objectivity and values

objectivity and values

1. the early positivists

   • comte and durkheim shared the enlightenment view of sociology
   • sociology's job was to discover the truth of how society works
   • scientific sociology would reveal the correct society and would give sociolgy a crucial role

2. marx

   • marx saw himself as a scientist and that his mehtod of historical analysis and materialism could reveal a line of development of human society
   • this development involved an evolution through a series of different types of class -based society, leading to a communist society
   • the role of Marx's sociology 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

3. weber

   • marx, durkheim and comte made no distinction between the facts as revealed by science and the values that we should hold
   • weber makes a sharp distinction between value judgements and the facts
   • research might show that divorcees are more likely to commit suicide but 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
       • we might argue that it should be harder to get married or that people have the right to committ suicide
   • none of these value judgements are 'proven' by the established fac. indeed, in weber's view, a value can be neither proved not disproved by the facts: they belong to different realms
   • e making a sharp distincion between facts and values, weber still saw an essential role for values in sociological research
   • his view is divided into 4 stages of the research process
     • values as a guide to reseach
       • social reality is made up of meaningless infinity of facts that make it impossible to styduy in its totality
       • the bets the researcher can do is select certain facts and study them
       • we can only select the facts in terms of what we regard as important based on our own values
         • their value relevance to us
       • values are essential to enabling us to select which aspects of reality to study
         • feminists value gender equality and this leads them to study women's oppression and to develop concepts such as patriarchy with which to understand it
     • data collection and hypothesis testing
       • values are essential in deciding what to study
       • we must be objective and unbias as possible when collecting the facts, keeping our values and prejudices out of the process
       • we should not ask leading questions. our questions should aim to get respondent to give us their view
       • once we have gathered the facts, we can use them to test a hypothesis. a hypothesis must fall or stand solely on whether or not it fits the observed facts
     • values in the interpretation of data
       • values become important when we come to interpret the data we have collected
       • the facts need to be set in a theoretical framework so that we can understand their signficance and draw conclusions from them
       • our choice of a theoretical framework or perspective is influenced by our values
       • therefore we must be explicit about them,spelling out our values so that others can see if unconscious bias is presented bias is present in our interpretation of our data
     • values and the sociologist as a citizen
       • research often have real affects on people but sociologists and scientists sometimes choose to ignore the uses that their work is put to
       • some sociologists see their job as to discover the facts and that it is the politicians job on how to use these findings
       • however, weber argues that scientists and sociologists are also peopel and should not dodge the moral and politial issues their work raises by hiding behind words such as objectivity or value freedom. they must take moral responsibility for the harm their research may do.
   • weber sees values as relevant to the sociologist in choosing what to research, in interpreting the data collected and in deciding the use to which the findings should be put. but the sociologists values must be kept out of the actual process of fact gathering

4. modern positivists

   • by the mid 20th century positivists tended to argue that their own values were irrelevant to their research.
     • two reasons for this
       • the desire to appear scientific
         • science is concerned with facts not values so the sociologist should remain morraly neutral - their job is to establish the truth not judge it
         • critics say that this reflected the wish to make sociology respectable as science has more prestige in modern society.
       • the social position of sociology
         • gouldner
           • by the 50s the american sociologists had become spiritless technicians . they had become problem takers instead of challanging authority.
           • by leaving their own values behind sociologists said they would not rock the boat of their paymakers

5. committed sociology

   • some sociologists argue for a committed sociology
     • myrdal
       • sociology should not only spell out their values but take sides by espousing the values and interests of particular individuals or groups
   • committed sociologists say that it is not possible or desirable to keep values out of sociology
   • gouldner
     • sociology is value free
       • impossible
         • the values of the sociologist and that of the paymaster is likely to be reflected in their work
       • undesirable
         • without values to guide research sociologists are selling their work to the highest bidder
   • whose side are we on
     • if sociology is influenced by values, this means the sociologist must take sides
     • becker
       • values are always present in sociology
       • instead of seeing things from the perspective of the overdogs sociolgists should take the side of the underdog. this is because less is known of these groups and their story needs to be told to redress the power imbalance.
     • the emphasis on identifying with the powerless has a clear link tot he kinds of research methods favoured by interactionists. they have a strong preference for qualitative methods which they see as revealing the meanings of these utsoders
     • gouldner
       • criticises becker for taking a romantic view of the disadvantaged groups
       • he argues that we should take the side of those fighting back. sociology should be committed to ending the underdogs oppression by unmasking the ways in which the powerful maintain their position

6. funding and careers

   • sociological research is funded by departments, businesses or voluntary organisations
   • this means they often have some control over the direction and questions of the research
     • the sociologists work os likely to embody the values and interests of their paymasters
   • sociolgists may also want to further their careers and reputations. this may influence the choice of topic, their questions and their findings
     • some may also censor themselves through fear of harming their carrer prospects
   • sociologists in university departments are often under pressure to publish reasearch regardless of quality or usefullness

7. perspectives and methods

   • feminists
     • sees society as based in gender inequality and rpomotes the rights of women
   • functionalism
     • sees society as harmoneous and espouses conservative values that favour the status quo
   • marxism
     • society is conflict ridden and srives for a classless society
   • these assumptions and values influence the topics that they choose to research
   • there is a link between sociologists methods and their value stance e.g. interactionists favour qualitative methods as it fits their desire to empathise with the underdog.
     • select methods to produce facts that reflect their value outlook

8. objectivity and relativism

   • if all perspectives involve values, are their findings just a reflection of their values, rather than a true picture of society.
     • if so there would be no way of deciding which of these different versions of reality is true
   • one version of this idea is called relativism
   • relativism argues that
     • differnt groups, cultures and individuals have different views of what is true. each sees the world in their own way
     • there is no independent way of judging whether any view is truer than any other
   • relativism goes much further. ti argue sthat there is no absolute or abjective truth. what you believe is true, is true for you. so if you believe the eart is round but i think the earth is flat there is no way of saying who is right

9. relativism and postmodernism

   • postmodernists take a relativist view of knowledge
   • they reject the idea that that anu one account of the social world is superior to any other
   • all knowledge is based on values and assumptions and thus no perspective has no special claim to be true
   • this lead to a paradox as we should nto believe what postmodernism says is true either