Theory and Methods.

Página 1

Positivism;

Positivist prefer quantitative methods such as social surveys, structured questionnaires and official statistics because these have good reliability and representativeness.

Positivists see society as shaping the individual and believe that ‘social facts’ shape individual action.

The positivist tradition stresses the importance of doing quantitative research such as large scale surveys in order to get an overview of society as a whole and to uncover social trends, such as the relationship between educational achievement and social class. This type of sociology is more interested in trends and patterns rather than individuals.

Positivists also believe that sociology can and should use the same methods and approaches to study the social world that “natural” sciences such as biology and physics use to investigate the physical world. By adopting “scientific” techniques sociologists should be able, eventually, to uncover the laws that govern societies just as scientists have discovered the laws that govern the physical world.

In positivist research, sociologists tend to look for relationships, or ‘correlations’ between two or more variables. This is known as the comparative method

Página 2

Interpretivism;

An Interpretivist approach to social research would be much more qualitative, using methods such as unstructured interviews or participant observation.

Interpretivists, or anti-positivists argue that individuals are not just puppets who react to external social forces as Positivists believe.

According to Interpretivists individuals are intricate and complex and different people experience and understand the same ‘objective reality’ in very different ways and have their own, often very different, reasons for acting in the world, thus scientific methods are not appropriate.

Intepretivist research methods derive from ‘social action theory‘

Intereptivists actually criticise ‘scientific sociology’ (Positivism) because many of the statistics it relies on are themselves socially constructed.

Interpretivists argue that in order to understand human action we need to achieve ‘Verstehen‘, or empathetic understanding – we need to see the world through the eyes of the actors doing the acting.

Página 3

Key notes;

Positivist approaches to social research are quantitative, ‘scientific’, objective.

Durkhiem’s suicide is an example of a positivist study

Interpretivists criticise Positivist’s reliance on statistics (they are socially constructed)

Interpretivist approaches to social research = qualitative, empathetic, micro

Key example = Douglas’ study of the multiple meanings of suicide.

Positivists criticise Interpretivist research because it’s too subjective, not authoritative.

Página 4

The Positivist Approach

Durkheim’s Suicide (1897) illustrates the positivist view of science. It is the most influential on sociology. Durkeim’s views are based on the following principles:

There are objective facts about the social world and they are expressed in statistics.

These facts are not influenced by the personal beliefs of the researcher.

Having collected stats, you should look for correlations which can reveal causal relationships

Durkheim believed human behaviour can be explained by external stimuli

By following this approach it is possible to uncover the laws of human behaviour

To be scientific, you should only study what you observe. It would be unscientific to study people’s emotions.

Durkheim’s approach is inductive – it involves starting with the evidence and then deriving theory.

Página 5

Differences between society and the natural world;

The three criticisms below hinge on the idea that the social world is fundamentally different to the natural, physical world

Social action theorists argue the social world is socially constructed

You cannot understand the world, or human action without understanding the meanings people attach to their actions

Some postmodernists argue you can only understand the world through language, thus there is no way to observe it directly.

Problems of prediction

People have consciousness, they judge situations and how to respond to them based on their life-histories, and personal opinions, which we cannot know objectively.

Thus if sociology aimed to make predictions, it would always be proved wrong.

Página 6

Questioning the Objectivity of Science

The ‘objectivity’ of the natural sciences has increasingly been questioned. In the 1960s a branch of sociology called ‘science and technology studies’ emerged which argues From this perspective, David Bloor (1976) argued that it is a mistake to see science as something which is apart from the social world, it is itself shaped by a range of social factors.

From this point of view, we should study the processes through which scientific knowledge is constructed, rather than accepting the scientific method as apart from society and ‘superior’.

Página 7

Bruno Latour: Science as the ‘construction of versions of reality’

Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar (1979) studied the way scientists did their research. They found that they spent a lot of time trying to win research grants (rather than doing actual research) and there was little incentive to disprove ideas

Scientists tended to form networks in which many individuals were all engaged in a ‘fierce battle to construct reality’, which could involve inventing special machines just to prove a theory true. If an individual challenged the version of reality being produced, they could be dis-enrolled from the network.

Página 8

Thomas Kuhn: Paradigms and Scientific Revolutions

Kuhn noted that we tend to see scientists as objective and neutral, and working together to refine scientific knowledge, which is generally seen as evolving gradually, as new evidence helps to refine and develop existing theories.

Kuhn disagreed with this, arguing that the evolution of scientific knowledge is limited by what he called ‘paradigms’. A paradigm is a basic world-view which provides a framework for thinking about the world. It includes basic assumptions about the nature of reality, which limit the kind of questions scientists ask in their research.

According to Kuhn, most scientists build their careers working within the dominant paradigm, effectively ignoring any evidence which doesn’t fit in with their general framework, and any scientist who tries to ask questions outside of the ‘dominant paradigm’ is marginalised, and not taken seriously.

However, ‘rogue scientists’ who look at the world differently do exist, and engage in alternative research, and when sufficient evidence builds up which contradicts already existing paradigms, a ‘paradigm shift’ occurs, in which the old paradigms are rejected, and a new dominant paradigm comes into force.

One example of this is the science surrounding climate change. According to Sutton (2015) some (marginal) scientists were finding evidence of a link between the burning of fossil fuels and a warming climate in the 1950s, but this was largely dismissed by the scientific community until the 1990s, but today this is widely accepted.

In summary Kuhn argued that scientific knowledge shifted in a series of ‘revolutions’ as new ‘paradigms’ came to replace old ‘paradigms’; he is also suggesting that science should not be seen as being characterised by consensus – rather there are a number of competing paradigms within science, and not all of them get taken seriously by those with power.

Kuhn has been criticised by Lakatos (1970) – he argues that modern science is much more open to testing new ideas today than it was in the past.

Página 9

Realist Views of Science and Open and Closed Systems

Sayer suggests that there are two types of science – those which operate in closed systems, such as physics and chemistry, and those which operate in open systems such as meteorology.

Closed systems have only a limited number of variables interacting, all of which can be controlled, which makes it possible to carry out laboratory experiments and for precise predictions to be made.

However, sciences such as meteorology operate in open systems, where you cannot control all of the variables. These sciences recognise unpredictability.

Meteorology is still scientific – there are still forecasting models based on observation which allows us to predict with some degree of certainty when certain weather events will happen, and these models can, and are being refined.

Moreover, open systems sciences are engaged in trying to find ‘underlying structures’ which cannot be directly observed, such as magnetic fields, which can interfere with weather patterns.

Sayer argues that sociology can be scientific in the way meteorology is scientific, but not scientific in the way physics or chemistry can be scientific:

Quantitative sociology, for example can reveal hidden structures (such as the class structure), and make broad predictions about what percentage of people from a lower class background will fail, compared to those from a middle class background, without being able to predict exactly who will fail, and without us being able to SEE that class structure directly.

Página 10

Modernity, Postmodernity and Science

The scientific world view and the idea of scientific sociology evolved out of the enlightenment and modernity – the belief that there was ‘one truth’ and science could reveal it.

Postmodernists challenge the idea that science produces the truth about the natural world. For Rorty (1984) scientists have just replaced priests as the source of truth – we want experts to explain the world to us. However, there are still many unanswered questions about the nature of reality even with science.

Lyotard (1984) also criticises the view that science stands apart from the natural world. He argues that language shapes the way we think about the world, and while scientific language may open our eyes to some truths; it just closes our eyes to others.

Página 11

Summary – Can Sociology Be Scientific?

Early positivists suggested that sociology should aim to be scientific – this has largely been rejected

Interpretivists reject this because they believe reality is social reality is different to natural reality – we need to understand meanings.

Moreover, many people such as Kuhn argue scientific knowledge is also socially constructed

Sayer believes there is a ‘half way house’ – we can still do quantitative ‘scientific sociology’ in an open systems ways – many people within sociology subscribe to this.

Postmodernists reject the view that we should be scientific in any way, this closes our minds.

Página 12

Key Notes;

Key features of the scientific method = the experiment, objectivity, cause and effect relationships, making predictions.

Positivism = a scientific approach applied to society – Durkheim’s suicide as an example.

Interpretivist criticisms of the scientific method applied to society – humans are conscious actors, they cannot be understood using detached, quantitative methods

Criticisms of the ‘objectivity’ of science and the scientific method – Kuhn’s paradigm critique is especially important.

Realism – we can still usefully study society as an open system, rather than just focussing on individuals – for example we can still make general predictions about social behaviour based on statistical trends, even if we can’t predict exactly what that action will be or who, specifically will do what.

Postmodern views of science – the idea that ‘truth’ is no longer possible.

Página 13

The Functionalist Theory;

Functionalism as a Structural/Systems Theory – it focuses on the needs of the social system as a whole; it is a consensus theory – it sees society as based on shared values; it is also a modernist theory – it believes that research can find the truth and lead to progress. Functionalism is closely related to the New Right and Modernisation Theory.

Página 14

Introduction/ Society as a System

Historical Context: the 1890s to the 1950s

Parsons uses the term ‘organic analogy’ to describe society.

Parsons sees three similarities between society and a biological organism: both are self-regulating, both have needs, both have sub-systems which perform specific functions.

Emile Durkheim’s Functionalism (1858 – 1917) – The first ever ‘Sociologist’

Concerned with understanding rapid social change brought about with industrialisation

Traditional society based on ‘mechanical solidarity’ and strong collective conscience

Industrial society = more complex causes change and anomie, challenge of modernity = how to achieve ‘organic solidarity’

Society exists as a separate entity above its members, as a system of ‘social facts’. It affects people irrespective of their individual thoughts and feelings.

Studied suicide to illustrate the above.

Página 15

Talcott Parson’s Functionalism

Society is based on value consensus and social order

Society needs individuals to be integrated – this is achieved through socialisation and social control

The social system has four basic needs: instrumental (adaptation and goal attainment) and expressive (integration and latency)

Social change is gradual and evolutionary/ progressive – societies gradually evolve by moving from simple to more complex and larger structures.

Robert Merton’s Functionalism

Merton’s Three Internal Critiques of Functionalism: Not everything is necessary; not everything is interconnected; some institutions are dysfunctional

Merton’s ideas of Latent and Manifest Functions: Intended and unintended (so functions may be more complex than Parson’s suggests)

Overall Evaluations of Functionalism

Durkheim’s study on suicide – trends still true today

Governments view society as a system

Development theorists view society as a system.

X – Logical Criticisms – Functionalism is teleological – it explains an institutions existence in terms of its effect, and the effect may not be necessary

X – Conflict Perspectives – Functionalism ignores power inequality and exploitatio

X – Action Perspectives – Functionalism is deterministic

X – Postmodernist Critiques – society is not as stable, orderly, or predictable as Functionalists suggest.

Página 16

The Functionalist perspective on education

Secondary socialisation

Social Solidarity

Skills for working

Meritocracy

Role Allocation

Modernisation Theory (Functionalism applied to development)

Aid injections and five stages of growth

Cultural Barriers

Capitalist/ Industrial model of development

Functionalist and Social Control theories of crime

Bonds of attachment theory

Positive Functions of Crime

Inevitability of crime

Functionalist research methods – Positivism

Social Facts

Objectivity

Official Statistics

Correlations

Generaliseablity

Science

Página 17

Key notes;

Durkheim’s functionalism – social facts and anomie

Parson’s systems theory – the organic analogy and social evolution

Merton’s internal critique of functionalism – latent and manifest functions

Functionalism applied to the family – Murdock’s four universal functions, Parson’s functional fit theory and the two irreducible functions of the family – socialisation and the stabilisation of adult personalities

Functionalism applied to education – meritocracy, social solidarity, school as a bridge between home and society (particularistic and universalistic values)

Functionalism applied to Crime and Deviance – Durkheim’s three positive functions of crime, strain theory, consensus subcultural theories.

Functionalism and Modernisation Theory – Parson’s traditional and modern values and the evolutionary model of society

Functionalism and research methods – Durkheim’s Positivist approach to suicide

Página 18

Marxism;

Karl Marx: Key Ideas

Two classes – Bourgeois – Proletariat

Relationship between them is Exploitation/ Surplus Value

The Base (economy) determines the Superstructure (all other institutions)

The ruling class have ideological control through the superstructure

The proletariat exist in false consciousness

The fundamental problem with Capitalism is that it causes alienation

Revolution is inevitable because the iron law of Capitalism is that exploitation must carry on increasing.

Communism is the final stage of societal evolution (the abolition of private property)

The purpose of research is to find out more about the laws of Capitalism to see when revolution is ripe.

Página 19

Antonio Gramsci: Humanistic Marxism

Criticised Marx because he thought individuals are more active, not passive

Introduced the concept of Hegemony – Ruling class maintain power through Coercive and Hegemonic control

Ruling class hegemonic control is never complete because they are too few and they have the proletariat have dual consciousness – they can see through Bourgeois ideology.

To bring about social change the proletariat needs its own organic intellectuals to develop a counter-hegemony – a realistic alternative to Communism, to lead people to Socialism.

Louis Althusser: Scientific Marxism

Criticised Marx – There are three levels of control: economic, political, and ideological. The Bourgeois maintain control on all three levels and they all reinforce each other.

They maintain control through the Repressive state apparatus – the army

More importantly – the Ideological state apparatus – everything else, most obviously education and the media.

Criticised humanistic Marxism – structure determines everything, people are incapable of having genuinely revolutionary ideas within the existing Capitalist system

Capitalism needs to collapse before socialism comes about.

Página 20

Overall Evaluations of Marxism

Eight ways in which Marxism might still be relevant today

Transnational Capitalist Class (Sklaire)

Global Exploitation by TNCs (Wallerstein’s WST)

Evidence of elite control of superstructure – Independent schools links

Ideological Control – Agenda Setting and Jeremy Corbyn

Advertising and False Needs

Alienation – Amazon!

Contradictions in Capitalism – David Harvey

Marxism Conference – Organic Intellectuals?

Criticisms of Marxism

X – More complex class structure

X – Capitalism is less exploitative (welfare state)

X – Relative autonomy

X – Postmodernism – people are free, not under false consciousness

X – Work is less alienating for self-employed people

X – Scientific Marxism is economically deterministic (Interactionism)

X – Failure of communism in Eastern Europe

X – It is a metanarrative (Postmodernism)

Página 21

Key Notes;

Karl Marx – the basics: bourgeoisie and proletariat, exploitation, alienation, false consciousness, revolution.

Gramsci’s humanistic Marxism – hegemony, dual consciousness and organic intellectuals

Althusser’s structuralist Marxism – the repressive state apparatus.

Marxism applied to the Family – capitalism, private property and the family, The family as a safe haven, ideological functions, also see Marxist Feminism

Marxism applied to education – the ideological state apparatus, reproduction of class inequality, legitiimation of class inequality, correspondence principle

Marxism applied to Crime and Deviance – • Private Property and Crime, The costs of Corporate Crime, Selective Law Enforcement, Criminogenic Captialism („Dog Eat Dog“ Society)

Marxism applied to Global Development – Colonialism and Slavery, The Modern World System, Unfair trade rules, TNC exploitation

Marxism and Research Methods – Social Class, Comparative Analysis, Objectivity/ Critical Research.

Página 22

Feminism key notes;

Liberal Feminism – does not seek revolutionary changes: they want changes to take place within the existing structure; the creation of equal opportunities is the main aim of liberal feminists – e.g. the Sex Discrimination Act and the Equal Pay Act

Marxist Feminism – capitalism rather than patriarchy is the principal source of women’s oppression, and capitalists as the main beneficiaries, through the housewife role for example; overthrowing capitalism remains the main objective.

Radical Feminism – Society is patriarchal, dominated and ruled by men – men are the ruling class, and women the subject class. Rape, violence and pornography some of the key tools through which men control women; separatism can be part of the solution.

Difference Feminism – women are not a homogenous group, they experience disadvantage in different ways.

Postmodern Feminism – critiqued preceding Feminist theory as being part of the masculinist Enlightenment Project; concerned with language (discourses) and the relationship between power and knowledge rather than ‘politics and opportunities‘.

Página 23

Social Action Theory;

We can divide sociological theories into two broad types: structural and action theories.

Functionalism, Marxism and Feminism are all structural theories, are interested in ‘society as a whole’ and ask ‘societal level questions’ such as ‘what functions does education perform for society and the individual’? (Functionalism) or ‘why does injustice exist’ (Marxism and Feminism)? They seek to understand the actions of individuals by looking at the structure of wider society and generally believe that ‘society shapes the individual’.

Página 24

Sociologists who adopt social action perspectives usually reject the view that society has a clear structure that directs individuals to behave in certain ways. Some social action theorists do not deny the existence of a social structure, but see this structure as rising out of the action of individual; others argue that there is no such thing as a social structure. For the purposes of Second Year sociology you need to know about four Action Theories – all of which have slightly different views on the relationship between social structure and social actions.

Max Weber is generally regarded as the founder of social action theory – he believed that we need to develop an empathetic understanding to uncover the personal meanings and motives individuals give to their own actions, and that this was crucial to understanding how social structures changed over time. However, he also believed that we could make generalisations about types of motive people had and that these general motivations were influenced by the wider society – thus he is half way between structure and action theory, rather than a pure ‘social action’ theorist.

Página 25

George Herbert Mead developed ‘Symbolic Interactionism’, and he put more emphasis on the role of the active individual than Weber.

For Mead, there is still a society ‘out there’ which constrains human action, in the sense that there are a number of pre-existing social roles which people have to take on in order to get by in society. However, individuals have considerable freedom to shape their identities within and between these social roles.

Mead also argued that everything about society is open to multiple interpretations and meanings – the same institutions, social roles and individual-actions can mean very different things to different people. For Mead, individuals are constantly interpreting and re-interpreting each other’s ‘symbolic actions’ – and this is an ongoing, complex process – if we want to understand human action we need to understand the micro-details of how people interpret other people’s actions, and how their re-actions are in turn re-interpreted and so on.

Página 26

In order to truly understand why people act in the way that they do, we need to understand people’s ‘self-concept’ – their identities, there ideas about the ‘generalised other’ (society) and micro-interpretations.

Erving Goffman’s developed Mead’s work in his Dramaturgical theory of social action – he argued that the most appropriate way to understand people is to view them as if they are actors on a stage – people use props (such as clothes and body-language) to project idealised images of themselves to a social audience – people have multiple identities which change according to the social setting and the audience they find themselves performing in front of. As well as the social world, the front stage, we all have backstage areas (mostly the home) where we prepare for our social performances, and reflect on how good or bad our performances have been, and plan to change them accordingly. For Goffman, individuals are very active and manipulative, and we may never actually get to see people’s real identities unless we spend considerable time with them during their day to day lives.

Labelling Theory focuses on how the definitions (meanings) people impose on situations or on other people can have real consequences (even if those definitions are not based in reality) – and argues that people in power generally have more ability to impose their definitions on situations than the powerless. For example, parents, teachers and the police generally have more power to make labels stick and make these labels have consequences compared to working class youths. Labelling theory criticises both Mead and Goffman, arguing that while we need to look at micro-level interactions and meanings to examine labelling, we still need to understand where people are located in the power-structure of society to fully understand the process of labeling and identity construction.

Página 27

Key Notes;

Max Weber: Verstehen, and Social Change – observation alone is not enough to understand human action, we need empathetic understanding. Gaining Verstehen is the main point of Sociology, e.g. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism).

Symbolic Interactionism – people’s self-concepts based on their understanding of how others perceive them (the looking glass self); need to understand meanings to understanding actions; social roles are not specific or fixed; they can be interpreted in various different ways.

Goffman’s Dramaturgical Theory – People are actors on a ‘social stage’ who actively create an impression of themselves

Labeling Theory – the definitions (meanings) people impose on situations or on other people can have real consequences (even if those definitions are not based in reality)

Página 28

Post Modernism;

Modernity~ 1650 to 1950 (ish)

Clear social structure (class/ gender)

The nuclear family

Jobs for life

Nation States and Politics

Trust in Science

A belief in ‘progress’

Página 29

Post and Late Modernity (the Same)~ 1980 (ish) to the present day

Globalisation

Uncertainty

Consumerism

More Individual Freedom

More Diversity

The media and Hyper-reality

Página 30

Modernism

Structured, institutions important stable, ordered,

Individual shaped by society

Objective knowledge is possible, it can lead to progress

Marxism

Post-Modernism

Institutions less powerful, media and consmer culture all important

Individual free to construct their own identity

Objective knowledge is not possible, it just leads to oppression

Lyotard

Late Modernism

Global institutions and abstract systems both constrain and empower individuals

The Individual has no choice but to construct their identity

Knowledge is still useful to help steer late-modernity, but it is fraught with uncertainties

Giddens

Página 31

Key notes;

Postmodernism

Economy and Politics = Industrial economies, jobs for life; Nation State, most people vote and are in trades unions; Organised/ Heavy Capitalism and the Welfare State

Society/ Culture reflects the underlying class and patriarchal structures; Nuclear family the norm, marriage for life; Identities shaped/ constrained by class position/ sex; Media – one way communication, reflects ‘reality’

Knowledge – The Enlightenment – Science/ Objective Knowledge/ Truth and Progress

Sociology – Positivism/ Functionalism – doing research to find how societies function and gradually building a better world; Marxism/ Feminism –emancipation.

Late Modernism

Economy/ Politics = Post-Industrial, service sector, portfolio workers and consumption is central; Declining power of the Nation State; Disorganised Capitalism/ Liquid Capitalism (Bauman)

Society/ Culture – Culture is free from structure – it is more Diverse and Fragmented ; Relationships more diverse; More Individual Freedom to shape identities; Media – more global, two- way, hyperreality (Baudrillard)

Knowledge – Critique of the Enlightenment; Incredulity towards Metanarratives (Lyotard)

Sociology – Narrative histories; Deconstruction (Lyotard) and Destabilising Theory.

Página 32

Key notes Sociology and social policy;

Intro – Social policy = things the government does to steer society in some way. Examples include taxation which affects wealth distribution, various education policies and policies about how to tackle crime

There are several reasons why governments may ignore certain findings of research – e.g. lack of money; Marxists and Feminists believe governments generally have an ideological bias which mean they ignore certain research findings.

Positivists believe researchers should collect objective knowledge to assess the impact of social policies and to help introduce new policies

Social Democratic Perspectives generally agree with the above.

The New Right and Neoliberals – have had most influence on social policyrecently – e.g. The education system/ crime policy and in International Development

Marxist approaches to social policy – prefer policies which favour the redistribution of wealth and promote equality of opportunity, such as the abolition of private schools.

Feminist approaches to social policy – prefer policies which emphasis gender equality, such as the Paternity Act.

Postmodernists focus on deconstruction rather than social policies

Late Modernists emphasise the importance and challenges of developing and evaluating social policies in an age of globalisation.