Other typologies may be based on the criterion of a dominating religion (Christian society) or language (English speaking society).

Social scientists Gerhard and George Lenskis identified four human societies according to their primary means of subsistence: hunter-gatherer societies, nomadic pastoral societies, horticulturalist or simple farming societies, and intensive agricultural societies, also called civilizations.

Some theorists add industrial and post-industrial societies. Marx identified five societies by their mode of production: primitive communal society, slavery, feudalism, capitalism and communism.

In social sciences typologies suggested by E. Durkheim and F. Toennis are also often mentioned. Both theorists suggested two types of societies that served a reason to call their typologies “dichotomies”.

For instance, E. Durkheim identifies traditional (military) and industrial societies applying the criterion of social solidarity.

Mechanical solidarity is typical for traditional or archaic society, because people as members of the society are undeveloped and similar to each other. The society is bound because its members are not differentiated.

Organic solidarity is given rise due to the division of public labour; it is based not on similarity but on differentiation of people as it suggests development of the personality. Due to division of labour an individual realizes his dependence on the society.

In his dichotomy suggested in 1887 Ferdinandt Toennis (1855-1936) introduced Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft to differentiate between traditional and modern societies. American researcher Neil Smelser found out five distinctions between the concepts:

1. Gemeinschaft which is based on a feeling of togetherness, stimulates people's desire to live according to the communal principles, for instance, at harvester peasants help each other free of charge. Gesellschaft is based on people's rational realization of individual interests, its example is a state where individuals interact in impersonal situations and pay money for particular goods and services.

2. In the sphere of social control Gemeinschaft gives priority to traditional beliefs, customs and non-written laws while Gesellschaft is a society based on formal law.

3. As for division of labour, Gemeinschaft is characterized by limited specialization based on kinship ties, i.e. husbands, wives and children perform particular jobs in the household. Gesellschaft is characterized by specialization of professional roles and their separation from family roles.

4. In Gemeinschaft culture is formed on religious values while in Gesellschaft - on secular ones.

5. In Gemeinschaft the main institutions are the family, neighborhood and community while in Gesellschaft such are large groupings and associations, for example business circles, government, political parties etc.

Both dichotomies were criticized for their oversimplification. First, societies like Gemeinschaft also differ from each other, for instance, Japanese feudalism differs from German feudalism and they both differ from other non-industrial societies.

Besides, in every modern society the elements of Gesellschaft and Gemeinschaft are mixed up, it means that the latter cannot disappear to anywhere.

Second, such dichotomies consider the society as a stable integrated whole leaving aside a probability of contradictions and conflicts which are to some extent typical of any society.

Having made use of all typologies, a contemporary American sociologist Daniel Bell worked out some synthesizing model. He identifies three types of human society: non-industrial, or traditional, industrial and post-industrial, or modern. In non-industrial society the determining factor of its development is agriculture, in industrial - industry and in post-industrial - information (theoretic knowledge).

The other famous triads are a conception of pre-modern, modern and post-modern societies suggested by S. Crook and S. Lash; a theory of pre-economic, economic and post-economic societies suggested by a Russian theorist V.L. Inozemtsev, a theory of the first, second and third waves of civilization suggested by O. Toffler etc.

Theories of the society's origin

There are a lot of theories of the society's origin; some of them are rather disputable. For instance, in “spontaneous” sociology one can distinguish three hypotheses:

1) a natural one which is based on the proposition that labour made man and turned a crowd to a cultural entity of producers;

2) a divine theory says that God made man and bequeathed him the material world and moral law;

3) a cosmic theory states that some from another planet made man and manipulated human development to achieve their laboratory purposes. But these theories can't explain the essence of the socio-genetic mechanism which is necessary to create a social organization.

Of modern scientific theories of the society's origin the distinguished ones are instrumental, sexual, gender, cratic and semantic conceptions.

Instrumental conception assigns a primary importance to man's ability to make a quick comprehension and consideration that resulted in inventing specialized instruments to satisfy man's needs. Man invented specialized labour tools - instruments. By increasing labour efficiency with tools people came to consolidation of the system of labour division and to widening of economic differentiations. A social organization emerged and started developing.