Perhaps but a deeper root of this boarding totalizer can also be found in the Positivismo de Comte. If Tobias Barreto denounced the fisicalismo in the sociological theory of Comte (accusing it to want to make of sociology a social physics) 1, Slvio Romero, in reply favorable to this science, searched a half term, alleging that the scientific nature of sociology was not identical of natural sciences. Valley to stand out that, in ' ' Course of Positiva&#039 Philosophy; ' (1830-42), Augustus Comte all classified and systemize the body of sciences developed until then. Its criteria of scientific hierarquizao had obeyed the two basic principles, crossing them enter itself: the beginning of simplicity and the generality, both observed in the object of study of each science. In the base of the scientific pyramid that it established met, before everything, the Mathematics, rank that science some would surpass it in terms of simplicity and generality; to Sociology fit the rank highest, because its object of study consisted of being most complex and less general? namely, the social relations. The conviviality of Slvio Romero with the Positivismo de Comte occurred, over all, in phase tenra of its intellectual life; not delaying to be dimmed by the choice that made for the evolucionismo of Spencer. In any way, of Comte the sociology of Slvio Romero has as mark its inclination to compose a general picture of modern sciences. If, in this aspect, it did not suffer direct influence from Comte (what it is doubted), did not escape of such necessity? if it did not see it strengthened in spirit – when it adopted the sociology of Spencer and, later, of Le Play.

For this Comte task human being conceives the Philosophy as a branch of knowing, whose function would be mere to classify sciences. Slvio Romero followed it the steps. The sergipano thinker sketched its classification of sciences, therefore, inhaled not only in evolucionismo of Spencer, but in the comteano positivismo.

Comments are closed.