Conclusion - is sociology a science ?

Sociologists are divided as to whether sociology can be a science. While positivists favour adopting what, interpretivists reject the view that sociology can be s____.

This division derives largely from disagreement about the nature of sociology and its subject matter:

• Positivists see sociology as the study of c____: the s____ f___ or structures e____ to individuals that cause them to behave as they do. In the positivists' view, this is the same approach as the natural sciences - to discover the what

• Interpretivists see sociology as the study of m_____ s____ a___: t____ i____ m___ that lead actors to choose their course of action. Human actions are not governed by e___ c____, unlike events in nature, so they cannot be studied in the same way as natural phenomena.

Sociologists are divided as to whether sociology can be a science. While positivists favour adopting the natural sciences as a model, interpretivists reject the view that sociology can be scientific.

This division derives largely from disagreement about the nature of sociology and its subject matter:

• Positivists see sociology as the study of causes: the social facts or structures external to individuals that cause them to behave as they do. In the positivists' view, this is the same approach as the natural sciences - to discover the cause of the patterns they observe, whether in nature or society.

• Interpretivists see sociology as the study of meaningful social action: the internal meanings that lead actors to choose their course of action. Human actions are not governed by external causes, unlike events in nature, so they cannot be studied in the same way as natural phenomena.

• However, while positivists and interpretivists disagree about whether sociology can be a science, they both accept what

• Basically, the positivist view sees natural science as inductive reasoning or verificationism applied to the study of observable patterns.

• However, while positivists and interpretivists disagree about whether sociology can be a science, they both accept the positivist model of the natural sciences as described above.

• Basically, the positivist view sees natural science as inductive reasoning or verificationism applied to the study of observable patterns.

Yet as we have seen, since the positivist view of science was formulated in the 19th century, quite different pictures of science have emerged, and these have very different implications for the question of whether sociology can or should be scientific. For example:

• Popper rejects verificationism in favour of falsificationism as the defining feature of science and argues that on this definition much sociology is unscientific, but that a scientific sociology is possible in principle.

• Kuhn argues that sociology can only become a science once all sociologists adopt a single shared paradigm.

• Realists argue that science does not just study observable phenomena, as positivists argue, but underlying unobservable structures. On this basis, both Marxism and interpretivism may be seen as scientific.

Yet as we have seen, since the positivist view of science was formulated in the 19th century, quite different pictures of science have emerged, and these have very different implications for the question of whether sociology can or should be scientific. For example:

• Popper rejects verificationism in favour of falsificationism as the defining feature of science and argues that on this definition much sociology is unscientific, but that a scientific sociology is possible in principle.

• Kuhn argues that sociology can only become a science once all sociologists adopt a single shared paradigm.

• Realists argue that science does not just study observable phenomena, as positivists argue, but underlying unobservable structures. On this basis, both Marxism and interpretivism may be seen as scientific.

as