Test 1 Flashcards
what is theory and how should it be evaluated?
- provides a framework for our ideas
- identify what is important and what is not important
- it should not be evaluated in terms of absolute truth/falsity, but in terms of their range or scope of validity
what is the difference between natural science and social science?
- in natural science, theories agree on the fundamentals but in social science theories are in internal conflict with their fundamentals
- theories in natural science will typically replace one another but theories in social science will co-exist and compete
what is positivism?
positivism is the idea that was introduced by early sociologists that thought the law of social behaviour would predict phenomena. this is the idea that social sciences should only use quantitative methods to follow natural science.
what is the difference between ontology and epistemology?
ontology is the science that is concerned with the kinds of things that exist and specifying the processes and relations of things that make them what they are. epistemology is the sciene that is concerned with how we know something is real or how we obtain knowledge. this deals with the relationship between the knower and the known.
what does democrate’s theory suggest?
democrates’ theory is of the atom and the void in which he argues that everything is made of atoms and the void. this suggests that there is a reality beneath the reality that we see.
how many levels of reality are there and what are they according to comte?
in increasing order of complexity, there are 5 levels of reality which are physical, chemical, biological, psychological and sociological
what is the connection between common sense and science?
common sense refers to conventional wisdom in which is the source of much of what we think of the world. science is what actually explains reality as it is. common sense and science are connected in that elements of reality that rooted from common sense can be proved through science, and as these claims become recognized as valid, the science becomes common sense.
what is the ontology of natural science?
natural science argues that reality is objective because things happen out of causal necessity. Explanations will be of universal deductive scope.
what is the ontology of social science?
reality is both objective and subjective because while things may objectively exist, everything is laced with meaning so that anyone may interpret something differently., subjective to their own identity. as such, explanations will be of context dependent and probabilistic scope.
what is the epistemology of natural science?
natural science obtains its knowledge from the outside, through observable measurement.
what is the epistemology of social science?
social science obtains its knowledge from the outside and the inside, through both observation and intersubjective understanding
why can we never achieve complete objectivity? what is another term for objectivity?
another term for objectivity is value neutrality. we can never achieve true objectivity because we, as humans, have inherent biases and tendencies. this is due to our intersubjectivity with our research subjects.
what is intersubjectivity? what is it the opposite of? what should we always note with this?
intersubjectivity is the unique relationship that human researchers have with their human subjects in that we share an identity of being human, and can thus understand them through empathy and sympathy. it is the opposite of solipsism which suggests that you can only understand yourself. we have to note that intersubjectivity is limited because you will never truly understand an experience unless you have personally experienced it as well?
what is a research method that allows for greater intersubjectivity?
participant observation allows for greater intersubjectivity because we are able to take on the role of the subject and thus better understand them.
how does the nominalist view compare with the social realism view on collective concepts? which is the dominant view? how should we think of these views?
nominalism views collective concepts as simple figures of speech because they believe that only individuals have agency, so the structure has no influence. this is based on reductionism. it believes that any totality is the aggregation of its parts, and explains phenomena from micro to macro.
social realism views collective concepts as the emergent realities or things that come out of human interaction, creating something that is more than the sum of its parts. it emphasizes structures and social systems and is based on the doctrine of emergence. it suggests that the totality is more than the sum of its parts and explains phenomena from macro to micro. the dominant view is social realism. we should think of nominalism and social realism as a continuum.
what is reductionism? how does it compare to the doctrine of emergence?
reductionism is the idea that everything can be reduced to the property of its parts. the doctrine of emergence suggests that when you bring elements together, their association creates a reality that is more than the addition of the units.
what is a good example of the doctrine of emergence?
george simmel’s theory on formal sociology in which he investigated group dynamics when a dyad became a triad. he suggested that there were 3 new opportunities that emerged with the addition of the third unit, not because the third was inherently different, but because it changed the composition of the group.
the first possibility was mediation in which the third unit can now act as a mediator between the other two during conflict.
the second possibility is tertius gaudens, in which refers to the ‘third who enjoys’. this is the situation in which the third party benefits from the jealous attention and competitive favours of the other two.
the third possibility is divde et impera, which is divide and rule. this is the situation where the third party will actively pit the other two against each other as to gain a powerful dominating position.
who was francis bacon?
francis bacon was often recognized as the most important voice in modern science because he introduced experiment and precise measurement. he came up with the idea of idola mentis.