Sociolgy Values And Ethics Flashcards
What does it mean to have values in research?
- values in this context refers to ideas and beliefs that the researcher holds
- sociologists are divided about whether it is possible to stop ones values interfering with research
Positivists and value free sociology
What did positivists , such as Comte believe about sociology being a science?
- if they believe it can and should be studied scientifically, would they want values to be involved?
- positivists believe that sociology can and should be free from values
- this is because they believe it studies empirical and objective social facts
value laden sociology
- whether it is desirable or not, sociology’s cannot be value free and we should not see it as such. Sociologists who argue that sociology is value fee are doing a ‘disservice’ to the subject (gouldner 1968)
- Weber agrees with positives to an extent
He agrees that research itself can be objective and free from values
But he argues that sociologists will always use their values in choosing their research topic and identifying concepts
He therefore days sociology can be value laden
Values came enter research in what ways?
- Choosing a topic
- Choosing a method
- Choosing participants
- Choosing questions
- Funding funding
- Finding a publisher
- Analysing data
- Operationalising key concepts
Interprevists and values in research
- interprevists believe that the nature of sociology means that values will always influence research
- if interprevists believe that values are always going to be involved, what’s the point of doing research
Is there anything we can do?
- Becker believes that the best thing a researcher can do, is clearly state all values they have in their research
- this allows the audience to be aware of their values and consider for themselves how the research may have been impacted
Postmodernism critique
- postmodernists such as lyotard and baudrillard argue the whole process of sociological and scientific thinking is itself based on a series of values about the nature of society
- scientific thinking is just one way to understand the world and it is not any better than any other way of thinking and does not provide ‘superior truths’
- reflexivity
- narratives
- Foucault - what is considered to be knowledge reflects the ability of more powerful groups to impose their ideas on the rest if society. If the discourse favoured by a particular group becomes dominate, they also gain control over what is considered knowledge.
Committed sociology
- sociology should not be value free but should have explicit values guiding its approach to study
- mostly favoured by critical sociologists - feminist and Marxists, sociology who are opposed to the oppression of a range of disadvantage minorities
- there is an tussle between liberal and radical perspectives
Liberal perspectives
- sociology should be sympathetic to disadvantaged and oppressed. Less concerned with studying those in positions of power. Place more focus on social action research
Radical perspectives
- focus on those with power. Place more focus on social structure
liberal study of deviance
Beckers labelling theory - takes the side of the ‘underdog’ and focuses on the ways groups are labelled as deviant and targeted by forces of social control
Becker argued sociology had traditionally been on the side of the more powerful, therefore considered issues from the viewpoint of the police office, social worker etc. he called for sociology to instead look from the viewpoint of the ‘underdog’. Then new questions and wats of looking at the issues could emerge
Radical study of deviance
Gouldner - labelling theory ends up blaming the ‘middle dogs’ e.f the police who r have very little really power. Study of deviance should instead focus on the really powerful groups - those who make the law and give groups such as the police their orders
Gouldner argued Beckers ideas did not go far enough. Gouldner argued Becker still failed to focus on those with the most power. Sociology needs to study those who create the structure of oppression.
Marxist perspective
- Althusser argued that the role of sociology is to uncover the ways in which the ruling class control the mass population. In doing so, sociologists hope to achieve the breakdown of capitalism by exposing the truth how it operates for the benefit of a few.
- as Marxists like Althusser saw their work as scientific, they simultaneously believed that they were being objective and that they should try to promote radical change.
Feminist perspectives
- feminist writers, such as spender, would agree with the idea of exposing the workings of an oppressive society, but also argue that the key is to explore how males dominate and control society, not how the ruling class dominate. The aim is exposing the truth, but the result is to free women from patriarchy.
- according to hammersley, there are four elements to searching research - all of which demonstrate a rejection of searching for objectivity:
1. Feminist research starts with the belief of subordination of women runs through all areas of social life
2. Rather than seeking to exclude women’s feelings and personal experience, these should form the basis of all analysis
3. The hierarchal division between the researcher and the researched should be broken down so that the subjects of research should be drawn in to help interpret data obtained
4. As the overall aim of feminist research is the emancipation of women, the success of research should only be measured in line with this, not solely in terms of academic credibility - feminist writers accuse sociology of traditionally male stream, that is, interested in male views and concerns, rather than trying to include views of both males and females
Evaluation of sociology values and ethics
- committed sociologist, whether from the liberal or radical schools of thought, run the risk of being accused of producing sociology that is little more than personal opinion. According to this view, committed sociology has two serious problems:
1. Sociological interpretations of the social world can become so distorted by the ideology of the researcher that they lack any validity. However, defenders of committed, critical sociology deny that this is the case
2. It can be argued that it is inappropriate to base sociology on opinions relating to what is right and wrong, because these are truly personal and cannot be tested by any evidence. Once sociologist view of a good society is no more credible that of another and basing sociology on something so subjective discredits it.
