22 SOCIAL SCIENTIST research area, and (b) the method, concepts and the indices opted for. Modernisation Theory Theories of modernisation do not form one homogeneous entity. Variant trends exist. But a fundamental unity is apparent in the basic premises, method and concepts. Modernisation refers to a process of change. Not any kind of change but a change towards "those types of social, economic and political systems that have developed in Western Europe and North America".1 Sociologists have defined modernisation variously but within the framework of an evolutionary perspective which involves a multi-linear transition of developing societies from "tradition" to "modernity". What is "Western" is "modern". The Western model of capitalist development is unquestioningly held to be universally valid in bold disregard of history. Mystifying the essentially exploitative content of colonialism and imperialism, Indian sociology expectantly awaits the completion of "modernisation" in India. The problem is seen as only one of time lag. Hindrances are perceived in the form of the obtuse "traditionality" of the Indian man and woman. Modernisation theory's ahistorical approach is compounded with the use of abstract value loaded concepts as tools for the dissection of social processes. Polar concepts are used in the typical tradition of Western sociology. Weber and Parsons themselves have used polar concepts to depict and anayse reality. Status and contract? geneinschaft and gesselschaft, mechanical and organic solidarity, informal and formal groups, primary and secondary groups, culture and civilisation, traditional and bureaucratic authority, sacred and secular associations, military and industrial society, status and class—all these attempts represent as many attempts to "group the structural change of the institutional framework of a traditional society on the way to becoming a modern one".2 Parsons' scheme of value orientations catalogues the possible alternatives: particularism versus univer-salism, ascription versus achievement, diffuseness versus specificity.3 Indian sociology has its indigenous contribution of rural and urban, caste and class. Polar concepts are inherently static and subsuming. The fundamental question arises as to what exactly constitute "tradition" and "modernity". Srinivas defines "modernisation" as an analgam of a "disquieting positivist spirit", "a revolution in communication"? "urbanisation", "spread of literacy", "media exposure", "wider economic participation", "mobility".4 Which of them is the cause and which effect or are they both at once? The question remain3 unresolved. This inability of Western sociology to find objective criteria to discriminate between the various elements in society leads to