A comparative analysis of sociologies of İbn Khaldun and Auguste Comte

It has been accepted by the world of sociology that Comte in the XIX Century, after a prolonged history of historical preparation, has declared sociology in a way that conforms to the methodology of positive sciences. Despite its widespread belief, the domain of social existence was studied by other thinkers on scientific grounds hundreds of years before Comte. While it is possible to talk about many thinkers who lived before Comte in this regard, Ibn Khaldun is the most remarkable person. Ibn Khaldun and Comte have similarities in many respects, especially in the claim of establishing a science. Among these similarities are remarkable things such as having a theoretical structure and observing everything that exists about society as "as it is". It has a great role in gaining the scientific title of they work of explaining reality in a way that is appropriate to reality in reality based on observation. In this context, although social physic and umran science are the products of two different cultural environments, society is trying to understand it with the principle of causality. It is clear that the similarities of thinkers, as well as the century and culture in which they lived, caused differences in the expression of such sciences. Despite Comte's humanism, Ibn Khaldun's group feeling collective reflects such a difference. In addition, Comte, which emphasizes the static and dynamic aspects of social processes, put forward a holistic theory, while Ibn Khaldun similarly develops a slow model of society. While thinkers are allied in the concept of change, they differ in the direction of this change. Comte's constantly progressing change is different from one another by expressing tension again after progressing in Ibn Khaldun. Similarly, although Comte advocates sociology as an alternative to existing religions, Ibn Khaldun's sociology as a particular religion is also a fundamental source of many differences. It is also seen that the elements of social structure, such as economy, family, state, education and morality, deal with each other in a way related to sociological thinking.