of them take a part in the literature while defined
as discipline. I see both science as they are sad to each other because both
science has some criticisms for each other. In general, economists have
criticized the sociology because of that the sociologists were considering all
the things as social and this statement does not mean any sense for economists.  The problem was deficiency of mathematics.
When we look to the perspective of sociologists from the other side, for them,
economists behave very abstract. Perhaps, if two sciences could be understood,
we could be more successful at the points we came today. Some economists have
tried to examine sociology and economics together by understanding the
importance of sociology. So it is not only economists, but also sociologists,
who develop this science. In fact, they are trying to bring both of them
together. Especially, Max Weber’s contributions to the acceptance of economic
sociology as a discipline have been exist. To make a simple definition,
economic sociology is a sociological perspective on economic phenomena. This
science focused on economic variables of social life. However, in order to
explain the economic sociology, it is essential to take a look at the
differences between both disciplines. Some assumptions comes to mind when
mentioned about economic science. It is considered as the economy is going to
proceed under these assumptions. While creating the assumptions, some kind of
calculations had to be done easily. Since, it is not possible to evaluate the
individual behaviors and measure the behaviors mathematical. The differences
usually arises from the point of view to the assumptions. The most significant
of these differences is, how the economic actor will behave.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
Writers Experience
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
Writers Experience
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
Writers Experience
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team


of all, economic actor usually brings us the human profile whose try to
maximize the contribution, reduce the costs and keeps its profit on everything.
With the Turkish discourse he/she is “?ktisadi
?nsan”. So, the boundaries of the dominant
economy are the rational individuals in terms of the economic factor. The
general principle is “people always act rationally”. But when we deal with the
discipline of economic sociology of the individual, we are faced with a
different perspective. Economic sociology certainly does not address only
rational behaviors. It is argued that the economic actor will also act in a
pattern with non-rational behaviors. Against homo-economicus, homo-sociologicus
brings about the human type, that is, the type of people affected by the social
environment. If we ask “what effect it is”, we can list the different social
structures of society, their cultures and the inability of people to act
rationally. When we deal with the issue of rational behavior, we can ask
ourselves a question “Do we always keep our own economic interests in front of
everything?” I would like to give a simple instance about this.


Let’s say we are in a situation as we need
to buy a present for a friend of us. There is a certain purchasing power, there
is a value we show our friend and there is the society we have in it has some
basic values. How many of us buy a present to our friend with the least amount
of money in our pocket? I am trying to emphasize that we are looking the case
with both the sociological and the economic way. How many of us buy a present
with the small amount of money in our pocket without thinking our friendship?
Or by thinking that our friendship is very strong and we need to use most
possible amount of money to buy a gift? It depends on the level of friendship.
So, you see that the money in your pocket is not that important. If you are so
close with your friend, the amount of money that you are going to use is
changing, so the point is, the gift exchange is not a fact on the consideration
of monetary. But the quality of the gift changes according to the societies.
For instance, if you buy a republican gold to someone married in United States
of America, it doesn’t make any sense for her/him. However, this is a very
significant traditional movement in our (Turkish) culture. To give another
example, let’s say you have a patient relative in hospital. What kind of
reaction would you face with, if you give money to your relative and say “buy
some flowers to yourself with this money “instead of buying her/him a
flower?  From your point of view it would
be a very rational movement but, it is clear to predict that your relative wouldn’t
be happy.


of all, I have mentioned that “the inability of acting rational”. In economic
sociology it is called as “bounded rationality”. One of the basic principles of
economics, all actors in the market must have all kinds of knowledge that will
enable them to act rationally on the market. And after the consideration of
these knowledges it acts rational. I specifically need to indicate another
example from pour life. Let’s say you need to go to the supermarket. In
supermarket X, some kind of goods are cheap, in supermarket Y all the goods are
cheap. Perhaps by comparing each supermarket you are going to use your money
rational. Suppose that, first week you have gone like this. Then, you heard
from your friend that, at the supermarket Z the products that you have bought
are cheaper than other supermarkets. When you increase these kind of
situations, the time that you spend for shopping will cause a hitch for your
other responsibilities. As you see, it is hard to catch all the knowledge and
evaluate for economic actor. In particular, as the number of establishments
selling the same goods in the capitalist system multiplies, the decision-making
process of the economic factors must also be fast. However, the mental capacity
we possess to evaluate and make available these information is also a scarce
resource. Because of that, people do not have the ability to evaluate all the
information at the same time. People can act rationally according to the
information they obtain or the information they can reach. Their behavior is
already rationally assessed within the deliberate environment or restricted
knowledge they are in. The emergence of rational, egoistic individuals in the
economy depends on the idea that the economic factors in society are never affected
by each other. That is to say, methodological individualism. People in their
own minds, decide and apply without being influenced by society.



It is to gain benefit or profit that
motivates the individual. It is their own interests. On the other hand,
economic sociology argues that individuals are influenced by society and other
groups. For economic sociology, the economy is a part of the social system, so
it is their willingness to protect social rights and social values of social
positions rather than material profit motivating individuals. Social prestige,
strong moral and non-economic motives are more important in society.

Another difference between economic
sociology and economics is the cultural point of view. Culture in economic
sociology is a fundamental issue, that is, it is not possible to explain the
functioning of any economic event or any human behavior independently of
culture. But when we look at the basic economy, the situation is completely
different. Culture does not consider economic variables as an addendum, and it
is often assumed that it does not affect economic events. In all societies,
there is the idea of helping individuals when their income increases. It is
seen that this transfer of income is sometimes done through religion and
sometimes through different institutions. Zakat in Islamic religion is an
example of this situation. Religion, an element of culture, can directly
influence consumption, an economic activity, from time to time



my point of view, this approach is totally philosophical perspective. It is not
possible to give up the importance of mathematics in economics. However, seeing
the economy as an independent system from the society also leads us to
mistakes. It is clear that every behavior in every society will not give the
same end. And social events do not depend on one reason. So economics is
actually a social science. Some economists are mathematically based, so they do
not want to evaluate economics in social sciences. In fact, it is part of the
economic social system and buried within the society, which is why the sole
explanations become impossible. We need to consider more reasons. As a result,
if we take a look at the development of consumption in the economy, consumption
in primitive societies does not rely on too much demonstration and competitive
features to meet people’s biological needs. Because there is not much
differentiation between social classes. Everyone consumes the same thing more
or less.