3. Sociology and Science

Name some features of science?

Discovering objective facts, Objective reality, Empirical evidence, Patterns, laws & inductive reasoning, Verificationism, Preferred methods, Prediction, Guiding policy

What do positivists say about sociology as a science?

• Society is a objective factual reality made up of social facts eg: material deprivation for educational underachievement

• Positivists like Durkheim and Comte believe in inductive reasoning where we can accumulate data and observe patterns → policies to tackle issues

• Comte said sociology is the “queen of the sciences”

• Verificationism aims to prove a theory true

• They prefer macro theories and quantitative research for objectivity and detachment → high reliability eg: Durkheim’s suicide study using official statistics

What to interpretivists say about sociology as a science?

• Sociology is not a science as science deals with laws of cause and affect not human meanings which are internal to people’s consciousness and are ideas not things

• G.H.Mead argued since humans have free will, their reaction to stimuli isn’t straightforward as they interpret the meaning of the stimulus then choose how to respond. It is sociologists job to uncover the meanings

• They prefer qualitative research void of detachment and objectivity. Weber calls it verstehen where we put ourselves in the place of the actor and empathise in order to understand the meanings → high validity

What do different types of interpretivists believe about positivism?

1. Interactionalism - Glaser and Strauss reject the positivist view that we should have hypothesise before starting research as they believe it may impose our own views and distort reality. They argue we should take a bottom-up approach and form hypothesise and ideas based on the observations made

2. Phenomenologists/ethnomethodologists - Garfinkel (ethno) takes a radically anti-structuralist view arguing society is not a thing determining our actions and only exists in people’s self-conscious. Since people’s actions aren’t governed external forces there are no cause and effect explanations favoured by positivists

What do interpretivists believe about Durkheim’s suicide study?

• Douglas argued we must uncover the meanings of suicide for individuals involved, not rely on statistics (which are socially constructed by coroners)

• He suggested using qualitative case studies to understand personal meanings

• HOWEVER, ethnomethodologist Atkinson claims we can never know the 'real' rate of suicide because we don’t know the meanings the deceased held - only how the living interpret deaths (social construction)

• The meanings the living apply to suicide may be due to religious reasons eg: not wanting to condemn the dead to Hell.

What is a meta-narrative

An overarching theory that attempts to explain/legitimize history or human experience

What do postmodernists argue about sociology as a science?

• They see everything as a meta-narrative. They believe scientific sociology would claim a monopoly on truth excluding other points of view which can be dangerous

• Can be used as a form of domination and oppression

• Poststructuralist feminists (type of postmodernist) believe one feminist theory is a form of domination as it excludes different groups of women

• Science is an undesirable path for sociology because it may not lead to progress like positivists hope it would eg risk society - scientifically created dangers like nuclear weapons

What is Popper’s view on science?

• He rejects the positivist idea that science must have verificationism and he calls it the “fallacy of induction”

• He uses the example of swans to exemplify that it is easy to keep proving all swans are white but it doesn’t prove the theory is true

• He argues scientific theories must be open to falsification. They must be bold (making big claims/predictions) and falsifiable (can be proven wrong).

• He argues there can never be absolute proof that something is true as the next time the theory may fail

What societies does Popper argue science thrives in?

• Science thrives in open or liberal societies that encourage criticism and debate

• Closed societies (due to dominating religion/ideology) reduce the growth of science as they conflict with the falsifiable nature.

• Eg: Rome. In the 17th century Galileo was punished for claiming the Earth revolved around the sun and even today science may be bound by religious doctrines there

To what extent does Popper believe sociology is scientific?

• Mainly unscientific - theories can’t be falsified eg: Marxism predicted a revolution leading to a classless society but that it hasn’t happened due to false class consciousness of the proletariat. Marxism is correct whether the revolution happens or not → can’t be falsified

• However, he recognises the importance of Marxism as it can be tested in the future and debates between sociological perspectives can clarify thinking

• Possible and desirable for sociology to be scientific by producing hypothesise. eg: Ford’s study of comprehensive schools producing mixing of social classes was falsified.

How does Kuhn criticise Popper?

• Kuhn disagrees with Popper’s idea that the scientific community is open, critical and rational. He argues that scientists are conformists who unquestioningly accept the ideas of the paradigm.

• He says scientists have no rational means of choosing one paradigm over another

What is Kuhn’s main theory?

• Science cannot exist without a paradigm which is shared by members of a scientific community and has a consensus

• He argues it acts as a worldview or set of norms guiding a scientists research, principles, assumptions and method of research

• Scientists accept the paradigm due to their socialisation, as working within it brings rewards like publications, funding, and career advancement

• Non-conformity to the paradigm may lead to dismissal eg: Velikovsky affair

Describe what 2 things Kuhn distinguishes between?

Normal Science

• Where the paradigm goes unquestioned and scientists engage in solving the ‘puzzles’ set by the paradigm rather than creating anything radically new

• He argues this allows for scientists to agree with the basics → be more productive

Scientific Revolutions/Paradigm Shifts

• Over time, anomalies can build up → arguments over the basic assumptions → crisis → scientific revolution, where rival paradigms compete until one is accepted by the scientific community however, scientists may find it impossible to switch to a new paradigm

• This allows normal science to resume eg: switch from the idea that the Earth is at the middle of the universe to the sun

To what extent does Kuhn believe sociology is a science?

• He believes sociology is unscientific as it is pre-paradigmatic and so pre-scientific

• Sociology could become a science if there were a consensus of views however this is unlikely due to long differences in perspectives eg: Marxists vs Functionalists

• Postmodernists would add to this saying it’s undesirable for sociology to become a science as a paradigm seems like a meta-narrative which may silence minority views

What were Keat and Urry’s main ideas about science from the realist perspective?

They distinguish between open and closed systems

• Open systems – variables can’t be controlled → precise predictions impossible (e.g., sociology, meteorology)

• Closed systems – variables can be controlled and precise predictions can be made (e.g., chemistry, physics, lab experiments)

To what extent do realists believe sociology is a science?

• Realists argue that sociology is a science, but it is an open science. They disagree with both the positivist and interpretivist view that science can only look at observable phenomena

• While, 'social class' is unobservable, its effects on life chances can be observed eg: Marxism is scientific because it studies structures like capitalism producing poverty by understanding subjective meanings

• Unlike interpretivists they see little difference between natural and social science apart from the fact natural science can be observed in closed systems sometimes