continued

continued

1. committed sociology - gunnar myrdral argues that sociologists should not only spell out their values (weber) they should also openly take sides adopting values of particular group.

   • it is neither possible or desirable to keep values out of research.
     • gouldner - value free sociology is impossibe - as paymaster of sociologists are bound to be reflected in their work & undesirable - without values to guide work, sociologists are putting their service at the disposal of the highest bidder.
       • whose side are we on?
         • if all sociology is influenced by values, this mean the sociologist must inevitably take sides. by not choosing a side, the sociologist is in fact taking the side of the more powerful against the less powerful.
           • becker - values are always present in sociology. traditionally sociologists have tended to take the viewpoint of the powerful.
             • becker argues that instead of seeing things from the perspective of these 'overdogs' sociologists should adopt a compassionate stance and take the side of the underdogs. less is known about these groups.
               • e.g my empathising with mental patient we can show hidden rationality of their behaviour - behaviour the psychiatrist thinks is irrational. goffman - to describe the situation of a mental patient faithfully have to take their side, we have to be biased.

2. this emphasis on identifying with powerless has clear links to kind of research methods favoured by interactionists. strong preference for qualitative methods, e.g po which reaveales meaning of these 'outsiders'

   • however, gouldner criticises becker for taking a romantic approach to disadvantaged groups. he is only concerned with those who 'are on their backs'.

3. gouldner adopts marxist perspective. sociologists should take the side of those who are fighting back. sociology should not confine itself to describing the viewpoint of underdog. should be committed to ending their oppression, by unmasking powerful.

   • funding and careers - most research funded by someone other than sociologist. e.g government departments. the body that pays controls the direction it takes and kind of questions asked. sociologists work embody values of paymaster.
     • funding organisations may prevent publication of the research if its finding prove unacceptable. black report - into class inequalities in health, the conservative government arranged for its release over a bank holiday weekend, allegedly in hope of reducing the publicity, as reports finding ran counter views.
       • to influence those who fund the research, we should also consider the sociologists own personal values deriving from their background. they may wish to further their careers and may influence choice of topic.
         • some censor themselves in fear of being too outspoken

4. perspective and methods - for gouldner all research is inevitably influenced by values. feminism - see society as based on gender inequality and promote rights of women. functionalists -see society as harmonious and adopt conservative values that favour status quo. marxism - see society as conflict-ridden and strive for classless society.

5. functionalists conclude that inequality is good for society , whereas marxists conclude that it produces exploitation.

6. also link between kinds of methods and value stance. interactionlist preference for qualitative methods fits with their desire to empathise with the underdog since such methods give access to meanings. functionalists and positivsts take the side of establishment and see viewpoint of authority fits well with their uncritical acceptance of official stats.

7. objectivity and relativism - different groups have different views as to what is true. each one sees the world in own distinctive way. there is no independent way of judging whether any view is truer.

   • it argues that there is no absolute truth just truths. what you believe is true, is true for you.
     • relativism and postmodernism - they reject the idea that any one account of the social world is superior to the other. any one that does claim to have truth, like marxism, is just a meta-narrative. all knowledge based on values.
       • if correct, must apply to postmodernism, which leads to paradoxical conclusion that we shouldn't believe what postmodernism says either. relativism is logically self-defeating.
         • it matters less whether a theory contains certain values, than whether it can explain the world we observe.