Sociology-theory and methods-objectivity and values

Question 1

Who are the classical thinkers that shaped sociology in its early years?

Answer 1

Comte, Durkheim, Marx and Weber. They all had views on the question of objectivity and value freedom

Question 2

Who were the early positivists?

Answer 2

Comte and Durkheim. For them, the creation of a better society was not a matter of subjective values or personal opinions about what was ‘best’. They shared the Enlightenment or modernist view of the role of sociology. As the science of society, sociology’s job was to discover the truth about how society works, uncovering the laws that govern its proper functioning. Equipped with this knowledge, social problems could be solved and human life improved

Question 3

For the early positivists, what is scientific sociology?

Answer 3

In their view, scientific sociology would reveal the one correct society. This gave sociologists a crucial role. By discovering the truth about how society worked, sociologists would be able to say objectively and with scientific certainty what was really best for society-they would be able to prescribe how things ought to be. In fact, Comte regarded sociology as the ‘queen of the sciences’ and saw sociologists as latter-day priests of a new scientific religion of truth

Question 4

Who was Karl Marx?

Answer 4

There is debate about whether or not Marx was a positivist. However, it is certainly true that he saw himself as a scientist and that he believed his method of historical analysis, historical materialism, could reveal the line of development of human society. This development involved an evolution through a series of different types of class-based society, leading ultimately to a future careless communist society, in which exploitation, alienation and poverty would be ended, and each individual would be free to achieve their true potential

Question 5

What has been the role of Marx in sociology?

Answer 5

The role of Marx’s sociology therefore, was to reveal the truth of this development, especially to the proletariat, since they would be the class to overthrow capitalism and herald the birth of communist society. Marx thus takes for granted the value of the ideal communist society and argues that his scientific approach will show us how to reach it. In this he is similar to Comte and Durkheim, in that he sees science as helping to ‘deliver’ the good society

Question 6

How did Weber differ from Marx, Durkheim and Comte?

Answer 6

Marx, Durkheim and Comte made no distinction between the facts as revealed by science and the values that we should hold-since they believed that science could tell us what these values should be. By contrast, Weber makes sharp distinction between value judgements and facts and he argues we cannot derive one from the other

Question 7

What is an example of how Weber makes sharp distinction between value judgements and facts?

Answer 7

Research may show that divorcees are more likely to commit suicide, however this fact does not demonstrate the truth of the value judgement that we should make divorce harder to obtain. There is nothing about the fact that logically compels us to accept the value. Eg we might argue we should instead make it harder to get married (another value), or that people have every right to commit suicide if they wish (a third value). None of these judgements are ‘proven’ by the established fact. In Weber’s view a value can be neither proved nor disproved by the facts; they belong to different realms. Despite making a sharp distinction between facts and values, Weber still saw essential role for values in sociological research

Question 8

What are the four essential roles that Weber saw for values in sociological research?

Answer 8

Values as a guide to research, data collection and hypothesis testing, values in the interpretation of data, and values and the sociologist as a citizen

Question 9

How does Weber see values as a guide to research?

Answer 9

Weber took idea from phenomenology that social reality is made up of ‘meaningless infinity’ of facts that make it impossible to study in its totality. Therefore best researcher can do is select certain facts and study these. Weber’s says we can only choose what to study in terms of what we regard as important based on our own values (value relevance). Values are essential in enabling us to select which aspects of reality to study and in developing concepts to understand these aspects. Eg feminists value gender equality, leading them to study women’s oppression and develop concepts such as patriarchy with which to understand it

Question 10

How does Weber see data collection and hypothesis testing as an essential role of values?

Answer 10

We must be as objective and unbiased as possible when collecting facts, keeping our values and prejudices out of the process. Eg we shouldn’t ask leading questions designed to give answers we want to hear: our questions should aim to get respondents to give us their view, not our own. Once we have gathered facts, we can use them to test a hypothesis and again must keep our values out of the process-the hypothesis must stand or fall solely on whether nor not it fits the observed facts

Question 11

How does Weber see interpretation of data as an essential role of values?

Answer 11

Values become important again when interpreting data we have collected. The facts need to be set in theoretical framework so we can understand their significance and draw conclusions from them. In Weber’s view, out choice of theoretical framework or perspective is influenced by our values. Therefore we must be explicit about them, spelling out our values so others can see if unconscious bias is present in our interpretation of our data

Question 12

How does Weber see values and the sociologist as a citizen?

Answer 12

Research findings often have very real effects on people’s lives but sociologists/scientists sometimes choose to ignore sues to which their work is put-argue their job is to conduct objective research and discover facts; politicians/public decide what use to make of their findings. Weber rejects this and argues scientists/sociologists are also human beings/citizens and must not dodge moral and political issues their work raises by hiding behind ‘objectivity’ or ‘value freedom’. Must take moral responsibility for harm their research may do. Eg Einstein’s theories helped make atomic bomb possible; yet he subsequently spoke out against nuclear weapons

Question 13

What is the commitment issue in sociology?

Answer 13

The issue of commitment that Weber raised has remained at the centre of debates about the place of the sociologist’s values in research. Eg, some modern positivists have shied away from any value commitments. By contrast, Marxists, interactionists and feminists have argued for a ‘committed sociology’ in which the sociologist spells out the importance of their values o their research

Question 14

Unlike Durkheim and Comte, who were openly committed to re-shaping society in certain ways), what are the two reasons why modern positivists tend to argue their own values were irrelevant to their research?

Answer 14

The desire to appear scientific, and the social position of sociology

Question 15

Why is the desire to appear scientific a reason why modern positivists tend to argue their own values were irrelevant to their research?

Answer 15

Science is concerned with matters of fact-not value. Therefore sociologists should remain morally neutral-their job is simply to establish the truth about people’s behaviour and not judge it. Critics argue this reflected a desire to make sociology respectable. Science has high prestige in modern society, so mimicking its ways would raise the subject’s status and earn respectability. This was particularly important in 20th century, when sociology was just becoming established as an academic discipline

Question 16

Why is the social position of sociology a reason why modern positivists tend to argue their own values were irrelevant to their research?

Answer 16

Gouldner argues by 1950s, American sociologists in particular had become ‘spiritless technicians’. Earlier in the century, sociology had been a critical discipline, often challenging accepted authority, but by 1950s, sociologists were no longer ‘problem makers’ who defined own research problems. They became ‘problem takers’ who hired themselves out to organisations to take on and solve their problems for them. Gouldner argues by leaving own values behind them, sociologists were making ‘gentleman’s promise’ they would not cause chaos by criticising paymasters. They were hired hands so saw on values as irrelevant-the exact attitude Weber was criticising when he said sociologists had to take moral responsibility for the effects of their work

Question 17

What does Myrdal argue?

Answer 17

Argues that sociologists should not only spell out their values-as Weber recommends-they should also openly ‘take sides’ by espousing the values and interests of particular individuals or groups

Question 18

What do committed sociologists argue?

Answer 18

Committed sociologists such as Myrdal and Gouldner argue it is neither possible nor desirable to keep values out of research

Question 19

What is value-free sociology, in Gouldner’s view?

Answer 19

Impossible because either the sociologist’s own values or those of their paymasters are bound to be reflected in their work. Also undesirable as without values to guide research, sociologists are merely selling their services to the highest bidder

Question 20

What does Becker say about the argument of values in sociology?

Answer 20

He asks ‘whose side are we on?’. He argues values are always present in sociology. Traditionally, however positivists and functionalists have tended to take the viewpoint of powerful groups-police, psychiatrists etc

Question 21

What does Becker suggest and value freedom and commitment?

Answer 21

Instead of seeing things from perspective of these ‘overdogs’, sociologists should adopt compassionate stance on side of underdogs-criminals, mental patients and other powerless groups. Partly because less is known about them and their story needs to be told to redress the balance. By identifying with them and giving a voice, we can reveal previously hidden side of social reality. Eg by empathising with mental patient, we can show hidden rationality of behaviour the psychiatrist thinks is irrational-as Goffman argues, to describe situation of mental patient faithfully, we have to take their side and be biased in favour of them and against the psychiatrist

Question 22

What does this emphasis on identifying and empathising with the powerless have clear links to?

Answer 22

It has clear links to the kinds of research methods favoured by interactionists. They have a strong preference for qualitative methods such as participant observation, which they see as revealing the meanings of these ‘outsiders’

Question 23

How does Gouldner criticise Becker?

Answer 23

Criticses Becker for taking a romantic and sentimental approach to disadvantaged groups. He accuses Becker of being concerned only with those who are ‘on their backs’-misunderstood, negatively labelled, exotic specimens of deviant behaviour. Instead, Gouldner adopts Marxist perspective arguing sociologists should take the side of those who are ‘fighting back’-political radicals struggling to change society. Sociology shouldn’t confine itself to describing viewpoint of underdog. It should be committed to ending their oppression by unmasking the ways in which the powerful maintain their position

Question 24

How is most sociological research funded, and how does this affect the research?

Answer 24

Most sociological research is funded by someone other than sociologists themselves. Funding sources include government departments, businesses and voluntary organisations. Often the body that pays for the research controls the direction it takes and the kinds of questions it asks (and fails to ask). Thus the sociologist’s work is likely to embody values/interests of their paymasters. Sometimes, funding bodes may block publication of research if findings prove unacceptable

Question 25

Apart from research funding, what else can affect sociologist’s choice of topic?

Answer 25

Sociologists may wish to further their careers and reputations which may influence choice of topic (eg choosing something in fashion), their research questions and how they interpret their findings. Some may censor themselves for fear that being too outspoken will harm career prospects or cost them their job. Also sociologists in university departments are likely to be under pressure to publish research, perhaps regardless of its quality/usefulness

Question 26

What does Gouldner say about sociological research?

Answer 26

All research is inevitably influenced by values-whether it is the values of the sociologist, or those of the funding body that pays for the research

Question 27

How can different sociological perspectives be seen to embody different assumptions and values about how society is or should be?

Answer 27

Feminism sees society as based on gender inequality and promotes rights of women. Functionalism sees society as harmonious and espouses conservative values that favour the status quo. Marxism sees society as conflict-ridden and strives for a classless society

Question 28

How do assumptions and values affect the sociological perspectives?

Answer 28

It influences the topics that sociologists of different perspectives choose to research, the concepts they develop and the conclusions they reach. Eg functionalists have concluded that inequality is beneficial for society, whereas Marxists conclude it produces exploitation of the poor by the rich

Question 29

How is there a link between sociologists’ methods and their value-stance?

Answer 29

Eg interactionists’ preference for qualitative methods fits with their desire to empathise with the underdog, as such methods gives access to actors’ meanings. Likewise, the functionalist and positivist tendency to take the side of the ‘establishment’ and the viewpoint of those in authority fits with their uncritical acceptance of official statistics produced by government. Thus both interactionists and functionalists can be accused of selecting methods that produce facts that reflect their values and outlook

Question 30

What does relativism argue?

Answer 30

Different groups, cultures and individuals-including sociologists-have different views as to what is true. Each sees the world in their own way, through their own perspectives, concepts, values and interests. Secondly, there is no independent way of judging whether any view is truer than any other

Question 31

How do sociologists agree with what relativism argues?

Answer 31

All sociologists would agree with the first statement, eg different cultures hold often widely different religious beliefs that affect what they believe to be true. However, relativism goes much further, arguing there is no absolute or objective truth-just truth plurals. What you believe is true, is true-for you. So if you believe the earth is round, while another thinks it i flat, there is no way of saying who is right

Question 32

What sociologists take a relativist view?

Answer 32

Postmodernists take relativist view of knowledge. Reject idea any one account of social world is superior to another-there are no ‘privileged accounts’ that have special access to the truth. Any perspective that claims to have truth, such as marxism, is just a meta-narrative. All knowledge, from whatever perspective, is based on values and assumptions and so no perspective has any special claim to be true

Question 33

What do postmodernists’ relativist view of knowledge mean for positivism?

Answer 33

If relativism is correct then it must apply to postmodernism too-which leads to the paradoxical conclusion that we shouldn’t believe what postmodernism says either. In other words, relativism is self-defeating, since it claims to be telling us something true, while simultaneously telling us that no one can tell us what is true

Question 34

How far do sociologists believe in relativism?

Answer 34

In practice, sociologists rarely go as seeing postmodernism as untrue because of the relativist view. After all, there is a real factual world ‘out there’, in which women generally do more housework than men, in which ethnic background may affect a person’s life chances etc. Regardless of our values, we can observe and record these facts. Once we have established the existence of such facts, they can be used to judge the worth of competing theories. In the end, it matters less whether a theory contains certain values, than whether it can explain the world we observe