Since the introduction of Western sociology to China in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Chinese sociology has consistently regarded the search for responses to social and national crises as its central mission. In the early practice of localizing Chinese sociology, scholars such as Wu Wenzao, Pan Guangdan, Fei Xiaotong, and Lin Yaohua conducted research on communities, culture, rural China, and clan-based family structures, demonstrating a theoretical orientation that approached society as a whole through the study of specific issues. This construction of sociological discourse, guided by a holistic theoretical orientation, achieved remarkable success. For example, Fei Xiaotong’s concepts of tuanti geju (collective mode of association) and chaxu geju (differential mode of association), developed through his comparison of Chinese and Western societies, remain among the most influential and enduring conceptual contributions to Chinese sociology.

Decline of holism

At present, sociology, as a discipline with an integrative orientation, faces a widely recognized challenge: Academic discourse has become highly fragmented, underscoring the need for a holistic theoretical system capable of effectively explaining the trajectories and mechanisms of social change in China. This situation is partly attributable to the influence of American sociological research paradigms. Specifically, in the process of localization and disciplinary formation, American sociology tended to focus on specific societal subfields—such as cities, communities, race, gender, power, family, and occupations—rather than developing theoretical analyses of society as a whole. The rise of empirical research methods within American sociology was closely linked to its attention to local social issues such as race and gender, and was characterized by the predominance of quantitative approaches.

As sociology was first being indigenized in China, a trend toward “Americanization” took hold, emphasizing the use of statistical knowledge and quantitative methods to establish the discipline’s scientific rigor. Disciplinary differentiation and specialization led to insufficient theoretical refinement within various subfields. The concepts proposed were largely descriptive and lacked systematic connections. Moreover, most subfields confined themselves to social realities within their respective research areas, examining only parts of society while neglecting the whole. This theoretical fragmentation across subfields resulted in a crisis of diminishing holism in sociological theory.

However, as an empirically oriented and integrative discipline, sociology is concerned not only with explaining the mechanisms underlying specific social facts, but also with reviewing and generalizing across different mechanisms. In this sense, sociology is not simply a combination or aggregation of its various subfields. Rather, it explores social patterns across domains, aiming to provide a holistic vision of society as a unified whole. Therefore, in the context of diminishing holism, it is necessary to reflect on and reshape these subfields in theoretical construction, attending to the interconnections among phenomena examined across disciplines with a clear holistic awareness. This allows for a comprehensive conception of society as a whole.

Reclaiming holistic view of society

In contemporary China, extensive and profound social transformation, together with the continuous emergence of new forms of knowledge, experience, and information, presents important opportunities. The key question is how the theoretical concepts and propositions that emerge from these conditions can foster a comprehensive and reflective sociological “enlightenment agenda”—that is, how Chinese society can be conceptualized as a whole in light of the problem awareness generated within sociology’s various subfields.

From the perspective of disciplinary history, this calls for renewed engagement with the traditions through which sociology was introduced to China, as well as reflection on how the intellectual profile of modern Chinese sociology took shape through the localized adaptation of foreign theories and methods in its formative stages. Viewed in this light, such historical reflection provides a basis for rearticulating a holistic theoretical orientation for Chinese sociology in the new era. Methodologically, it also entails sustained reflection on questions of value and meaning, attentive to the human condition and the dilemmas it confronts in the age of artificial intelligence. With an interdisciplinary and comprehensive orientation to theoretical construction, fundamental empirical research questions from various disciplines can be integrated into sociological inquiry, thereby enabling meaningful academic dialogue.

Building a sociology with Chinese features, style, and ethos should not be limited to generating isolated, descriptive concepts. It must also emphasize the construction of a theoretical system grounded in observation of Chinese experience—one that can describe society as a whole and thereby offer a sociological “enlightenment agenda” with Chinese characteristics.

Zhou Zhongxian is from the School of Sociology and Ethnology at the University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.