is sociology a science essay plan

• My Preferences
• My Reading List
• Study Guides
• Sociology as Science
• Sociology in America
• Three Major Perspectives in Sociology
• Complementary Perspectives in Sociology
• An Integrated Perspective in Sociology
• Deducing with Sociological Imagination
• Sociology and Common Sense
• The Founders of Sociology
• Scientific Method for Sociology
• Basic Sociological Research Concepts
• Sociological Research: Designs, Methods
• Ethics in Sociological Research
• Evaluating Sociological Research
• Cultural Values
• Cultural Norms
• Cultural Diversity
• Toward a Global Culture
• Types of Societies
• Culture and Society Defined
• Culture's Roots: Biological or Societal?
• Material and Non‐Material Culture
• Symbols and Language in Human Culture
• Piaget's Model of Cognitive Development
• Cognitive Development: Age 0–6
• Cognitive Development: Age 7–11
• Cognitive Development: Age 12–19
• Social and Personality Growth: Age 0–2
• Social and Personality Growth: Age 3–6
• “Unsocialized” Children
• Social and Personality Growth: Age 7–11
• Social and Personality Growth: Age 12–19
• Organizational Models
• Pros and Cons of Bureaucracy
• Social Groups
• Social Organizations
• Defining Crime
• Crimes against People
• Crimes against Property
• The Criminal Justice System
• Theories of Deviance
• Types of Social Classes of People
• Social Mobility
• Causes and Effects of Poverty
• What Divides Us: Stratification
• Prejudice and Discrimination
• Native Americans
• African Americans
• Hispanic Americans
• Asian Americans
• Race and Ethnicity Defined
• Sexism in Higher Education
• Sexism in the Workplace
• Sexism in Politics
• Gender and Homosexuality
• Prevalence of Homosexuality, Bisexuality
• Definitions
• Gender Identity
• Gender Roles
• Gender Stereotypes
• Social Stratification and Gender
• Social Stratification and Homosexuality
• Modern Corporations and Multinationals
• Labor Unions
• Politics and Major Political Structure
• Politics in the United States
• Economy Defined
• Historical Overview of Economics
• Predominant Economic Systems
• Theories of Education
• Reform of Education
• Global Perspective on Education
• Current Issues in Education
• Universal Education: Growth and Function
• Relationships in Middle Adulthood
• Relationships in Older Adulthood
• Homosexual and Bisexual Relationships
• Adult Development
• Early Adulthood: Age 17–45
• Relationships in Early Adulthood
• Starting a Family in Early Adulthood
• Judaism, Christianity, and Islam
• Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism
• Sociological Theories of Religion
• Types of Religious Organizations
• Social Correlates of Religion
• Introduction to Religion
• Religious Fundamentalism
• Totemism and Animism
• Medical Establishment and Professions
• Health Care: Costs and Inequality
• Managed Care as a Means of Cost Control
• Access to Health Care
• Euthanasia: The Right to Die?
• Sociological Perspective on Health
• Population and Demographic Variables
• Urbanization and Its Historical Stages
• Creating News and Culture
• Oversimplification and Stereotyping
• Violence and Pornography in the Media
• The Role and Influence of Mass Media
• Models of Social Change
• Technology and Social Change
• Environmentalism and Social Change
• Resisting Social Change
• Social Change Defined
• Social Movements

The definition of sociology uses the phrase “scientific study.” Many people do not consider the social or soft sciences—such as sociology and psychology—to be “true” or hard sciences—such as chemistry and physics. Whereas inherent differences exist between the soft and hard sciences, the same fundamental principles of scientific inquiry apply. The word science comes from the Latin scire meaning “to know,” and for centuries “science” referred to virtually any academic discipline, including theology, languages, and literature. Only in the last hundred years or so has science come to mean a field of study that relies on specific research values and methods. (Remember that Emile Durkheim in the late 19th century was the first sociologist to use the scientific method.) Thus, whether or not a particular discipline like sociology is a science depends more on the methods used than on the particular subject area studied.

Previous Evaluating Sociological Research

Next Cultural Values

has been added to your

Reading List!

Removing #book# from your Reading List will also remove any bookmarked pages associated with this title.

Are you sure you want to remove #bookConfirmation# and any corresponding bookmarks?

Final dates! Join the tutor2u subject teams in London for a day of exam technique and revision at the cinema. Learn more →

Reference Library

Collections

• See what's new
• All Resources
• Student Resources
• Assessment Resources
• Teaching Resources
• CPD Courses
• Livestreams

Study notes, videos, interactive activities and more!

Sociology news, insights and enrichment

Currated collections of free resources

Browse resources by topic

• All Sociology Resources

Resource Selections

Currated lists of resources

Study Notes

Is Sociology a Science? The Case for "Yes"

Last updated 13 Jun 2020

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share by Email

Positivist sociologists believe that it is possible to establish objective facts through scientific research methods and the thorough collection and analysis of empirical evidence. They argue that their research follows the scientific method shown below.

A good sociologist identifies a social problem or question. Following research, they formulate a hypothesis. Although they are very unlikely to use laboratory experiments, they would argue that they use rigorous, reliable research methods that produce sound quantitative data which can be analysed, leading to conclusions that are then published in peer reviewed academic journals.

Classic positivist sociologists like Auguste Comte and Emile Durkheim were firmly of this view. Indeed, when Durkheim conducted his famous study Suicide he did so in part to establish how the science of sociology could explain all human behaviour, even that which most would consider fundamentally individual and “antisocial”.

Like a natural scientist, Durkheim tested his hypothesis against a range of “variables” (e.g. religious belief) to understand the impact these social features had on suicide rates. While Durkheim’s study has been extensively criticised, he did reach conclusions that supported his hypothesis and published them in a highly influential and much read essay.

Evaluating the Case For "Yes"

Interpretivists and postmodernists believe that this misunderstands the nature of society and human behaviour. While potassium will always react with water, humans will (within certain parameters) do as they please. They cannot be scientifically studied in the same way.

Karl Popper argued that positivist sociology generally failed to be as scientific as it intended because it used inductive reasoning rather than deductive reasoning. In other words, instead of subjecting their hypothesis to falsification, trying to find evidence to disprove it, they do the opposite: they try and find evidence that supports their hypothesis. The flaw with this approach is often illustrated with swans. If you had a hypothesis that "all swans are white", you would find more and more supporting evidence with every white swan you found. But the critical evidence is the black swan that proves your hypothesis incorrect. While inductive reasoning requires a researcher to look for evidence that supports their hypothesis, true scientific method attempts to falsify the hypothesis. Popper calls this falsification . Instead of searching for supportive evidence, the researcher should try and prove that their hypothesis is untrue. If they are unable to do so, it remains the best explanation. Popper was particularly critical of some concepts within Marxism, such as false class consciousness arguing that it is not really possible to falsify.

Taking Durkheim’s study on suicide as an example, even other positivists criticise the reliability of his data and the scientific rigour of his method. The calculation of suicide rates between countries might have been inconsistent. Furthermore, some of the key concepts in the study (such as social cohesion and social control) were very difficult to operationalise. How do you scientifically measure such concepts? Sociology is full of such concepts that are almost impossible to be turned into quantitative data, and yet any other measurement would be deemed unscientific

• Science (Theory)
• Sociology as a Science

You might also like

Durkheim on deviance, evaluating functionalist explanations of crime, crash course: social change.

23rd November 2017

Consensus Theories - Functionalism

Belief systems, science and religion: compared, research methods - "card drop" activity.

Quizzes & Activities

Theories of Crime - Impossible 5 Revision Activity

Our subjects.

• › Criminology
• › Economics
• › Geography
• › Health & Social Care
• › Psychology
• › Sociology
• › Teaching & learning resources
• › Student revision workshops
• › Online student courses
• › CPD for teachers
• › Livestreams
• › Teaching jobs

Boston House, 214 High Street, Boston Spa, West Yorkshire, LS23 6AD Tel: 01937 848885

• › Contact us
• › Terms of use
• › Privacy & cookies

© 2002-2024 Tutor2u Limited. Company Reg no: 04489574. VAT reg no 816865400.

Jake Gordon

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

2.1 Sociology as a Social Science

Learning objectives.

• Explain what is meant by saying that sociology is a social science.
• Describe the difference between a generalization and a law in scientific research.
• List the sources of knowledge on which people rely for their understanding of social reality and explain why the knowledge gained from these sources may sometimes be faulty.
• List the basic steps of the scientific method.

Like anthropology, economics, political science, and psychology, sociology is a social science. All these disciplines use research to try to understand various aspects of human thought and behavior. Although this chapter naturally focuses on sociological research methods, much of the discussion is also relevant for research in the other social and behavioral sciences.

When we say that sociology is a social science, we mean that it uses the scientific method to try to understand the many aspects of society that sociologists study. An important goal is to yield generalizations —general statements regarding trends among various dimensions of social life. We discussed many such generalizations in Chapter 1 “Sociology and the Sociological Perspective” : men are more likely than women to commit suicide, young people were more likely to vote for Obama than McCain in 2008, and so forth. A generalization is just that: a statement of a tendency, rather than a hard-and-fast law. For example, the statement that men are more likely than women to commit suicide does not mean that every man commits suicide and no woman commits suicide. It means only that men have a higher suicide rate, even though most men, of course, do not commit suicide. Similarly, the statement that young people were more likely to vote for Obama than for McCain in 2008 does not mean that all young people voted for Obama; it means only that they were more likely than not to do so.

A generalization regarding the 2008 election is that young people were more likely to vote for Barack Obama than for John McCain. This generalization does not mean that every young person voted for Obama and no young person voted for McCain; it means only that they were more likely than not to vote for Obama.

Wikimedia Commons – CC BY 2.0.

Many people will not fit the pattern of such a generalization, because people are shaped but not totally determined by their social environment. That is both the fascination and the frustration of sociology. Sociology is fascinating because no matter how much sociologists are able to predict people’s behavior, attitudes, and life chances, many people will not fit the predictions. But sociology is frustrating for the same reason. Because people can never be totally explained by their social environment, sociologists can never completely understand the sources of their behavior, attitudes, and life chances.

In this sense, sociology as a social science is very different from a discipline such as physics, in which known laws exist for which no exceptions are possible. For example, we call the law of gravity a law because it describes a physical force that exists on the earth at all times and in all places and that always has the same result. If you were to pick up the book you are now reading—or the computer or other device on which you are reading or listening to—and then let go, the object you were holding would definitely fall to the ground. If you did this a second time, it would fall a second time. If you did this a billion times, it would fall a billion times. In fact, if there were even one time out of a billion that your book or electronic device did not fall down, our understanding of the physical world would be totally revolutionized, the earth could be in danger, and you could go on television and make a lot of money.

People’s attitudes, behavior, and life chances are influenced but not totally determined by many aspects of their social environment.

redjar – Cheering – CC BY-SA 2.0.

For better or worse, people are less predictable than this object that keeps falling down. Sociology can help us understand the social forces that affect our behavior, beliefs, and life chances, but it can only go so far. That limitation conceded, sociological understanding can still go fairly far toward such an understanding, and it can help us comprehend who we are and what we are by helping us first understand the profound yet often subtle influence of our social backgrounds on so many things about us.

Although sociology as a discipline is very different from physics, it is not as different as one might think from this and the other “hard” sciences. Like these disciplines, sociology as a social science relies heavily on systematic research that follows the standard rules of the scientific method. We return to these rules and the nature of sociological research later in this chapter. Suffice it to say here that careful research is essential for a sociological understanding of people, social institutions, and society.

At this point a reader might be saying, “I already know a lot about people. I could have told you that young people voted for Obama. I already had heard that men have a higher suicide rate than women. Maybe our social backgrounds do influence us in ways I had not realized, but what beyond that does sociology have to tell me?”

Students often feel this way because sociology deals with matters already familiar to them. Just about everyone has grown up in a family, so we all know something about it. We read a lot in the media about topics like divorce and health care, so we all already know something about these, too. All this leads some students to wonder if they will learn anything in their introduction to sociology course that they do not already know.

How Do We Know What We Think We Know?

Let’s consider this issue a moment: how do we know what we think we know? Our usual knowledge and understanding of social reality come from at least five sources: (a) personal experience; (b) common sense; (c) the media (including the Internet); (d) “expert authorities,” such as teachers, parents, and government officials; and (e) tradition. These are all important sources of our understanding of how the world “works,” but at the same time their value can often be very limited.

Personal Experience

Let’s look at these sources separately by starting with personal experience. Although personal experiences are very important, not everyone has the same personal experience. This fact casts some doubt on the degree to which our personal experiences can help us understand everything about a topic and the degree to which we can draw conclusions from them that necessarily apply to other people. For example, say you grew up in Maine or Vermont, where more than 98% of the population is white. If you relied on your personal experience to calculate how many people of color live in the country, you would conclude that almost everyone in the United States is also white, which certainly is not true. As another example, say you grew up in a family where your parents had the proverbial perfect marriage, as they loved each other deeply and rarely argued. If you relied on your personal experience to understand the typical American marriage, you would conclude that most marriages were as good as your parents’ marriage, which, unfortunately, also is not true. Many other examples could be cited here, but the basic point should be clear: although personal experience is better than nothing, it often offers only a very limited understanding of social reality other than our own.

Common Sense

If personal experience does not help that much when it comes to making predictions, what about common sense? Although common sense can be very helpful, it can also contradict itself. For example, which makes more sense, haste makes waste or he or she who hesitates is lost ? How about birds of a feather flock together versus opposites attract ? Or two heads are better than one versus too many cooks spoil the broth ? Each of these common sayings makes sense, but if sayings that are opposite of each other both make sense, where does the truth lie? Can common sense always be counted on to help us understand social life? Slightly more than five centuries ago, everyone “knew” the earth was flat—it was just common sense that it had to be that way. Slightly more than a century ago, some of the leading physicians in the United States believed that women should not go to college because the stress of higher education would disrupt their menstrual cycles (Ehrenreich & English, 1979). If that bit of common sense(lessness) were still with us, many of the women reading this book would not be in college.

During the late 19th century, a common belief was that women should not go to college because the stress of higher education would disrupt their menstrual cycles. This example shows that common sense is often incorrect.

Steven Depolo – Female Black College Graduates Cap Gown – CC BY 2.0.

Still, perhaps there are some things that make so much sense they just have to be true; if sociology then tells us that they are true, what have we learned? Here is an example of such an argument. We all know that older people—those 65 or older—have many more problems than younger people. First, their health is generally worse. Second, physical infirmities make it difficult for many elders to walk or otherwise move around. Third, many have seen their spouses and close friends pass away and thus live lonelier lives than younger people. Finally, many are on fixed incomes and face financial difficulties. All of these problems indicate that older people should be less happy than younger people. If a sociologist did some research and then reported that older people are indeed less happy than younger people, what have we learned? The sociologist only confirmed the obvious.

The trouble with this confirmation of the obvious is that the “obvious” turns out not to be true after all. In the 2008 General Social Survey, which was given to a random sample of Americans, respondents were asked, “Taken all together, how would you say things are these days? Would you say that you are very happy, pretty happy, or not too happy?” Respondents aged 65 or older were actually slightly more likely than those younger than 65 to say they were very happy! About 40% of older respondents reported feeling this way, compared with only 30% of younger respondents (see Figure 2.1 “Age and Happiness” ). What we all “knew” was obvious from common sense turns out not to have been so obvious after all.

Figure 2.1 Age and Happiness

Source: Data from General Social Survey, 2008.

The news media often oversimplify complex topics and in other respects provide a misleading picture of social reality. As one example, news coverage sensationalizes violent crime and thus suggests that such crime is more common than it actually is.

Wikiemedia Commons – CC BY-SA 2.0.

If personal experience and common sense do not always help that much, how about the media? We learn a lot about current events and social and political issues from the Internet, television news, newspapers and magazines, and other media sources. It is certainly important to keep up with the news, but media coverage may oversimplify complex topics or even distort what the best evidence from systematic research seems to be telling us. A good example here is crime. Many studies show that the media sensationalize crime and suggest there is much more violent crime than there really is. For example, in the early 1990s, the evening newscasts on the major networks increased their coverage of murder and other violent crimes, painting a picture of a nation where crime was growing rapidly. The reality was very different, however, as crime was actually declining. The view that crime was growing was thus a myth generated by the media (Kurtz, 1997).

Expert Authorities

Expert authorities, such as teachers, parents, and government officials, are a fourth source that influences our understanding of social reality. We learn much from our teachers and parents and perhaps from government officials, but, for better or worse, not all of what we learn from these sources about social reality is completely accurate. Teachers and parents do not always have the latest research evidence at their fingertips, and various biases may color their interpretation of any evidence with which they are familiar. As many examples from U.S. history illustrate, government officials may simplify or even falsify the facts. We should perhaps always listen to our teachers and parents and maybe even to government officials, but that does not always mean they give us a true, complete picture of social reality.

A final source that influences our understanding of social reality is tradition, or long-standing ways of thinking about the workings of society. Tradition is generally valuable, because a society should always be aware of its roots. However, traditional ways of thinking about social reality often turn out to be inaccurate and incomplete. For example, traditional ways of thinking in the United States once assumed that women and people of color were biologically and culturally inferior to men and whites. Although some Americans continue to hold these beliefs, these traditional assumptions have given way to more egalitarian assumptions. As we shall also see in later chapters, most sociologists certainly do not believe that women and people of color are biologically and culturally inferior.

If we cannot always trust personal experience, common sense, the media, expert authorities, and tradition to help us understand social reality, then the importance of systematic research gathered by sociology and the other social sciences becomes apparent.

The Scientific Method

As noted earlier, because sociology is a social science, sociologists follow the rules of the scientific method in their research. Most readers probably learned these rules in science classes in high school, college, or both. The scientific method is followed in the natural, physical, and social sciences to help yield the most accurate and reliable conclusions possible, especially ones that are free of bias or methodological errors. An overriding principle of the scientific method is that research should be conducted as objectively as possible. Researchers are often passionate about their work, but they must take care not to let the findings they expect and even hope to uncover affect how they do their research. This in turn means that they must not conduct their research in a manner that “helps” achieve the results they expect to find. Such bias can happen unconsciously, and the scientific method helps reduce the potential for this bias as much as possible.

This potential is arguably greater in the social sciences than in the natural and physical sciences. The political views of chemists and physicists typically do not affect how an experiment is performed and how the outcome of the experiment is interpreted. In contrast, researchers in the social sciences, and perhaps particularly in sociology, often have strong feelings about the topics they are studying. Their social and political beliefs may thus influence how they perform their research on these topics and how they interpret the results of this research. Following the scientific method helps reduce this possible influence.

Figure 2.2 The Scientific Method

As you probably learned in a science class, the scientific method involves these basic steps: (a) formulating a hypothesis, (b) measuring and gathering data to test the hypothesis, (c) analyzing these data, and (d) drawing appropriate conclusions (see Figure 2.2 “The Scientific Method” ). In following the scientific method, sociologists are no different from their colleagues in the natural and physical sciences or the other social sciences, even though their research is very different in other respects. The next section discusses the stages of the sociological research process in more detail.

Key Takeaways

• As a social science, sociology presents generalizations, or general statements regarding trends among various dimensions of social life. There are always many exceptions to any generalization, because people are not totally determined by their social environment.
• Our knowledge and understanding of social reality usually comes from five sources: (a) personal experience, (b) common sense, (c) the media, (d) expert authorities, and (e) tradition. Sometimes and perhaps often, the knowledge gained from these sources is faulty.
• Like research in other social sciences, sociological research follows the scientific method to ensure the most accurate and reliable results possible. The basic steps of the scientific method include (a) formulating a hypothesis, (b) measuring and gathering data to test the hypothesis, (c) analyzing these data, and (d) drawing appropriate conclusions.

For Your Review

• Think of a personal experience you have had that might have some sociological relevance. Write a short essay in which you explain how this experience helped you understand some aspect of society. Your essay should also consider whether the understanding gained from your personal experience is generalizable to other people and situations.
• Why do you think the media sometimes provide a false picture of social reality? Does this problem result from honest mistakes, or is the media’s desire to attract more viewers, listeners, and readers to blame?

Ehrenreich, B., & English, D. (1979). For her own good: 150 years of the experts’ advice to women . Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.

Kurtz, H. (1997, August 12). The crime spree on network news. The Washington Post , p. D1.

Sociology Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

History of Sociology as a Science: Understanding Human Actions Research Paper

Sociology is a science.

Sociology is a science aimed at understanding human actions. It is a science-based on interpretative analysis of society and explanation of causes of social movements. Sociology is a science because it has its concepts and uniformities, it is based on empirical processes and theories. Sociology, as a science, is focused on action (human behavior). Action is referred to as social when it is attached to the actions of individuals, their behaviors, and interactions with other social units. Action is referred to as not social when it is not oriented towards human behavior (Gerth 1946). For example, two people communicating with each other represent social action, while a person starting a car does represent mechanical action, not social. Sociology, as a science, studies actions in which participate many people, groups of people, or individuals. Scientific sociology investigates human behavior as the result of the actions of others.

From early history, sociology has been founded on methodology: observation, comparison, experiment, and historical research. The same methodology is used in such science as biology. For example, empirical research is used for suicide analysis. Only statistical rate is used to establish sociological argument on suicide. According to Max Weber, sociology is aimed at explaining the meaning: actual meaning for specific cases (average meaning for plural cases) and theoretical meaning of hypothetical cases (Gerth 1946). Sociology, similar to history, is an empirical science, while ethics and jurisprudence are dogmatic disciplines. Some critics point out that the relationship between action and reactive behavior cannot be traced empirically. Nevertheless, meaningful action cannot be found in most of the psychophysical processes as well.

Sociology is an applied discipline focused on the study of social interaction. Sociology is closely related to other sciences such as economy, psychology, biology, physiology, behavioral genetics, and even ecology. Moreover, without the contribution of sociology, many of these sciences would be deficient. Sociology does not have a uniform definition. Social stratification, for example, investigates social inequalities. Demography, as a part of sociology science, is focused on population size and type. Criminology studies deviance, while political sociology investigates laws. The most valuable contribution of sociology is that it is widely applied in non-academic settings. In particular, sociological research is used by lawmakers, developers, and educators to resolve social problems and develop public policy. Sociologists, unlike chemists, are not a committee to scientific methods. Sociological hypotheses are hard to prove, however, systematic research is inherently marked as flawed.

Sociology examines the society and behavior of humans, it is focused on social institutions formed by people; it studies diverse social, business, and even religious organizations. Sociologists collect, analyze, and provide valuable information on characteristics of social groups and institutions, it investigates how individuals affect each other. Sociology aims at finding the answer to whether such social characteristics as sex, age, and race influence the life of people. Sociologists examine social stratification, mobility, ethnic relations, family issues, education, sex roles, demography, criminology, and gerontology. Without research carried out by sociologists, laws would not meet the needs of people, criminology would not be able to draw the prevent crimes, and business leaders would not be aware of the target marketing. Sociology is important for diverse sciences because it contributes valuable information about all aspects of human behavior, social interactions, and population trends.

Sociology: from ancient times till the present day

As early as in the 14 th century Ibn Khaldun has introduced a concept of social philosophy – he has formulated the basic theory of social cohesion and conflict (Levine 1995). However, it took five centuries for sociology to emerge as a science. The early 19 th century was marked with a challenge of modernity; the world was becoming more integrated and the experiences of people were more uniform. Sociologists of that time aimed at understanding how social groups co-existed. Auguste Comte (1830 th ) has introduced the word “sociology” – the unifying concept of all social studies (economics, history, and psychology). Comte assumed that all humans pass through the same historical stages and if to understand the progress, it is possible to find the solution to social ills.

Emile Durkheim, Ferdinand Tonnies, and Vilfredo Pareto are classical sociology theorist. However, their works had extensively influenced religion, theology, ethics, law, education, philosophy, and economics. Notably, the first publications containing the word “sociology” in a title, were published in 1854 by American lawyers Henry Hughes and George Fitzhugh (Levine 1995). Both authors addressed the issue of slavery. Frank Blackmar was the first to teach sociology as a discipline at the University of Kansas. Within forty years, sociology became international science: Rene Worms established the International Sociological Association. American Sociology Association has been formed in 1905 by Lester Ward (Levine 1995).

As Comte assumed, sociology would eventually subsume all human sciences. Sociology is not aimed at replacing other science, moreover, it contributes to other sciences. The modern focus of sociology is on organizations, social instructions, and interactions. The comparative method is the most widely used sociological tool. The globally-used word “Western” (describing the life of the American community) has been introduced by sociologists who have noted that the American lifestyle is different from other national units. In addition to multi-cultural studies, today’s sociology investigates micro-structures of society (race, social class, and gender roles), institutions (family), social deviations (crime and divorce), and interpersonal interactions (Giddens 2006). To describe social relations and develop models aimed at predicting social changes, sociologists rely on quantitative methods of research. Such methods as focused interviews, ethnographic studies, and group discussions provide valuable information on social processes.

In conclusion, sociology as a science is relatively young, however, its importance cannot be underestimated. Sociologists contribute to all sciences and improve the understanding of social changes and processes. Sociology helps lawmakers to meet the needs of the majority, it assists criminologists in developing patterns for crime rate control and prevention, and it enables business leaders to target customers. Even though sociological assumptions are hard to prove, their findings are practical and can be applied to social analysis. It helps to understand why people this or that way, why the behavior of people differs, and how the community influences the actions of its members.

Gerth, H. H. & Mills, C. W. (1946). From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology . New York: Oxford University Press.

Giddens, A. (2006). Sociology . Cambridge: Polity Press.

Levine, D. N. (1995). Visions of the Sociological Tradition. University Of Chicago Press.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 31). History of Sociology as a Science: Understanding Human Actions. https://ivypanda.com/essays/history-of-sociology-as-a-science/

"History of Sociology as a Science: Understanding Human Actions." IvyPanda , 31 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/history-of-sociology-as-a-science/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'History of Sociology as a Science: Understanding Human Actions'. 31 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "History of Sociology as a Science: Understanding Human Actions." October 31, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/history-of-sociology-as-a-science/.

1. IvyPanda . "History of Sociology as a Science: Understanding Human Actions." October 31, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/history-of-sociology-as-a-science/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "History of Sociology as a Science: Understanding Human Actions." October 31, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/history-of-sociology-as-a-science/.

• Maldoror and the Completed Works of the Comte de Lautréamont
• Classical social theory: In defense of Marx’s ideas
• Sociology: History, Early Theories, and Evolution
• Changes in Social World and Sociology
• Sociological Theories: Definition and Aims
• Future of Modernization: Concept Under American Context
• The Image of God in the Film “Chocolate”
• The Mastodon which Made a Museum
• The Influence of the First Women Sociologists in the Development of Science
• Definition of Sociology and Its Main Research Methods
• School of Sociology and Theoretical Perspectives
• Immanuel Wallerstein's World-Systems Analysis
• Childhood Disorders: Shyness Explained
• Individuals and Families in a Diverse Society: Ageing Population
• Huckleberry Finn Living Today

Essay Plans

Marked essays.

Data which is presented as statistical data or numerical is described as  being a Quantitative method . Sociologist, among others will contend that  quantitative method , like questionnaire and others would better be suited to  undergo the rigours of sociological research. This is so because of the  advantages that they hold. However, in contrast sociologist would disagree  with this statement.                 Quantitative methods , such as questionnaires, structured interviews and  official statistics has advantages that would prove to be more efficient. In  sociology, for a research to be valid r carried out effectively, the data  collected must be objective. This view is supported by the positivist, Emile  Durkheim and auguste Comte. Quantitative methods collect empirical data which  further means that data being collected is objective. Empirical data is  statistical, anything dealing with numbers and if the data being collected is  numerical it suggest that the method used was unbiased. Also quantitative  methods are nothing cognitive, as cognitive information cannot be measured or  understood. Also cognitive data would be studying the perception and not  exactly what is happening.                 It is argued that in quantitative methods , the researcher is detached from  the study and is not influenced by his personal belief. Therefore the  information would not be flawed, because the researcher would just say  what’s happening and would not have his personal views. This would have  resulted from the empirical data collected. For example, a researcher who is  doing a research on: why are students in Jane brown High school prone to  violence. The research her would practice observable phenomena and report  what she sees and not what she thinks the individual is thinking.                 Furthermore, quantitative research methods are easily replicable. This  means that the data/information collected will always be the same years after  the research was conducted. However, new information or knowledge can be  added to what is already there because it is accumulative. No matter how long  the research was conducted it will always remain the same because numbers  cannot change, but an explanation can. This makes quantitative methods one of  the preferred methods . In coherence, quantitative research methods   facilitates theory formulation, this is so as a large amount of data is  collected that the researcher is used to formulate theories that seek to  explain social phenomena.                 Other reasons why quantitative methods would be better suited is that it  saves the researcher time and money, which means that the researcher would  not have to spend a lot of time on the research as it will directly get to  the point.                 Nevertheless, some sociologist would disagree with the fact that  quantitative methods would be best suited because no method in sociology,  they say can be objective. One disadvantage of using quantitative method is  that there is no indication about the respondents’ personal state of mind,  for example, mood, attitude or feelings. Weber in his theory contend that in  sociology, any research being conducted the researcher must practice  verstehen. Verstehen is subjective, this, there is no objectivity in  sociology researchers. This would therefore mean that quantitative methods   are not best suited for sociological research. Weber contends that a  researcher must be attached to the research such that verstehen is practiced;  this would involve the placing of oneself in the respondents’ shoes. He  further states that through thus process, the researcher will be able to  understand the actions and the meaning behind them.                 Additionally, Atkinson and Cicourel believe that other methods such as  qualitative research methods would have a better advantage over quantitative  methods . This is so because they also believe like Weber that there is no  objectivity in any sociological research. Atkinson and Cicourel posit this  view because even with the statistical data collected through the  quantitative method the information gathered id subjective. The statistical  data is influence by the perception of the person collating and analyzing the  data.                 Qualitative methods would be best suited for sociological researches  because they provide explanation and look beyond the numbers. The  interpretive theorist believe that the study of humans is complex, because  humans have consciousness and consciousness fluctuates and will not always  remain in the same manner to external stimuli, and the is no universal law of  human behaviour.                 Analyzing the statement from both views, quantitative methods would be best  suited to undergo the rigours of sociological research to an extent and then  there is the other view that qualitative methods would be better because of  its subjectivity which is best for sociological researches.

Sociology is a discipline that has been the subject of debate within the social sciences about whether it can be considered a science or not. While some scholars argue that sociology is a science due to its use of empirical evidence and scientific methods to study social phenomena, others argue that it is not a science because social phenomena are inherently complex and difficult to measure. This essay will evaluate the major positions in this debate, providing a more detailed definition of science, exploring the limitations and challenges of using scientific methods in sociology, and using a wider range of academic sources to support the arguments.

One of the main arguments for sociology as a science is its use of empirical evidence and scientific methods. The positivist perspective, which sees sociology as a hard science like physics or chemistry, argues that sociology should use the same methods as natural sciences, such as experiments and quantitative surveys, to generate reliable and valid data. For example, Durkheim's study of suicide used statistical methods to demonstrate the relationship between social factors and suicide rates. However, critics argue that such methods are limited in their ability to capture the complexity of social phenomena, and may be subject to issues of reliability, validity, and generalizability.

Another argument for sociology as a science is its ability to generate testable hypotheses and theories. According to the falsificationist perspective, sociology should generate hypotheses that can be tested through empirical evidence, with theories that have been falsified by data being discarded. For example, Merton's strain theory of deviance was based on the hypothesis that individuals who experience strain are more likely to engage in deviant behavior. However, critics argue that such an approach neglects the role of interpretation and subjectivity in social research, and may overlook important aspects of social life that cannot be easily quantified.

On the other hand, some scholars argue that sociology is not a science because social phenomena are inherently complex and difficult to measure. The interpretive perspective, for example, argues that sociology should use qualitative methods such as participant observation and interviews to understand the meanings that individuals attach to their experiences. For example, Bourdieu's study of cultural capital demonstrated how social class and cultural background can influence an individual's taste in art and culture. However, critics argue that such methods may lack objectivity and reliability, and may be subject to the researcher's biases and interpretations.

Despite these debates, it is important to recognize that both quantitative and qualitative methods have their strengths and weaknesses. For example, Hochschild's study of emotion management in airline flight attendants used a mixed-methods approach to explore the complex and often contradictory emotions that attendants experienced on the job. By using both quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews, Hochschild was able to capture both the objective and subjective aspects of the attendants' experiences. This demonstrates that a mixed-methods approach can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the social world.

In conclusion, while the debate surrounding sociology as a science is ongoing, it is clear that there are both strengths and limitations to using scientific methods in sociology. While sociology may not be a hard science like physics or chemistry, it is still a valuable tool for understanding society and making informed decisions about social policies. Therefore, it is important to continue the debate surrounding the nature of sociology and to develop new research methods that can address the complexities of the social world. By doing so, we can continue to advance our understanding of society and contribute to the development of more effective social policies.

Discuss the similarities and differences between Conflict/Marxist theories and Functionalist theories in sociology. [25 marks] 2004

Introduction

Sociology is a field of study that attempts to understand human society and social behavior. It is a broad discipline with several theoretical perspectives, two of which are Conflict/Marxist theories and Functionalist theories. These two theories attempt to explain social phenomena, but they differ in their assumptions and explanations. This essay discusses the similarities and differences between Conflict/Marxist theories and Functionalist theories in sociology.

Similarities between Conflict/Marxist theories and Functionalist theories

Both Conflict/Marxist theories and Functionalist theories recognize the importance of social structures in shaping society. They acknowledge that institutions, such as the family, government, education, and the economy, play a crucial role in creating and maintaining social order. Additionally, both theories attempt to explain the dynamics of social order and change. They are concerned with how societies maintain stability and the factors that lead to social change.

Differences between Conflict/Marxist theories and Functionalist theories

Conflict/Marxist theories focus on social inequality and the struggle for power and resources. They argue that society is divided into classes, and the struggle for power and resources between these classes is the primary cause of social change. Functionalist theories, on the other hand, emphasize social harmony and the maintenance of social order. They argue that society is like a biological organism, with different parts working together to maintain stability and equilibrium.

Conflict/Marxist theories view society as inherently unstable and in constant conflict, while Functionalist theories view society as stable and well-functioning. Conflict/Marxist theories are critical of the status quo and focus on the ways in which society is unequal and oppressive. Functionalist theories, however, are more accepting of the status quo and view social inequality as a necessary component of society.

Examples of Conflict/Marxist and Functionalist theories in action

An example of Conflict/Marxist theory in action is the struggle for workers' rights. Conflict/Marxist theorists argue that workers are oppressed by capitalists who control the means of production and exploit their labor. The workers' struggle for better wages and working conditions is a response to this oppression. An example of Functionalist theory in action is the importance of social norms in maintaining order. Functionalist theorists argue that social norms, such as laws and customs, are necessary for social order and that individuals who violate these norms are punished to maintain social stability.

Criticisms of Conflict/Marxist and Functionalist theories

Critics of Conflict/Marxist theories argue that they oversimplify complex social phenomena and do not pay enough attention to individual agency. Critics of Functionalist theories argue that they fail to account for social inequality and the inability to explain social change adequately.

In conclusion, Conflict/Marxist theories and Functionalist theories are two different theoretical perspectives in sociology. Although they share some similarities, they differ in their assumptions and explanations. Conflict/Marxist theories focus on social inequality and the struggle for power and resources, while Functionalist theories emphasize social harmony and the maintenance of social order. These theories provide a framework for understanding society and social behavior, but they also have their limitations and criticisms. Nonetheless, they remain relevant and continue to shape sociological research and thinking.

Question: Assess the extent to which a longitudinal approach is useful for the study of either HIV/AIDS or teenage pregnancy in the Caribbean. Unit & Module: Unit 1 Module 1 - Sociology, Culture & Identity Year: 2009 Essay: A longitudinal design is the study of one group over a period of time noting change and continuity. In this essay, the writer shall discuss the practicality of the longitudinal design in studying HIV/AIDS in the Caribbean. Longitudinal designs or approaches aim to study a particular group and monitor it over a specific period of time. The goal is to notice and document any changes, developments or actions which continuously occur. This approach would be appropriate for studying HIV/AIDS in the Caribbean. The target group in this study would be persons who have either virus, paying attention to how the virus progresses and affects them and their bodies. HIV/AIDS are viruses who attack the human body. Persons who contract these viruses usually start off with a cold/flu virus which eventually transforms into more than that. After that stage, the virus then attacks the immune system of the host. These viruses are initially mild and further progress into a life-threatening illness. Therefore, because of the nature of a longitudinal design, it would be the perfect approach in carrying out a study like this. In using this design, the researcher should monitor the hosts of the viruses as they go through each stage. Longitudinal designs also aim to give information on cause and effect relationships. So, this approach could pay much attention to the effects on the body caused by the virus, for example, deterioration in the condition and of the body itself. Overall, this approach is the most appropriate to investigate such a study. A longitudinal design is not the only data collection method that can be utilized but can arguably be the best one. This study could be conducted with the use of a questionnaire distributed to persons who have contracted the viruses but it could be more time consuming and less cost-effective to do such. The study could also be conducted using interviews but if conducted using that method, it could take extremely long. A longitudinal design unlike a questionnaire or an interview can study the entire target group at one time thus making the research process less tedious. In conclusion, a longitudinal approach can be seen as the most useful data collection method to carry out a study on HIV/AIDS in the Caribbean due to its characteristics and process. It is more cost-effective and less time consuming than a questionnaire or interviews would be in this study.

Question: It is becoming evidently clear that the family is no longer in the main agent of socialization in society. Discuss. Unit & Module: Unit 1 Module 1 - Sociology, Culture & Identity Year: N/A Essay: Socialization is the process of learning the culture of one’s society. Giddens stated that it is through the process of socialization that people become members of society, thereby learning acceptable behaviors and becoming skilled in the ways of their culture. Durkheim believes that socialization is important as it lets individuals know what is expected of them and it also constrains behaviour. Maconis (2007) states that socialization is an important ingredient for personality development. This can be seen in Davis’ case with Anna and Isabelle, who were isolated from the rest of society, from birth to age six. Upon being found, they were unable to speak, unresponsive and incapable of functioning properly. Socialization thus aids in forming our personalities and also avoids punishment in society. Socialization first begins with the family. This is referred to as primary socialization. This essay will discuss the role of the family in socialization, highlighting the reasons why family is no longer the main agent of socialization and identifying other agents of socialization. To begin, the family was essentially the main agent of socialization. They contribute to primary socialization, which takes place from birth, teaching individuals the culture of society. In our early life, the family is very important in shaping our ideas, beliefs, and behaviour. According to Murdock, the family plays important roles in society. These roles include, socializing children into the culture of society, reproducing the next generation, providing the basic needs and aiding in companionship and gratification. In addition, functionalism sees that the family is a universal social institution in society that takes care of the needs of society. Hubert Spencer suggests that society is just like an organism. The organism consists of different parts, which contribute to equilibrium and the wellbeing of this organism. Similarly, the family is the “different parts” in society, that maintain order in society. Each part function to meet Parson’s functional prerequisites. The integration of the various parts, that is, the different roles in the family, provides consensus and patterned relationships. Additionally, although the family is seen as “the cornerstone in society” and provides the means of primary socialization, there are various factors contributing to its decline as the main agent. Through primary socialization, individuals have developed negative attitudes. This is evident as social issues are usually traced back to the family as the source. This is because family is portrayed as the “building blocks” of society. The family has also broken down due to job opportunities. This has led to mothers, whose traditional role was to socialize the children, now working and staying longer periods, away from the home. Due to the lack of the family as the agent of primary socialization, individuals now utilize other agents as they interact with new groups, thus promoting, secondary socialization. Furthermore, solutions for the decline of the family as the main agent includes; the use of new agents, anticipatory socialization and resocialization. Other agents of socialization include school, religious institutions, peers, the media and the community. These agents contribute to secondary socialization, as the individuals interact with other groups, apart from the family. These agents also aid in the resocialization of individuals, where they reinforce the values and beliefs of society. These agents may also play a role in anticipatory socialization, where individuals deliberately seek help to socialize them into the expected behaviour. Religious intuitions are an example of an agent who contributes to anticipatory socialization. However, it must be noted that just like the family, all agents are flawed. For example, religious institutions portray certain activities like adultery in a negative manner to “boost family values”. Therefore, various agents which are not flawless, aid in secondary and anticipatory socialization, as well as resocialization of individuals. To conclude, the family was considered the main agent of socialization. According to functionalism, the family played numerous roles to ensure the transmission of values, norms, and beliefs in society, in an attempt to maintain consensus and stability in society. However, due to numerous factors such as interactions with new groups, the creation of alternatives and job opportunities, the family is no longer the main agent, and there are now other agents who contribute to secondary socialization. These agents include school, religious institutions, peers, the media and the community. These agents although they have flaws, also play an important role in the socialization of individuals.

Question: Within the social sciences, there is a debate about whether sociology is a science or not. Evaluate the major positions in this debate.

A popular debate in sociology concerns whether sociology should be studied as a science or not. Science is defined as the use of systematic methods of research and investigation and the logical analysis of arguments in order to develop an understanding of a particular subject matter. The sociologists that claim it is a science are known as positivists. Those that dispute their viewpoint are known as interpretivists, who suggest that society cannot be measured and oversimplified into a mere thing to be studied. Within this essay, the major arguments made for each viewpoint will be discussed as well as an evaluation of each position on this debate. Positivism is a sociological tradition stating that human behaviour within society can be studied using the same procedures and methods employed in studying natural sciences. Those methods include observation and multivariate analysis as noted by Nasser Mustapha 2009. This tradition was founded by French sociologist Auguste Comte. Comte advanced his theory of positivism by furthering his belief that human behaviour was controlled in the same way that matter was constricted. Positivists adhere to their claim that sociology possesses certain features that allows it to be identified as a science. They make the claim that sociology is theoretical, meaning that data is obtained by research and utilized in formulating theories. This can be seen as sociologists may employ different approaches in order to study the same phenomena and can be related to scientists also utilizing various approaches in order to study the same matter. Sociology can be said to have both a cumulative and a value free nature. Sociology’s cumulative nature means that sociologists are able to develop and refine the older theories established by their predecessors. For example, Emile Durkheim expanded on Herbert Spencer’s idea that society can be viewed as an organism. This concept is similar to that of scientific studies which over time has disputed and modified theories as time has developed. Positivists also hold the view that similar to studying natural sciences; sociology is value-free, meaning it is merely reported without any of the researcher’s moral conclusions on social life. Due to their beliefs, positivists utilize quantitative methods in acquiring information. Quantitative research methods involve statistics and numerical data which ensure that it is easy to quantify and is a reliable source of data. Max Weber, a German sociologist, opposed Comte’s theory that sociology should and can be studied as a natural science. This perspective is known as Interpretivism and is the other tradition of the study of sociology as noted by Mustapha. Interpretivists mainly oppose positivism as it simplifies society to be studied as a single thing. They view human behaviour as something that cannot be measured because it is based on emotions and feelings. Human behaviour also will differ depending on who they are interacting with. Interpretivists are also critical of their view that human behaviour is controlled and contained by the laws and norms of society. Due to this view, they adopt humanistic and subjective research methods referred to as qualitative methods in order to obtain data. Not all sociologists have agreed that sociology is a science and have made very strong cases to support their claims. Their main argument is that human behaviour changes based on several factors which include who exactly they are interacting with. Due to human behaviour being rather subjective (personal) makes it very difficult to study it as a being objective (detached). Alternatively, positivists have made a very strong argument for studying sociology as a natural science. They have linked many of its characteristics which make it very suitable to be considered a science.

Essay submitted by user shanique hayden General Comments on Essay:

1. The writer demonstrated a very good understanding to the subject matter - quatitative research methods vs qualitative research methods.

2. Good use of language and expression.

3. The writer did not cite sociologists, in the discussion/analysis phase of the essay, although their arguments/points of views on the strenghts of the quantitative research method was stated.

Mark out of 25

Knowledge & Understanding 6

Interpretation & Analysis 7

Synthesis and Evaluation 7

Total 20/25 Quantitative methods are better suited to undergo the rigours of sociological research. Discuss.     Quantitative research methods can be described as those methods employing the use of more scientific and numerical data. Quantitative research methods are predominantly used in the positivist approach to research and it was the method adopted by Emile Durkheim in his study on suicide. This research method is also deemed as reliable and practical.      Emile Durkheim did his study on suicide in nineteenth century. In conducting his study, he used the positivist approach which warrants the use of social facts, statistical data, correlations, causation, multivariate analysis and laws of human behaviour. Durkheim's research methodology was therefore quantitative. His quantitative method allowed him to make very good use of the statistical data available to him which helped to propel his theory. He used this statistical data to explain why the suicide rates among Roman Catholics and Protestants were either higher or lower than those of other groups. This data also enabled him to make a correlation between the suicide rates and the group with which it is associated. After making his correlations, he used multivariate analysis, which involves trying to isolate the effects of a particular independent variable upon the dependent variables, to isolate the most important variables and also to determine if there was a genuine causal relationship between these factors and suicide. The quantitative method proves to be better suite d in this situation as it would be difficult to obtain the information for the study using other means such as the qualitative method of research. This is due to the fact that the persons under study are d e ad and so would not be able to provide the information needed for the research. Therefore due to the method used it was easy for conclusions to be drawn about the situation based on data such as statistics that were available.      Quantitative research methods are deemed to be reliable. Reliability means that the study done can be replicated and the same results will be produced. Quantitative methods usually produce standardized data in a statistical form which makes it easy for the results to be repeated and checked.  On the other hand qualitative methods are seen as failing to meet the standards of reliability because the procedures used to collect data are often unsystematic, the results are hardly ever quantified and so there is no way that a qualitative study can be replicated and the reliability of the findings checked.      Practicality alludes to efficiency of the time and effort associated with the study. Quantitative methods are generally less time consuming and require less personal commitment when compared to the qualitative method. It is also possible to study larger and more representative samples which could provide a better understanding of the population under study. Qualitative methods however are less practical as they require a lot of time and most times the study has to be confined to a small group thus at times making the sample non-representative of the population under study and so accurate generalizations cannot be made.    To conclude qualitative method of research provides the research with the use of statistical data thus making it easier to study phenomenon where the direct individuals under study are not available for interviews, for example suicide victims. This research method is also reliable and so other persons in the field of study can improve on the study or use the study to assist in another. The research method is also very practical which becomes useful when there is not a lot of time or resources and when the population size is quite large, thus requiring a large representative sample. However it must be noted that while quantitative methods are better suited for conducting some research in sociology, it is not suited for all and so the writer would like to conclude that quantitative methods are better suited to undergo some rigours of sociological research but not all.

Scholar Essays

Capesociology.org.

• Note to Parents
• Submit Essay for marking
• Frequently Asked Questions

Connect with Us

• Empirical Evidence
• Multiple Choice
• Question Bank
• Revision Exercises
• Visual Summaries

Sociology as a science

An essay on the roots of the “scientific method” and its relationship to the pursuit of sociology

• Published: September 1981
• Volume 12 , pages 263–284, ( 1981 )

Cite this article

• David V. McQueen 1  

90 Accesses

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Presented here is an overview from the standpoints of sociology, history of science, philosophy of science and “pure science” of the lingering question of whether sociology is a form of scientific pursuit. The conclusion is drawn that sociology barely meets any of the rigid criteria traditionally associated with the natural sciences. Sociology is viewed as having a position of theory and argument which is labeled “inconoclastic scepticism.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA) Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Achinstein, Peter. 1968. Concepts of Science: A Philosophical Analysis . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press

Google Scholar  

Anderson, Fulton H. 1962. Francis Bacon: His career and His Thought . Los Angeles: Univ. of California Press

Berger, Peter. 1963. Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective . New York: Doubleday

Berger, Peter and Brigitte Berger. 1972. Sociology — A Biographical Approach . New York: Basic Books, Inc.

Bergman, Gustav. 1957. Philosophy of Science . Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press

Braithwaite, R. B. 1953. Scientific Explanation: A Study of the Function of Theory, Probability and Law in Science . Cambridge University Press

Bridgeman, Percy, W. 1927. The Logic of Modern Physics . New York: Macmillan

Brodbeck, May. 1959. “Models, Meanings, and Theories.” In L. Gross, Symposium in Sociological Theory . Evanston

Butterfield, Herbert. 1957. The Origins of Modern Science, 1300–1800 . New York: Macmillan

Carnap, Rudolf. 1964. The Logical Structure of the World and Pseudoproblems in Philosophy . Berkeley: Univ. of California Press

Cohen, Morris, R. 1926. “The Myth about Bacon and the Inductive Method.” Scientific Monthly 23, Pp. 504–508

Collingwood, Robin, G. 1946. The Idea of History . Oxford: Oxford University Press

Dilthey, Wilhelm. 1931. Gesammelte Schriften , 12 Vls. Leipzig: Teubner. Especially Vol 8: Weltanschauungslehre

Dijksterhuis, Edward J. 1968. The Mechanization of the World Picture . Oxford: Claverdon Press

Farrington, Benjamin. 1964. The Philosophy of Francis Bacon . Liverpool: Liverpool Univ. Press

Feigl, Herbert, Brodbeck, May (ed.). 1953. Readings in the Philosophy of Science . New York: Appleton

Feigl, Herbert, Grover, Maxwell (eds.). 1962. Scientific Explanation, Space, and Time . Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 3. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minn. Press

Feigl, Herbert and Michael Scriven (eds). 1956. The foundations of Sciences and the Concepts of Psychology and Psychoanalysis . Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 1. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minn. Press

Feyerabend, P. K. 1962. Explanation, Reduction and Empiricism in Herbert Feigl and Maxwell Grover. Pp. 28–97

Giddens, Anthony. 1980. “Time and Space in Social Theory”. Plenary address at the 1980 Deutscher Soziologentag, Bremen, W. Germany

Gouldner, Alvin. 1970. The coming Crisis of Western Sociology . New York: Basic Books

Habermas, Jürgen, G. 1970. Zur Logik der Sozialwissenschaften . Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag

Hanson, Norwood, R. 1958. Patterns of Discovery: An Inquiry into the Conceptual Foundations of Science . Cambridge Univ. Press

Hempel, Carl, G. 1952. Fundamentals of Concept Formation in Empirical Science . Vol. 2 No. 7 in International Encyclopedia of Unified Science. Univ. of Chicago Press

Hempel, Carl, G. 1965. Aspects of Scientific Explanation, and other Essays in the Philosophy of Science . New York: Free Press

Hempel, Carl, G. and Oppenheim, P. 1953. “The Logic of Explanation” Pp. 319–352 in Herbert Feigl and May Brodbeck (eds.) Readings in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Appleton

Hesse, Mary, B. 1963. Models and Analogies in Science . London: Sheed & Ward

Hodges, H. A. 1952. The Philosophy of Wilhelm Dilthey . London: Routledge

Jammer, Max. 1961. Concepts of Mass in Classical and Modern Physics . Cambridge. Mass.: Harvard. Univ. Press

Jonas, Friedrich. 1969. Geschichte der Soziologie . Vol I–IV. Reinbeck: Rowohlt

Kaplan, Abraham. 1964. The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science . San Francisco: Chandler

König. René. (ed.) 1973. Handbuch der empirischen Sozialforschung, Vol. 1. Geschichte und Grundprobleme der Empirischen Sozialforschung , 3. umgearbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Stuttgart: F. Enke

Kraft, Victor. 1953. The Vienna Circle: The Origin of Neo-Positivism; a Chapter in the History of Recent Philosophy . New York: Philosophical Library

Kuhn, Thomas, S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions . Univ. of Chicago Press

Labovitz, Sanford. 1967. “Some Observations on Measurement and Statistics.” Social Forces, 46, pp. 151–160

Labovitz, Sanford. 1972. “Statistical Usage in Sociology: Sacred Cows and Ritual.” Sociological Methods and Research 1. August. Pp. 13–37

Lakatos, Imre and Alan Musgrave (eds.). 1970. Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge . London: Cambridge Univ. Press

Lazarsfeld, Paul, F. 1961. “Notes on the History of Quantification in Sociology: Trends Sources and Problems.” ISIS 52:277–333

Mach, Ernst, 1942. The Science of Mechanics . LaSalle, Ill. First Published 1883 as Die Mechanik in ihrer Entwicklung . Leipzig

Mason, S. F. 1956. Main Currents of Scientific Thought . New York: Collier

Merz, J. T. 1926. History of European Thought in the Nineteenth Century . 2 Vols. London; Dover

Mill, John Stuart. 1961. A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive: Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific Investigation . London: Longmans

Nagel, Ernst; Patrick Suppes and Alfred Tarski (eds.). 1962. Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science . Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press

Nagel, Ernst. 1961. The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation . New York: Harcourt

Nisbet, Robert, A. 1979. Sociology as an Art Form . Berkeley: Univer. of California Press

Popper, Karl, R. 1963. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge . New York: Basic Books; London: Routledge

Popper, Karl, R. 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery . New York: Basic Books. First Published as Logik der Forschung. 1934

Popper, Karl, R. 1957. The Poverty of Historicism . Boston: Beacon

Quetelet, Adolphe. 1842. A Treatise on Man and the Development of his Faculties . London: Chambers. First Published as Sur l'homme et le développement de ses facultés: physique sociale . Paris, 1835. 2 vols.

Reichenbach, Hans, 1944. Philosophic Foundations of Quantum Mechanics . Berkeley: Univ. of Structure of Knowledge . Univ. of Chicago Press

Reichenbach, Hand. 1944. Philosophic Foundations of Quantum Mechanics . Berkeley: Univ. of California Press

Reichenbach, Hans. 1951. The Rise of Scientific Philosophy . Berkeley: Univ. of California Press

Reichesberg, N. 1896: “Der berühmte Statistiker, Adolf Quetelet, sein Leben und sein Wirken: Eine biographische Skizze.” Zeitschrift für schweizerische Statistik. 32:418–460

Scriven, Michael. 1962. “Explanations, Predictions, and Laws.” Pp. 170–230 in Herbert Feigl and Grover, Maxwell (eds.). Scientific Explanation, Space, and Time . Minnesota Studies in Philosophy of Science. Vol. 3. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press

Scriven. Michael. 1966. Primary Philosophy . New York: McGraw Hill

Skinner, B. F. 1964. Science and Human Behavior . New York: Macmillan

Stegmüller, Wolfgang. 1969. Probleme und Resultate der Wissenschaftstheorie und Analytischen Philosophie. Bd. 1. Wissenschftliche Erklärung und Begründung . Berlin: Springer

Tarski, Alfred. 1952. “The Semantic Conception of Truth.” Pp. 13–47 in Leonard Linsky (ed.) Semantics and The Philosophy of Language. Urbana: Univ. of Ill. Press

Tarski, Alfred. 1956. Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics . Oxford: Clarendon

Topitsch, Ernst (ed.). 1971. Logik der Sozialwissenschaften . Köln: Kiepenheuer & Witsch

Toulmin, Stephen. 1953. The Philosophy of Science: An Introduction . London: Hutchinson's Univ. Library

Walker, Helen, M. 1929. Studies in the History of Statistical Method . Baltimore: William and Wilkens

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1963. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus . New York: Humanities Press. First Published by Harcourt (1922) in English

Zeller, Richard, A. and Zachary H. Levine. 1974. “The Effects of Violating the Normality Assumption Underlying r.” Sociological Methods and Research 2. (May). 511–519

Zetterberg, Hans. 1966. On Theory and Verification in Sociology . First Published in Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksall. 1954

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Behavioral Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University, 615 N. Wolfe St., 21205, Baltimore, Md., USA

David V. McQueen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Additional information

A major part of this work was conducted while a research fellow of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Bonn, W. Germany.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

McQueen, D.V. Sociology as a science. Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 12 , 263–284 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01801198

Download citation

Issue Date : September 1981

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01801198

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Natural Science
• Scientific Pursuit
• Pure Science
• Rigid Criterion
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Is Sociology a Science? Correct Answer with Reasons and Examples

In the domain of academia, two tropes share an antagonist relationship more than the others. These two fields are science on one end and social science on the other. Students of various disciplines often butt heads together and get into debates about which subject is more worthy and which is not. Similarly, within fields as well, there are heated debates regarding its own credibility. In the realm of sociology, one such popular question for deliberation has been- “Is Sociology a science?” . In this article, we will discuss how sociology can be termed a scientific discipline. We will also see how it cannot be called a science. We will apply the example of Suicide by Emile Durkheim to agree or disagree with the question posed in the article and its title. 

• What is Science?  

Let us look at how “science” or “scientific” is defined

• Science is systematic, organized, and objective. 
• It is based on reason and evidence. 
• The aim is to produce general laws based on facts. 
• It collects facts and links them together as causal relations. 
• Scientific knowledge is acquired through observation, experimentation, and generalization.   

Science is defined as “a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws.”

Can we call Sociology a science? 

Let us see if sociology can be categorized as “science” based on the characteristics mentioned above  

According to a few Sociologists… 

Auguste Comte 

According to Auguste Comte, sociology, like other scientific sciences, is regulated by some natural laws. As a result, sociology is a science. Others argue that sociology, like political science, economics, and psychology, is a science.

Emile Durkheim 

“Sociology is a science since it adopts and utilizes the scientific method,” according to Emile Durkheim. Scientific approaches are used in the research of sociology’s subject matter. As a result, sociology is a science.

Is Sociology a science or not…?  It is a Science 

Scientific method- systematic, organized, and objectivity .

Sociology follows a method that is scientific in nature. It is a systematic study with fixed methods of inquiry that are organized and planned. Sociologists try to remain as objective as possible in their research by not letting their biases enter the field with them. Even if it is impossible to conduct experiments on men in a laboratory, man’s social behavior is subject to scientific research in the same way natural phenomena are. It employs scientific methods such as sociometry schedule scales, case studies, interviews, and questionnaires to quantify social phenomena.

Suicide by Durkheim 

This well-known work of Durkheim is a systematic study of suicide across various societies. It is systematic because it follows a pattern to derive answers. It is organized because a reader can categorize all the different nuances of suicide. Lastly, it is objective as Durkehim’s personal biases do not impact the end result of this research.  

Based on reason and evidence 

Everybody of knowledge produced in the discipline of sociology is based on evidence and reason. Every study is backed up by evidence gathered in the field or via the experiments performed. Social facts are established, and reasons are found for all that happens in a society. All the arguments are backed up via reality found through case studies, interviews, questionnaires, etc. 

Suicide by Durkheim

The entire research is based on empirical reason and evidence. It is based on data gathered by various researchers and formal bodies like the State statistical data. It is quantitative in nature and can be measured. In the end, it is established that suicide is a social fact present in all societies. 

General Laws

The idea that social science generalizations aren’t universal was disproved. Sociology, like scientific disciplines, has developed the ability to make universally applicable generalizations. It aims to provide general laws, not particular. It studies various societies and then formulates a general consensus. General laws are produced so that certain guidelines will be followed by every society irrespective of their variations. 

The extensive study on suicide by Emile Durkheim created a generalized theory that proved that suicide is present everywhere, even if it varies in its type and methods. Suicide is generalized when Durkheim divided it into four types and gave conditions that were somewhere or other met by societies. 

Causal Relationship 

Cause and effect relationships form the core of sociology. Sociology, like scientific sciences, seeks to understand and solve problems. Social research relies on theories of causality to deduce causal linkages between structural phenomena and individuals and explain these interactions through the application and development of theory. This method is also used to create generalizations. 

Cause and effect is the basis of this study. Durkheim correlated different causes with different effects when he categorized the four types of society.

                       Cause → Effect 

Too much integration → Altruistic Suicide 

Too less integration   → Egoistic Suicide 

Too much regualtion  → Fatalistic Suicide

Too less regulation    → Anomic Suicide

Observation and Experimentation

Even if a laboratory is not available, observation and experimentation are possible in the discipline of sociology. Precise observation is possible even outside a laboratory with four walls and humans in white coats. The entire social universe serves as a sociological laboratory. Even if sociology lacks a laboratory, it is capable of accurate observation. As a result, sociology is a science. 

Durkheim saw the societies that he studied as being a laboratory. The people in this laboratory were all the subjects to understand the phenomena of suicide. Observation and experimentation were done to know how the stability of society and the number of suicides correlated with each other. 

It is not a Science 

Cannot give exact predictions .

Sociology cannot always provide accurate predictions like natural sciences can. Natural sciences create forecasts based on specific information. However, sociology deals with social dynamics and human behavior that are so unpredictable and unusual that no precise predictions can be made. Sociologists can’t forecast a person’s behavior at a given point in time, nor can they predict trends or the rate of social change.

No universal tool of measurement 

Like scientific sciences, sociology is incapable of precise measurement. Things can be measured using specific measuring standards such as the k.g., meter, etc. No comparable instruments exist in sociology. Aside from that, sociology is concerned with qualitative social relationships that are difficult to quantify. As a result, sociology isn’t regarded as a scientific discipline.

Terminological Inefficiency 

Similar to measurement tools, sociology lacks in terminological stability and universality. Sociology has yet to create a comprehensive set of scientific words. Many concepts in sociology are ambiguous and have diverse meanings for different people. The terms caste and class, for example, do not yet have a clear definition.

Also Read: Why it’s important to study sociology?

Conclusion 

Sociology in the end is therefore finalized to be a SOCIAL SCIENCE discipline 

A famous sociologist named Robert Bierstedt, in his book The Social Order thus, concluded that the discipline of sociology is a “social science,” not natural science. It is mostly abstract science, not concrete. Finally, it is both a rational and an empirical science as well. 

Thus, we conclude that we define Sociology as “the science of society, social institutions, and social relationships. Specifically, the systematic study of the development, structure, interaction, and collective behaviour of organized groups of human beings.”

https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/sociology-is-sociology-a-branch-of-science-answered/6252#:~:text=Sociology%20is%20a%20Science%3A,Hence%20Sociology%20is%20a%20science

https://www.shcollege.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/NAAC_Documents_IV_Cycle/Criterion-II/2.3.2/IsSociologyaScience.pdf

Hello! Eiti is a budding sociologist whose passion lies in reading, researching, and writing. She thrives on coffee, to-do lists, deadlines, and organization. Eiti's primary interest areas encompass food, gender, and academia.

Skip to content

Get Revising

Join get revising, already a member, sociology cannot and should not be a science - essay plan.

• Created by: Izzy Bradshaw
• Created on: 06-03-16 17:49

‘Sociology cannot and should not be a science’ To what extent do sociological arguments and evidence support this view? (33 marks) – Essay Plan

Introduction

·          Science is displaced by rational scientific explanations based on empirical evidence derived from observation and experimentation, logical thought and reasoning.

·          Positivist and interpretivism are the two main theoretical arguments with regard to this issue. Positivism is based on the idea that sociology should be based upon the guidelines of the natural sciences. Whereas the theory of interpretivism would bring about the argument that the knowledge is based on people’s interpretations.

Positivists

·          The methods of the natural sciences are applicable to the study of people within society, and that it will help solve social problems and achieve progress by applying these methods in the same manner as a scientific theory or experiment.

·          Reality is a separate thing existing outside of the mind, so society can be studied objectively as factual reality.

·          A positivist sociologist would use scientific methods such as observations to study the patterns of society, in order to discover the laws that determine how society works. These cause and effect laws can then be used to predict future events and guide social policies made as a result of these predictions and past events.

·          Durkheim studied suicide official statistics to investigate what causes a person to commit suicide. He believed that if he could show that there were social patterns and causes applicable to suicide; he would be able to prove sociology as having a scientific guideline.

Interpretivists

·          Interpretivists would challenge the positivist view as believe that the work of  natural sciences cannot be applied to sociology as the studies of people is different; the natural sciences deal with matters that have no consciousness, therefore its behaviour and any effects on it is an automatic reaction to external forces.

·          Interpretivists focus on meanings and people have their own internal reactions given to certain situations.

·          Douglas rejected Durkheim’s view that suicide is a social fact. He believed that it depends on the internal meanings that would lead to the eventual result of a person committing suicide because it is something that can never be found out as it is impossible to define an exact reason why a person would choose to end their life.

·          Atkinson also supports Douglas by following the ethnomethodogist view of interpretivism and looking at the differences between how coroners define suicide. He …

• Sociological research methods

No comments have yet been made

Similar Sociology resources:

Sociology as a Science 4.0 / 5 based on 3 ratings

Sociology and Values - Essay Points 5.0 / 5 based on 2 ratings

sociological methods 5.0 / 5 based on 1 rating

The Sociology of Religion 0.0 / 5

Sociology Revision Notes - Postmodernism 0.0 / 5

Sociology as a Science 5.0 / 5 based on 4 ratings

Sociology- education full notes 0.0 / 5

is sociology a science? 0.0 / 5

Sociology and Science 0.0 / 5

Theories for Unit 4 Sociology 5.0 / 5 based on 1 rating Teacher recommended

Related discussions on The Student Room

• Sociology as a science »
• Sociology Help Thread »
• How to study sociology in one year and resit 2 a levels »
• A-level Sociology Study Group 2022-2023 »
• Personal Statement from Oxford Student for Year Abroad at Yale - Review »
• Subject selection error »
• AQA A Level Sociology Paper 3 (7192/3) - 14th June [Exam Chat] »
• How do i revise for my subjects? Please also recommend good resources (A-levels) »
• A level sociology vs a a level geography »
• psychology vs sociology a level »

Is Sociology a Science Critique Essay

Is Sociology a science? This paper will aim to explore the question ‘Is Sociology a science? ’ We will explore the definitions of Science and Sociology and then go onto examine various perspectives and theories surrounding the subject heading. Sociologists such as Durkheim, Comte and Weber will be examined. This paper is intended as an overview of two different schools of thought, those of positivist and anti-positivist approaches I will outline the main principals for each Sociologist covered.

I will then give my personal views on the question, and attempt to answer it within my conclusion. Firstly, in order to examine the essay title it must be laid out exactly what we mean by ‘Science’ and ‘Sociology’ Science definition. Science is, according to the Oxford dictionary 2002 “The systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiments”. Sociology definition.

Sociology on the other hand is described as, according to the Hutchins encyclopaedia , “the systematic study of the origin of human society, in particular of social order and social change, social conflict and social problems. It studies institutions such as the family, law and the church, as well as concepts such as the norm, role, and culture. Sociology attempts to study people in their social environment according to underlying moral, philosophical and political codes of behaviour. ” There are various ‘schools of thought’ when it comes to answering the question we are debating.

Order custom essay Is Sociology a Science Critique Essay with free plagiarism report

This paper will take a brief look at approaches such as positivist and anti-positivist approaches. It is often debated that thee are two separate schools of thought when discussing Sociology. There is the first notion that Sociology is based on fact and figures using quantitive data and analysis. The second suggestion is that Sociology is based on qualitative data and is surrounded by the need to understand why’s, where’s and how’s that make up society. It is only right to start with the views of Emile Durkheim, who is seen as some, the father of sociology and one of the greatest positivists of all time.

The term ‘positivist’ simply relates to a person/group of sociologists whom believe that Sociology to be a science ie quantative data analysis He expressed the need for quantitive data and in depth analysis in order to gain a true insight. He appreciated the fact that data and results were an accurate way of analysing and assessing the world and he applied these principals to the examination of society. In his text ‘The Rules of Sociological Methods’ (first published in 1895) Durkheim set out how he believed logic and methodology was the key to the successful study of ‘sociology’.

Emile Durkheim carried out what could be described as a famous study where he studied the suicide rates of European countries. This process weighted heavily on analysis of data and actual facts, just as science is based on facts. Durkheim’s argument was that any theory should be backed up with evidence. This evidence could only be found by the gathering and analysis of data. He believed that the correct route was to gather the data and develop theories that supported that evidence.

Positivists view things "in the same state of mind as the physicist, chemist or physiologist when he probes into a still unexplored region of the scientific domain" (Durkheim 1964: xiv). Durkheim is what we would call a ‘Positivist’. Positivists believe that there are many similarities to the research methods embraced by scientists. When we consider this fact is it very easy to state that a posivitist will only study when its subjects and analysis can be quantified ie they are measurable, and can be observed and reported on.

Auguste Comte, whom is arguably one of the first Sociologists, sought an empirical way of thinking towards sociological issues . Comte states that sociology should only be concerned with matters where you can get results based on data collation and facts- not based on assumption. Comte believed it was possible to have a good handle on the prediction of further trends and patterns within society. Empirical evidence is the key in positivism. Comte argued that positivism goes through three stages, ” the law of the three stages”.

It 'claims that human efforts to understand the human world have passed through theological, metaphysical and positive stages. ' (Giddens, 2006, page 11) Now we will go on to examine the ‘other sides of the coin’ and look at the subjectivists’ and realists sociologists’ theories regarding sociology as a science. Various writers could be seen to be labelled anti-positivist, or believers that sociology is not a science. Such sociologists believe that the researcher should concern themselves with human cultural norms, values and processes that are viewed from a subjective perspective.

Weber (1864-1920) defined sociology as ‘a science which attempts the interpretive understanding of social action in order to thereby arrive at a casual explanation of its course and effects’ (1964 p88). Weber was one of the founders of the “Verstehen” method, along with Simmel. Verstehen simply means “understanding” or ”interpretation”. This method involves an outsider attempting to relate to a person or persons from a specific group of people from their point of view.

The realists approach to Sociology generally consist of accepting that there are differences between science and sociology – but it should be mentioned that this approach does allow for a social science. Andrew Sayer (1992) expressed differences between ‘open and closed systems as arenas of study’ (Sociology in focus 638)A good example of this ‘closed system’ would be a science lab where conditions can be heavily controlled, this gives way to fixed conditions that can be maintained or fluctuated by the lab.

It has to be noted that a large amount of scientific research takes place outside of a controlled environment and this would be classed as an ‘open system’ Sayer argues that the behaviour and interaction of human beings takes place in open arenas and therefore the results cannot be predicted with any accuracy attached to it. But realists do not rule out completely the fact that sociology is indeed a science. Realists can be perceived to argue that the study named sociology could be based on the same principals as ‘science’ in the fact that both are concerned with exploring and evaluating an end roduct. Ray Pawson described the notion that there are two separate types of sociology as the ‘methodological myth’. He argues that two sociologies do not exist and that sociology is made up from a wide range of opinions Conclusion It has been shown within the context of this paper that Sociology can be viewed from both perspectives ie. As a science and the opposing view that it cannot be classed as a science. From a personal perspective I believe that Sociology is indeed a science, if carried out in its ‘true sense’.

In order for sociologists to be taken seriously in the world we must quantify what we are saying. This must be done with the assistance of data and observation, then opinions must be formed based on this data and facts we have collated. It is simply not good enough to provide readers with ideas of what may be true, as this is surely just opinion, rather than fact! If sociology was solely about opinions rather than showing empirical evidence to back up ones claims then surely each and every individual on the planet could rightly call themselves sociologists..

Bibliography Bilton, T, Bonnett, K et al (1996) Introductory Sociology 3rd Edition. Mc Millan Press: London http://sociology. org. uk/atssp7. htm. Accessed 14/2/2010 Cotgrove, S (1967) The Science of Society: An Introduction to Sociology, Allen & Unwin: London Hutchins encyclopaedia Keat & Urry (1975) Social Theory as Science, Routledge: London Oxford Dictionary ( 2002) Taylor et all (2000) Sociology in focus Causeway press:London www. jstor. org/stable/4026005 accessed 1/2/10 http://www. emile-durkheim. com/ accessed 18/2/10

Cite this Page

Is Sociology a Science Critique Essay. (2018, Jan 31). Retrieved from https://phdessay.com/is-sociology-a-science/

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

More related essays

If a problem is defined as personal, _______ are employed to cope with the problem. A. Individual strategies100% B. Collective strategies C. Societal strategies D. Professional strategies Chapter What famous sociologist.

Sociology every bit applied to dentistry is an indispensable portion of preparation for tooth doctors. The instance for inquiring, even necessitating, medical and other pupils of the wellness professions to.

In today’s global world, there has been rising cases of drug abuse. Illicit use of Opiates, especially heroin has dominated most parts of the world with more than 281,000 heroin.

Introduction Globalization is a widely discussed and contested topic. The process of globalization has profound impacts on the capacity of a nation to formulate its policies. It is accompanied by a.

Introduction In the following I will assess a research article ‘No place called home: the causes and social consequences of the UK housing ‘bubble’’ by Bone and O’Reilly (2010).A short summary.

The childhood anecdote from the beginning of the chapter shows that racial prejudices and differences are not inborn and they are a result of the way that society shaped a.

We as human beings have always been curious about the sources of our own behaviour. Attempts to understand this relied on ways of thinking that were passed down from generation.

Pierre Bourdieu (1930–2002), Professor of Sociology at the College de France, might come into view an unlikely candidate for inclusion under the rubric of critical theory. An erstwhile structuralist, whose.

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

Save time and let our verified experts help you.

ReviseSociology

A level sociology revision – education, families, research methods, crime and deviance and more!

Is Science Ideological?

Last Updated on November 19, 2018 by Karl Thompson

If sociologists refer to something as being ‘ideological’, they typically mean that it supports powerful groups in society, effectively keeping the existing ruling class, or elites, in power.

Scientists generally claim that the process of conducting scientific research and constructing scientific knowledge is value-free, and thus ‘non-ideological’. In simple terms, they claim their research reveals ‘the truth’, or the underlying causal laws of nature and the universe.

However, this doesn’t necessarily mean that science is not also ‘ideological’. This part of the religion specification overlaps with the ‘ is sociology a science ’ part of Theory and Methods.

The argument that science is value free and thus non-ideological

• The scientific method involves using controlled experiments to test a hypothesis bout how variables interact with each other
• Because all of the steps of the experiments are carefully recorded, it allows anyone else to repeat the experiment and test the results, thus verifying the results are ‘true’.
• It follows that scientists should strive to keep their own biases and values out of the research process, because they know anyone else can test their results.
• This should mean the knowledge collected through scientific research is objective, value free, or non-ideological.

Three ways in which science might be said to be ‘ideological’

The research process itself may simply reflect the biases of influential scientists

• Thomas Khun found that scientific research tends to be limited by dominant paradigms.
• A paradigm is a set of assumptions about the way the world is, which frames scientific research.
• Kuhn found that scientific findings which didn’t fit in with the existing, dominant paradigm, were ignored.
• In this sense, groups of leading scientists who operate within the dominant paradigm ignored the work of younger scientists whose work may challenge their world view.

The wider field of scientific research is influenced by those who fund the research

• Bruno Latour found that scientists would limit their research depending on where their funding came from.
• For example, if a particular drug company was funding a lab, there would be reluctance to conduct research which found anything negative about that drug company’s products.
• In this way, scientific research which harms powerful funding bodies is less likely to be carried out.

The dominance of the scientific world view may marginalise other non-scientific world views

• The scientific world view is a quantitative, materialistic world view, it has worked well to bring about technological ‘progress’. Because of this it may have become oppressive to other forms of knowledge.
• Feminists have suggested that it marginalises those who prefer to do research into the more subjective, feelingful aspects of social life.
• Religious worldviews may also be taken less seriously because of the rise of ‘scientism’.

Share this:

• Share on Tumblr

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Discover more from ReviseSociology

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading