A society is a conceptual grouping of humans based on common characteristics such as geographic or political criteria.
There is, then, a Dutch society in the Netherlands (and in those places they colonized), an Asian society on the Asian continent, and a human society on Earth.
Sociology is the area of academic study that examines how humans interact amongst each other.
Sociology builds on psychology, in that, it examines the more complex relationships between minds rather than individual minds.
Like much of psychology (but not all), sociology is a social science but can not meet the rigor of much of the more fundamental sciences because the structures being studied are too complex for the formulation of simple mathematical principles.
This is not at all to diminish the study of society but merely to point out the fundamental differences between hard and social science.
It could easily be argued that social science is more important to our lives than hard science because the former deals directly with how we treat and govern each other and the latter with our technological understanding.
If we don't fully understand a single mind, how then, can we understand many minds?
It is possible, that, sociological phenomena are simpler to conceptualize than those of the individual mind.
In chemistry, we can more clearly understand the macroscopic interactions of molecules than we can the basic nature of the quantum particles that consitute atoms and molecules.
Perhaps, like molecules, people are more clearly understood in their range of interactions than in isolation.
Sociology studies things that are best understood across groups of humans such as deviance, religion, and social or economic classes.
That the rich tend to do X would be an example of a simple sociological assertion.
The problem is that generalizations can never be applied to individuals that may or may not fall under the assertion about some group they fall into.
If I said, "Most rich people are Republicans", I may very well be correct, but more specifics in the assertion would make the statement more true.
If I said, "Most rich people in the Deep South of the United States are Republicans" I would, perhaps be more correct.
But, to specify a time also helps narrow the meaning of the statement. "Most rich people in Deep South of the United States were Republican in 2004" would perhaps be more correct.
People in society tend towards grouping along ethnic, enconomic, political, religious, or national lines.
Humans generally seek out similarity but we are capable of slow divergence from what is normal to us given an open curiosity.
It is my estimation that in three or four hundred years, if Earth is habitable, human society will have greatly mingled to the point where east and west can no longer be distinguished culturally.
This is not to say that all unique cultures will be extinguished, but that technology and travel will allow for the adoption of all the best aspects of all cultures.
Those aspects of cultures that deny human rights will be extinguished and we will be much more multi-lingual.
These are all given an optimistic outlook that continues on a path of disarmament and openness for cultural exchange.
We certainly could make the planet uninhabitable in any number of ways, including continuing to change the atmospheric composition of the Earth to nuclear war.
