Sociology & Science

1. It is possible to apply the logic and methods of the natural sciences to the study of society.
   1. Doing so will bring us true, objective knowledge.
2. Society is an objective factual reality.
3. Society is patterned, and we can observe empirical patterns or regularities.

   Annotations:

   • In Durkheim's words, "real laws are discoverable".
   1. The method for finding these patterns is called induction, or inductive reasoning.
4. Verificationism
   1. After many observations have been confirmed, or have verified a theory, we can claim to have discovered the truth in the form of a general law.
   2. Positivists seek to discover the causes of the patterns they observe.
      1. Positivists seek to produce general statements about how society works. These observations can then be used to predict future events, and to guide social policies.

         Annotations:

         • For example, if we know that material deprivation leads to educational failure leads to educational failure, we can develop social policies to tackle this.
5. As far as possible, we should use the experimental method, since this allows the investigator to test a hypothesis in the most systematic and controlled way.
6. Positivists use quantitative data. This allows them to produce mathematically precise statements about the relationship between the facts they are investigating.
7. Positivists believe that researchers should be detached and objective.
   1. However, there is always the danger that the researcher may contaminate the research. Hence, positivists use questionnaires and other forms of non - participant observation.
8. Positivism and Suicide
   1. Emile Durkheim (1897) chose to study suicide to demostrate that sociology was a science.
   2. By showing that "even such a highly individual act as suicide had social causes" sociology would be established as a true science.
   3. Using quantitative data, Durkheim found that suicide rates were much higher amongst Protestants than Catholics.

1. Interpretivists believe that positivist explanations are often reductionist and deterministic, with simplistic conclusions

   Annotations:

   • For example, "poverty causes crime".
2. Max Weber believes that the purpose of sociological research is to achieve 'Verstehen', or empathy.

1. Historian Thomas Kuhn believes that one aspect of science which makes it unique is the existence of a paradigm - a shared framework of basic principles, methods and assumptions that define a science.
   1. This paradigm is a world view that tells scientists what nature is like, which aspects of it are worth studying, what kind of methods they should use, what kinds of questions they should ask, and even the sort of answers they should expect to find.
      1. Therefore the paradigm is a set of norms which scinetists come to accept as a result of their socialisation.
2. 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.
3. Normal Science
   1. Mostly, the paradigm goes unquestioned, and scientists do what Kuhn calls 'normal science'. In normal science, the paradigm defines the questions, and in broad terms, the answers. Scientists are left to fill in the detail, or work out the 'neatest solution'.

      Annotations:

      • As Kuhn says; "Everything but the detail is known in advance. The challenge is not to uncover the unknown, but to obtain the known"
   2. For Kuhn, the great advantage of the paradigm is that it allows scientists to agree on the basics of their subject, which contrasts greatly with the view of Popper.

      Annotations:

      • As John Watkins (1970) put it; "While Popper sees falsification as the unique feature of science, for Kuhn, it is puzzle solving within a paradigm that makes it special".
4. Scientific Revolutions
   1. From time to time, scientists obtain findings that contradict the current paradigm.
      1. As these anomalies build up, confidence in the current paradigm declines, leading to arguments about the basic principles of the paradigm, and to efforts to reformulate the paradigm to account for the anomalies
         1. At this point, the science has reached a stage of crisis. Scientists begin to formulate rival paradigms, thus starting the scientific revolution.
            1. Rival paradigms become 'incommeasurable' - they cannot be judged or measured by the same standards because they are so fundamentally different.
               1. Eventually one paradigm wins over all others and becomes accepted by the scientific community, allowing normal science to resume.

                  Annotations:

                  • In the words of physicist Max Planck; "The new theory triumphs because it opponents eventually die".
                  • This is in stark contrast to Poppers theory of science as a community characterised by being open to critical thinking and falsification.
5. Implications for Sociology
   1. Currnetly, sociology is pre-paradigmatic, and therefore pre-scientific, divided into competing perspectives.
      1. By Kuhn's definition, sociology could only be a science if such basic disagreements were resolved.

         Annotations:

         • Post-modernists argue that a paradigm would not be favourable, as it would act as a meta-narrative.

Annotations:

• Karl Popper; 1902 - 1994

1. Popper aimed to answer two questions: What makes scientific knowledge unique, and why has scientific knowledge been able to grow at such a dramatic rate within the last two centuries?
2. 'The Fallay of Induction'
   1. What makes science a unique form of knowledge is the very opposite of verificationism - a principle Popper calls 'falsification'.
   2. For Popper a good theory must be falsifiable. Also, it must be bold, by claiming to explain a great deal.
3. Criticism & 'The Open Society'
   1. For a theory to be falsifiable, it must be open to criticism from other scientists.
      1. Therefore, science is essentially a public activity. In the scientific community, everything is open to criticism, so the flaws in a theory can easily be recognised and addressed, and the theory developed.
         1. Popper states that htis is why science thrives in liberal, open communities that believe in free expression and the right to challenge accepted ideas.

            Annotations:

            • However, science still thrived in the Soviet Union, often over taking science in the US.
            1. Hence, in a closed society with a dominant ideology, scientific discovery is often hindered.

               Annotations:

               • For example, the work of Galileo's work was strongly rejected by the Roman Catholic Church in the 17th century
               • Also, Darwin's work on evolution gained him the castigation of other leading scientists and religious leaders at the time.

1. Keat & Urry (1982)
   1. Closed Systems
      1. Are those where the researcher can control and measure all of the relevant variables, and can therefore make precise, scientific predictions.
         1. The typical research method is the laboratory experiment, as used in the natural sciences.
   2. Open Systems
      1. Are those where the researcher cannot control and measure all the relevant variables so cannot make predictions because the processes involved are too complex.

         Annotations:

         • For example, a meteorologist can predict the weather with 100% accuracy, because the processes involved are too complex to measure or of too large a scale to be studied in a laboratory.
2. Underlying Structures
   1. Realists reject the positivist view that science is only concerned with observable phenomena. Keat and Urry argue that science often assumes the existence of un-observable structures.
      1. In the realist view, this also means that interpretivists are wrong in assuming that sociology cannot be sociology cannot be scientific.
   2. For realists, both natural and social sciences attempt to explain the causes of events in terms of underlying structures and processes.
      1. Although these structures are often unobservable, we can work out that they exist by observing their effects
   3. Unlike Popper, realists regard Marxism as scientific because it sees underlying structures and proceses such as capitalism producing poverty.

1. Early Positivists
   1. For Auguste Comte and Emile Durkheim, the creation of a better society was not a matter of subjective values or personal opinions about what was best. They shared the enlightenment/modernist stance on sociology.

      Annotations:

      • Auguste Comte (1798-1857) Emile Durkheim (1858 - 1917)
      1. In their view, scientific sociology would reveal the one correct society.
   2. 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.
2. Karl Marx
   1. Marx saw himself as a scientist, and believed his method of historical analysis (historical materialsim) could reveal the line of development of human society.
   2. Marx' sociology served the purpose of observing the effect of capitalism, particularly on the proletariat, and how it would cause a communist revolution.
      1. Thus, similarly to Durkheim and Comte, Marx sees his science as being able to deliver 'the good society'.
3. Max Weber
   1. Whereas Marx, Durkheim and Comte tended not to see a distinction between the facts as revealed by science and the values that we should hold, Max Weber takes a different view.

      Annotations:

      • Max Weber (1864 - 1920)
      1. He makes a sharp distinction between value judgements and facts and he argues that we cannot derive one from another.
         1. For example, research might establish the fact that divorcees are more likely to commit suicide. However, this does not logically demonstrate the truth of the value judgement that we should make divorce harder to obtain.
4. Modern Positivists
   1. Becker - 'Whose side are we on anyway?'
      1. Values are present in all forms of research, including positivism. Positivists always examine the view point of the most powerful groups in society.
      2. Becker argues that it is now time to look at the underdogs, ie. mental patients, criminals etc. Little is known about these groups, and a new dimension of social reality can be discovered from them.
   2. Benefits of a neutral approach:
      1. Respected status.
      2. Free of bias.
      3. Valued evidence.
   3. By the late 1950's, many sociologists had abandoned the idea of improving society. Instead, researchers desired to appear scientific, remaining neutral and objective.
   4. Weaknesses of a neutral approach:
      1. No hypothesis or aim.
      2. No conclusion or subsequent action.
      3. Researcher objectivity still affected by their employer's subjectivity.

1. Factors that may affect how much influence a study has on social policy:
   1. Globalisation
   2. Interest groups.
   3. Government ideology.
   4. Costs
   5. Critical or subversive ideologies.
   6. Funding sources.
   7. Electoral popularity.