value freedom Flashcards
what do the early positivists say?
comte and durkheim argued that the creation of a better society was not a matter of subjective values / personal opinions about what was best
what do early positivists argue is sociology’s job?
sociology’s job was to discover the truth about how society works, uncovering laws that govern its proper functioning. Sociologists would be able to say objectively and with scientific certainty what was really best for society
What did Comte say about sociology
argues that it is the queen of the sciences and saw sociology as latter day priests of a new scientific religion of truth
What did Marx see himself as?
He saw himself as a scientist, believing his method of historical analysis, historical materialism could reveal the line of development of human society. It involved an evolution through a series of different types of class based society leading ultimately to a future classless communist society.
What distinction does Weber make and what was his explanation?
makes sharp distinction between value judgements and facts and he argues we cannot derive from the other. However he still saw an essential role for values within sociological research
1. values as a guide to research - social reality is made up of meaningless infinity or facts that make it impossible to study in totality. We can only select facts based on value relevance.
2. Data collection and hypothesis testing - we must be as objective and unbiased as possible when collecting facts.
3. values in interpretation of data - theoretical framework influenced by values and we must be explicit about them
4. values and sociology as a citizens - sociologists must not dodge moral / political issues.
What did modern positivists argue and what were the reasons for this
mid 20th century positivists tended to argue that their own values were irrelevant to their research - there were 2 reasons for this:
- the desire to appear scientific - science is concerned with matters of fact. not value and therefore sociology should remain morally neutral. Critics argue that this reflected a desire to remain like a science and make it respectable and an academic discipline.
- the social position of sociology - gouldner argues that by the 1950s, american sociologists were becoming mere spiritless technicians by leaving their own values behind, sociologists were making a gentleman’s promise that they would not rock the boat by criticising their paymasters
Myrdal
sociologists should not only spell out their values as Weber recommends, they should also openly take sides by espousing the values and interests of a particular individual or group
Gouldner
value free sociology is:
- impossible - sociologists’ own values or those of their paymasters are biund to be reflected in their work
- undesirable - without values to guide research, sociologists are merely selling their services to the highest bidder
Becker
instead of seeing things from the perspective of these overdogs - sociologists should adopt a compassionate study and stance and take the side of the underdog - criminals, mental patients and other powerless groups
AO3 of Becker
gouldner - criticises Becker for taking a romantic and sentimental approach to disadvantaged groups. Instead sociologists should take the side of whoever is fighting back. Sociology should not confine itself to describing viewpoint of the underdog.
the effect of funding sources
they include government departments, businesses and voluntary organisations
Sociologists work is likely to disembody values and interests of paymasters
Funding bodies may block publication of the research if its findings prove acceptable.
Gouldner - all research is inevitably influenced by values.
what does relativism argue
different groups, cultures, and individuals have different views as to what is true and each see the world in a different way.
There is no independent way of judging any view is truer than another
Postmodernists take this relativist view and any perspective that claims to have the truth is, to them, a meta-narrative/
