Sociology-theory and methods-sociology and science

Question 1

What were the ‘founding fathers’ of sociology in the 19th century very impressed by?

Answer 1

By the success of science in explaining the natural world and providing the knowledge with which humans could extend their control over nature. Many of these sociologists, such as Comte, who coined the term ‘sociology’, described themselves as ‘positivists’

Question 2

What do positivists believe?

Answer 2

That it is possible and desirable to apply the logic and methods of the natural sciences to the study of society. Doing so will bring us true, objective knowledge of the same type as that found in the natural sciences. This will provide the basis for solving problems and achieving progress

Question 3

What is a key feature of the positivist approach?

Answer 3

The belief that reality exists outside and independently of the human mind: nature is made up of objective, observable, physical facts, such as rocks, cells, stars etc, which are external to our minds and which exist whether we like it or not. Similarly, society is an objective factual reality-it is a real ‘thing’ made up of social facts that exists ‘out there’, independently of individuals, just like the physical world

Question 4

What do positivists believe about patterns?

Answer 4

They believe reality is not random or chaotic but patterned, and we can observe these empirical (factual) patterns or regularities, eg that water boils at 100 degrees C. It is the job of science to observe, identify, measure and record these patterns systematically, preferably through lab experiments, and then to explain them

Question 5

What do positivists believe about laws?

Answer 5

They believe, in Durkheim’s words, that ‘real laws are discoverable’ that will explain these patterns. Just as physicists have discovered laws that govern the workings of nature, such as the law of gravity, sociologists can discover laws that determine how society works. The method for doing so is known as induction, or inductive reasoning

Question 6

What is induction?

Answer 6

It involves accumulating data about the world through careful observation and measurement. As our knowledge grows, we begin to see general patterns, eg we may observe that objects, when dropped, always fall towards earth at the same rate of acceleration

Question 7

What happens after induction?

Answer 7

From this, we can develop a theory that explains all our observations so far. After many more observations have confirmed/verified the theory, we can claim to have discovered the truth in the form of a general law. This approach is also known as verificationism

Question 8

How do positivists believe patterns can be explained?

Answer 8

They believe the patterns we observe, whether in nature or in society, can all be explained in the same way by finding the facts that cause them. Eg physics explains an apple falling to the ground (one fact) in terms of gravity (another fact). Similarly, in sociology we might explain the social fact of educational failure in terms of another social fact such as material deprivation

Question 9

What do positivists seek to discover?

Answer 9

The causes of the patterns they observe. Like natural scientists, they aim to produce general statements or scientific laws about how society works. These can then be used to predict future events and to guide social policies. Eg if we know that material deprivation causes educational failure, we can use this knowledge to develop policies to tackle it

Question 10

What type of theory do positivists prefer?

Answer 10

They favour ‘macro’ or structural explanations of social phenomena, such as functionalism and Marxism. This is because macro theories see society and its structures as social facts that exist outside of us and shape our behaviour patterns

Question 11

How do positivists believe research should be carried out?

Answer 11

As far as possible sociology should take the experimental method used in the natural sciences as the model for research, since this allows the investigator to test a hypothesis in the most systematic and controlled way. Basically, experiments involve examining each possible causal factor to observe its effect, while simultaneously excluding all other factors

Question 12

What type of data do positivists prefer?

Answer 12

Like natural scientists, positivists use quantitative data to uncover and measure patterns of behaviour. This allows them to produce mathematically precise statements about the relationship between the facts they are investigating. By analysing quantitative data, positivists seek to discover the laws of cause and effect that determine behaviour

Question 13

How do positivists believe researchers should act during research?

Answer 13

They believe researchers should be detached and objective. They should not let their own subjective feelings, values or prejudices influence how they conduct their research or analyse their findings. In the natural sciences, it is claimed that the scientist’s values and opinions make no difference to the outcome of their research, eg water boils at 100 degrees C whether the scientist like the fact or not

Question 14

Unlike natural sciences, how can it be hard to be detached and objective in sociology?

Answer 14

In sociology we are dealing with people, and there is a danger the researcher may ‘contaminate’ the research, eg by influencing interviewees to answer in ways that reflect the researcher’s opinions rather than their own. Positivists therefore employ methods that allow for maximum objectivity and detachment, and so they use quantitative methods such as questionnaires, structured interviews and official statistics. These methods also produce reliable data that can be checked by others

Question 15

Why did Durkheim choose to study suicide?

Answer 15

He chose to study suicide to show that sociology was a science with its own distinct subject matter. He believed that if he could prove that even such as highly individual act had social causes, this would establish sociology’s status as a genuinely scientific discipline

Question 16

What did Durkheim find in the study of suicide?

Answer 16

Using quantitative data from official statistics, he observed that there were patterns in the suicide rate, eg rates for Protestants were higher than for Catholics. He concluded that these patterns could not be the product of the motives of individuals, but were social facts. As such, they must be caused by other social facts-forces acting upon members of society to determine their behaviour

Question 17

What did Durkheim believe the cause of suicide to be?

Answer 17

According to Durkheim, the social facts responsible for determining the suicide rate were the levels of integration and regulation. Therefore, for example, Catholics were less likely than Protestants to commit suicide because Catholicism was more successful in integrating individuals

Question 18

What did Durkheim claim that he discovered?

Answer 18

He claimed to have discovered a ‘real law’: that different levels of integration and regulation produce different rates of suicide. He claimed to have demonstrated that sociology had its own unique subject matter-social facts-and that these could be explained scientifically

Question 19

What do interpretivists believe about sociology and the natural sciences?

Answer 19

They do not believe that sociology should model itself on the natural sciences. Interpretivists criticise positivism’s ‘scientific’ approach as inadequate or even as completely unsuited to the study of human beings

Question 20

What is the subject matter of sociology, according to interpretivists?

Answer 20

They argue it is meaningful social action, and that we can only understand it by successfully interpreting the meanings and motives of the actors involved. They say sociology is about unobservable internal meanings, not external causes. In their view, sociology is not a science, because science only deals with laws of cause and effect, and not human meanings

Question 21

What do interpretivists believe about the methods of study used in the natural sciences?

Answer 21

Many interpretivists completely reject the use of natural science methods and explanations as a model for sociology. They are that there is a fundamental difference between the subject matter of the natural sciences and that of sociology

Question 22

What do interpretivists say about natural science?

Answer 22

It studies matter, which has no consciousness. As such, its behaviour can be explained as a straightforward reaction to an external stimulus. Eg, an apple falls to the ground because of the force of gravity. It has no consciousness, and no choice about its behaviour

Question 23

What do interpretivists say about sociology?

Answer 23

It studies people, who do have consciousness. People make sense of and construct their world by attaching meanings to it. Their actions can only be understood in terms of these meanings, and meanings are internal to people’s consciousness, not external stimuli-they are ideas or constructs, not the same thing

Question 24

What does Mead argue?

Answer 24

Rather than responding automatically to external stimuli, human beings interpret the meaning of a stimulus and then chose how to respond to it. This is because, unlike matter, people have free will and can exercise choice

Question 25

What do interpretivists believe about the behaviour of individuals?

Answer 25

Individuals are not puppets on a string, manipulated by supposed external ‘social facts’. as positivists believe, but autonomous beings who construct their social world through the meanings they give to it. The job of the sociologist therefore is to uncover these meanings

Question 26

Why to interpretivists reject the logic and methods of the natural sciences?

Answer 26

They argue that to discover the meanings people five to their actions, we need to see the world from their viewpoint. For interpretivists, this involves abandoning the detachment and objectivity favour by positivists. Instead we must put ourselves in the place of the actor, using what Weber calls verstehen or empathetic understanding to grasp their meanings

Question 27

What methods do interpretivists favour?

Answer 27

Qualitative methods and data such as participant observation, unstructured interviews and personal documents. These methods produce richer, more personal data high in validity and give the sociologist a subjective understanding of the actor’s meanings and life world

Question 28

Why are there different types of interpretivism?

Answer 28

All interpretivists seek to understand actors’ meanings. However, they are divided about whether or not we can combine this understanding with positivist-style causal explanation of human behaviour

Question 29

What are the types of interpretivism?

Answer 29

Interactionists, and phenomenologists and ethnomethodologists

Question 30

What do interactionists believe?

Answer 30

Believe that we can have causal explanations. However, the reject the positivist view that we should have a definite hypothesis before we start our research. Eg Glaser and Strauss argue that this risks imposing our own view of what it important, rather than taking the actors’ viewpoint, so we end up distorting the reality we are seeking to capture

Question 31

What approach do Glaser and Strauss favour?

Answer 31

A ‘bottom-up’ approach, or grounded theory. Rather than entering the research with a fixed hypothesis from the start (when we know little about the topic we are researching), our ideas emerge gradually from the observations we make during the course of the research itself. These ideas can then be used later to produce testable hypotheses of the sort favoured by positivists

Question 32

What do phenomenologists and ethnomethodologists believe?

Answer 32

(Eg Garfinkel) completely reject the possibility of causal explanations of human behaviour. They take a radically anti-structuralist view, arguing that society is not a real thing ‘out there’ determining our actions. In this view, social reality is simply the shared meanings or knowledge of its members. As such, society is not an external force-it exists only in people’s consciousness

Question 33

What do phenomenologists and ethnomethodologists believe about causal explanations in sociology?

Answer 33

In their view, the subject matter of sociology can only consist of the interpretive procedures that people use to make sense of the world. Because people’s actions are not governed by external causes, there is no possibility of cause and effect explanations of the kind sought by positivists

Question 34

What does the interpretivist Douglas believe about positivists?

Answer 34

Rejects the positivist idea of external social facts determining our behaviour. Individuals have free will and they choose how to act on the basis of meanings

Question 35

What does Douglas believe about suicide?

Answer 35

To understand suicide, we must uncover its meanings for those involved, instead of imposing our own meanings onto the situations

Question 36

How does Douglas view Durkheim’s study of suicide?

Answer 36

He rejects Durkheim’s use of quantitative data from official statistics. These are not objective facts, but simply social constructions resulting from the way coroners label certain deaths as suicides. Instead, Douglas proposes we use qualitative data from case studies of suicides, to reveal the actors’ meanings and give us a better idea of the real rate of suicide than the official statistics

Question 37

What does Atkinson (ethnomethodologist) believe?

Answer 37

Like Douglas, he rejects the idea that external social facts determine behaviour, and agrees that statistics are socially constructed. However unlike Douglas, Atkinson argues that we can never know the ‘real rate’ of suicide, even using qualitative methods, since we can never know for sure what meanings the deceased held

Question 38

What does Atkinson believe we can study about suicide?

Answer 38

The only thing we can study about suicide is the way that the living make sense of deaths-the interpretive procedures coroners use to classify deaths. For ethnomethodologists, members of society have a stock of taken-for-granted assumptions with which they make sense of situations-including deaths. The sociologist’s role is to uncover what this knowledge is and how coroners use it to arrive at a verdict

Question 39

What do postmodernists believe about scientific sociology?

Answer 39

They argue against the idea of a scientific sociology. This is because they regard natural science as simply a meta-narrative. Despite its claim to have special access to the truth, science is just one more ‘big story’; its account of the world is no more valid than any other. If this is so, there is no particular reason why we should adopt science as a model for sociology

Question 40

Why do postmodernists believe a scientific approach is dangerous?

Answer 40

Given the postmodernist view that there are as many different truths as there are points of view, a scientific approach is dangerous because it claims a monopoly of the truth and therefore excludes other points of view. Hence a scientific sociology not only makes false claims about having the truth; it is also a form of domination. Eg in the former Soviet Union, Marxism-a theory claiming to have discovered scientifically the truth about the idea; society-was used to justify coercion and oppression

Question 41

What do poststructuralist feminists believe about scientific sociology?

Answer 41

They share the same view of scientific sociology as postmodernists. They argue that the quest for a single, scientific feminist theory is a form of domination, since it covertly excludes many groups of women. Some other feminists argue that the quantitative scientific methods favoured by positivists are also oppressive and cannot capture the reality of women’s experiences

Question 42

Why do some writes argue that science is an undesirable model for sociology to follow?

Answer 42

Because, in practice, science has not always led to the progress that positivists believed it would. Eg, the emergence of ‘risk society’, with scientifically created dangers such as nuclear weapons and global warming, has undermined the idea that science inevitably brings benefits to humankind. If science produces such negative consequences, it is argued, it would be inappropriate for sociology to adopt its model

Question 43

What is science?

Answer 43

Although interpretivists reject the positivist view that sociology is a science, they tend to agree with the positivists’ description of the natural sciences. Positivists see natural science as inductive reasoning or verificationism applied to the study of observable patterns. However, not everyone accepts the positivists’ portrayal of the natural sciences. A number of sociologists, philosophers and historians have put forward quite different pictures of science. Three of these views are Popper’s view, Kuhn’s view, and realism

Question 44

Who was Karl Popper?

Answer 44

Probably one of the most influential philosopher of science of the 30th century. His ideas about science have important implications for sociology

Question 45

What does Popper note about systems of thought in society?

Answer 45

Many systems of thought claim to have true knowledge about the world, such as religions, political ideologies, tradition, intuition and common sense, as well as science

Question 46

What two questions about science does Popper set out?

Answer 46

1. What is it that distinguishes scientific knowledge from other forms of knowledge-what makes scientific knowledge unique? 2. Why has scientific knowledge been able to grow so spectacularly in just a few centuries?

Question 47

How does Popper differ from positivists?

Answer 47

He rejects their view that the distinctive feature of science lies in inductive reasoning and verificationism. In Popper’s view, the main reason why we should reject verificationism is what he calls ‘the fallacy of induction’ (error of induction). Induction is the process of moving from the observation of particular instances of something to arrive at a general statement or law

Question 48

How does Popper illustrate the fallacy of induction?

Answer 48

Uses the example of swans. Having observed a large number of swans, all of which were white, we may make the generalisation, ‘all swans are white’. It will be relatively easy for us to make further observations that seem to verify this-there are plenty more white swans out there. But however many swans we observe, we cannot prove that all swans are white-a single observation of a black swan will destroy the theory, thus, we can never prove a theory is true simply by producing more observations that support, or ‘verify’, it

Question 49

In Popper’s view, what makes science a unique form of knowledge?

Answer 49

Falsification (the opposite of verificationism). A scientific statement is one that in principle is capable of being falsified by the evidence. We must be able to say what evidence would count as falsifying the statement when we come to put it to the test. Eg, a test would disprove the law of gravity if, when we let go of an object, it did not fall

Question 50

In Popper’s view, what are the two features of a good theory?

Answer 50

It is in principle falsifiable but when tested, stands up to all attempts to disprove it. Also it is bold-it claims to explain a great deal (it makes big generalisations that precisely predict a large number of cases or events, and so is at greater risk of being falsified than a more timid theory that only tries to explain a small number of events

Question 51

What does Popper believe about truth?

Answer 51

For Popper, ‘all knowledge is provisional, temporary, capable of refutation at any moment’-there can never be absolute proof that any knowledge is true. This is because, as Stephen Hawking puts it ‘no matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory’. A good theory isn’t necessarily a true theory, therefore-it is simply one that has withstood attempts to falsify it so far

Question 52

Why does Popper see science as a public activity?

Answer 52

For a theory to be falsifiable, it must be open to criticism from other scientists, which is why Popper sees science essentially as a public activity. He sees the scientific community as a hothouse environment in which everything is open to criticism, so that the flaws in a theory can be readily exposed and better theories developed. Popper believes this explains why scientific knowledge grows so rapidly

Question 53

According to Popper, what does science thrive on?

Answer 53

Open or liberal societies-ones that believe in free expression and the right to challenge accepted ideas

Question 54

What are closed societies?

Answer 54

They are dominated by an official belief system that claims to have the absolute truth-whether a religion, or a political ideology such as Marxism or Narzism. Such belief systems stifle the growth of science because they conflict with the provisional, falsifiable nature of scientific knowledge. Eg the 17th century astronomer Galileo was punished as a heretic by the church authorities in Rome for claiming the earth revolved around the sun and not vice versa, as they church taught. We can see Rome at this time as a closed society, dominated by the church’s doctrines

Question 55

How do Popper’s views have implications for sociology?

Answer 55

Popper believes much sociology is unscientific because it consists of theories that cannot be put to the test with the possibility that they might be falsified. Eg Marxism predicts there will be a revolution leading to a classless society, but that has not yet happened because of the false consciousness of the proletariat. Hence the prediction cannot be falsified. If there is a revolution, Marxism is correct-and if there isn’t a revolution, Marxism is still correct

Question 56

Why does Popper believe that sociology may be able to be scientific?

Answer 56

Because it is capable of producing hypotheses that can in principle be falsified. Eg, Ford hypothesised that comprehensive schooling would produce social mixing of pupils from different social classes. She was able to test and falsify this hypothesis through her empirical research

Question 57

What does Popper believe about untestable ideas?

Answer 57

Although he rejects Marxism as unscientific because it is untestable, he does not believe that untestable ideas are necessarily worthless. Such ideas may be of value as they may become testable at some later data, and also because we can still examine them for clarity and logical consistency. Eg debates between different sociological perspectives can clarify thoughts that lack substance, question taken-for-granted assumptions and help to formulate testable hypotheses. While sociology may have a larger quantity of untestable ideas than the natural sciences, this may simply be because it has not been in existence as long as they have

Question 58

Who was Kuhn?

Answer 58

A historian of science who presents a radically different view of what makes science unique. Like Popper’s ideas, those of kuhn also have important implications for sociology?

Question 59

What is Kuhn’s central idea?

Answer 59

The paradigm. It is shared by members of a given scientific community and defines what their science is. It provides a basic framework of assumptions, principles, methods and techniques within which members of that community work. It is a worldview that tells scientists what nature is like, which aspects are worth studying, what methods should be used and what kinds of questions they should ask and even the sort of answers they should expect to find

Question 60

How do scientists use a paradigm?

Answer 60

It is a set of norms, or a kind of culture, because it tells the scientists how they ought to think and behave. Scientists come to accept the paradigm uncritically as a result of their socialisation. Rival perspectives are not usually considered. Scientists’ conformity to the paradigm is rewarded with publication of their research and career success, while non-conformity may mean work goes unpublished and may even lead to dismissal

Question 61

How important does Kuhn believe paradigms are?

Answer 61

In Kuhn’s view, a science cannot exist without a shared paradigm. Until there is a general consensus on a single paradigm, there will only be rival schools of thought, not a science as such

Question 62

What does Kuhn believe about paradigms and normal science?

Answer 62

Most of the time, the paradigm goes unquestioned and scientists do normal science. In normal science, scientists engage in puzzle solving. The paradigm defines the questions and in broad terms, the answers. Scientists are left to fill in detail or work out the nearest solution. Kuhn says ‘everything but the detail is known in advance. The challenge is not to uncover the unknown, but to obtain the known’

Question 63

What is an advantage of paradigms, according to Kuhn?

Answer 63

The great advantage is it allows scientists to agree on the basics of their subject and get on with productive ‘puzzle solving’ work, steadily fleshing out the bare bones of the paradigm with more and more detail, thereby enlarging their picture of nature

Question 64

How does Kuhn’s view contrast sharply with Popper’s view of science?

Answer 64

As Watkins says, while Popper sees falsification as the unique feature of science, for Kuhn it is puzzle solving within a paradigm that makes science special

Question 65

What happens when the ‘puzzle solving’ is not successful?

Answer 65

From time to time, scientists obtain findings contrary to those the paradigm led them to expect-pieces that don’t fit the puzzle. As these anomalies gradually mount up, confidence in the paradigm begins to decline leading to arguments about the basic assumptions and to efforts to reformulate the paradigm so as to account for the anomalies

Question 66

What is the period called when anomalies mount up causing arguments and lack of confidence?

Answer 66

It is a period of crisis. It’s previously taken for granted foundations are in question; scientists become demoralised and begin to lose sense of purpose. Scientists begin to formulate rival paradigms and this marks the start of a scientific revolution. For Kuhn, rival paradigms are incommensurable-two competing paradigms cannot be judged or measured by the same set of standards to decide which one is ‘best’. Although they are looking at the same universe, they seem to be looking at totally different ones

Question 67

What happens during the scientific revolution?

Answer 67

What supporters of one paradigm regard as a decisive refutation of the other, supporters of the rival paradigm will not even recognise as a valid test, because each paradigm is a totally different way of seeing the world. To move from one to the other requires a massive shift in mind-set. Many scientists find it impossible to switch from an old paradigm to a new one

Question 68

How does a scientific revolution end?

Answer 68

Eventually, one paradigm wins out and becomes accepted by the scientific community, allowing normal science to resume, but with a new set of basic assumptions, puzzles etc. However, the process is not a rational one and Kuhn compares it with a religious conversion. Generally the new paradigm gains support first of all from younger scientists, partly because they have less to lose than senior colleagues whose reputations have been built on the old one. In fact, as Planck said, the new theory triumphs because its opponents eventually die

Question 69

How does Kuhn’s view of the scientific community contrast sharply with Poppers view?

Answer 69

For Popper, the scientific community is open, critical and rational, constantly seeking to falsify existing theories by producing evidence against them. Progress occurs by challenging accepted ideas. For Kuhn, by contrast, the scientific community is not normally characterised by its openness, originality or critical spirit. For most of the time, during periods of normal science, scientists are conformists who unquestioningly accept key ideas of paradigm as a basis for making progress. Only during a scientific revolution does this change. Even then, scientists have no rational means of choosing one paradigm rather than another

Question 70

How does Kuhn’s view have implications for sociology?

Answer 70

Currently sociology is pre-paradigmatic and therefore pre-scientific, divided into competing perspectives or schools of thought. There is no shared paradigm-no agreement on the fundamentals of what to study, what method to use, what we should expect to find and so on. Eg functionalists disagree with Marxists about basic questions such as whether society is based on consensus or on conflict

Question 71

What does Kuhn believe about whether sociology is a science or not?

Answer 71

On Kuhn’s definition, sociology could only become a science if such basic disagreements were resolved. Whether this is even possible is open to doubt. Eg so long as there are political differences between conservative and radical sociologists, rival perspectives will probably continue to exist in sociology. Even within perspectives, there are often disagreements about key concepts, issues and methods. It is hard to imagine such differences being overcome to create a unified paradigm

Question 72

What do postmodernists argue about paradigms?

Answer 72

They may argue a paradigm would not be desirable in sociology. The paradigm sounds suspiciously like a meta-narrative - a dominant and dominating view of what reality is like. Postmodernists object to this both on the grounds that it silences minority views, and that it falsely claims to have special access to the truth

Question 73

What is the third view of science?

Answer 73

Realism. Realists such as Keat and Urry stress the similarities between sociology and certain kinds of natural sciences in terms of the degree of control the researcher has over the variable being researched. They distinguish between open systems and closed systems

Question 74

What are closed systems?

Answer 74

Closed systems are those where the researcher can control and measure all relevant variables, and therefore can make precise predictions of the sort Popper advocates. The typical research method is the lab experiment, as used in sciences such as physics or chemistry

Question 75

What are open systems?

Answer 75

Open systems are those where the researcher cannot control and measure all the relevant variables and so cannot make precise predictions. For example, a meteorologist cannot normally predict the weather with 100% accuracy, because the processes involved are too complex to measure or too large-scale to be studied in a lab

Question 76

What do realists argue about sociologists?

Answer 76

Realists argue that sociologists study open systems where the processes are too complex to make exact predictions. Eg we cannot predict the crime rate precisely as there are too many variables involved, most of which cannot be controlled, measured or identified

Question 77

What do realists believe about the positivist view?

Answer 77

Reject the positivist view that science is only concerned with observable phenomena. Keat and Urry argue that science often assumes the existence of unobservable structures. Eg, physicists cannot directly observe the interior of a black hole in space

Question 78

What do realists believe about the interpretivist view?

Answer 78

In the realist view, this means that interpretivists are wrong in assuming that sociology cannot be scientific. Interpretivists believe that because actors’ meanings are in their minds and not directly observable, they cannot be studied scientifically. However, if realists are correct and science can study observable phenomena, then there is no barrier to studying meanings scientifically

Question 79

What do realists believe about science?

Answer 79

For realists, both natural and social science attempt to explain the causes of events in terms of underlying structures and processes. Although these structures are often unobservable, we can work out that they exist by observing their effects. Eg we cannot directly see a thing called ‘social class’, but we can observe its effects on people’s life chance. In this view, much sociology is scientific

Question 80

How do realists views differ from Popper’s views?

Answer 80

Eg, unlike Popper, realists regard Marxism as scientific because it sees underlying structures such as capitalism producing effects such as poverty. Similarly, sociologists can also be scientific when they interpret behaviour in terms of actors’ internal meanings-even though these are unobservable

Question 81

How do realists views differ from interpretivists views?

Answer 81

Unlike interpretivists, realists see little difference between natural science and sociology, except that some natural scientists are able to study closed systems under lab conditions

Question 82

Overall what do sociologists believe about whether sociology can be a science or not?

Answer 82

Sociologists are divided as to whether sociology can be a science. While positivists favour adopting the natural sciences as a model, interpretivists reject the view that sociology can be scientific. This division derives largely from disagreement about the nature of sociology and its subject matter

Question 83

How do positivists view sociology?

Answer 83

As the study of causes: the social facts or structures external to individuals that cause them to behave as they do. In the positivists’ view, this is the same approach as the natural sciences-to discover the cause of the patterns they observe, whether in nature or society

Question 84

How do interpretivists view sociology?

Answer 84

As the study of meaningful social action: the internal meanings that lead actors to choose their course of action. Human actions are not governed by external causes, unlike events in nature, so they cannot be studied in the same way as natural phenomena

Question 85

What do positivists and interpretivists agree on?

Answer 85

While positivists and interpretivists disagree about whether sociology can be a science, they both accept the positivist model of the natural sciences as described above. Basically, the positivist view sees natural science as inductive reasoning or verificationism applied to the study of observable patterns

Question 86

Although there is agreement with the positivist model of natural sciences, why are there still different views on sociology and science?

Answer 86

Since the positivist view of science was formulated in the 19th century, quite different pictures of science have emerged, and these have very different implications for the question of whether sociology can or should be scientific

Question 87

Overall, what does Popper argue?

Answer 87

Rejects verificationism in favour of falsificationism as the defining feature of science and argues that on this definition much sociology is unscientific, but that a scientific sociology is possible in principle

Question 88

Overall, what does Kuhn argue?

Answer 88

That sociology can only become a science once all sociologists adopt a single shared paradigm

Question 89

Overall, what do realists ague?

Answer 89

That science does not just study observable phenomena, as positivists argue, but underlying unobservable structures-on this basis, both Marxism and interpretivism may be seen as scientific