Saying that sociology derived from the Enlightenment is akin to claiming that the iPad evolved from the light bulb. Although one might have derived from the other, it's a very long, thin, and tenuous connection. The Enlightenment, as a philosophical movement, encapsulated such new philosophies that humankind was forever altered, for the better. Certainly the concept of "Social Contract" is first seen during this time. But if sociology is the study of the development, structure, and functioning of human society, the study of social problems, there's a critical difference between that and what the Enlightenment Philosophers were concerned with, among which were: "What is an individual's relationship to the church and to the state?" ""How does that individual function economically?" These concerns were focused on a "bottom-up" view, from the individual to the culture at large, as opposed to a "top-down" view, which sociology incorporates. The fact that it relies upon statistical measurement of how groups of individuals interact belies its difference in philosophy. Certainly there is value in rationally analysing how groups interact; however, there's danger in trying to implement upon the culture what some believe to be a correct analysis of a problem. "One-size-fits-all" approaches rarely succeed.