Interpretivism (Sociology cannot be a Science): Interpretivists disagree with Positivists by suggesting that Scientific Methodology is completely unsuited to the study of human beings. Interpretivists see the social world as a product of Individuals (rather than it being an external, independent reality) i.e. without people, there would be no social world. They are fundamentally connected – not separate. The social world can only be understood by studying (interpreting) individual behaviour, actions, motives and meanings, rather than suggesting that they are shaped and controlled by an external reality. Sociology is not a science because science only deals with laws of cause and effect NOT human meanings and motivations. X + Y = Z MICRO Macro Inductive Logic

Knorr-Cetina (1981): The Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge According to Interpretivists, Sociology & Science are fundamentally different…… > Studies matter which has no consciousness. Behaviour is explained simply due to one force acting on another e.g. An apple falls to the ground due to gravity – it has no choice. Science: Sociology: > Studies humans who do have consciousness. Behaviour is complex and can only be understood by interpreting the meanings given to particular actions by individuals. They do have choice, they are active, and there is no set formula to their behaviour. Knorr-Cetina (1981): The Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge Knorr continues Kuhn’s argument that Scientific knowledge is Socially Constructed by highlighting that all knowledge is socially constructed as it relies on the interpretation of people & the resources & instruments available to them (and created by them) Laboratory settings are artificial and & therefore is far removed from the natural world that scientists are supposedly studying.

Symbolic Interactionism George Herbert Mead (1863 - 1931) Society is built up by Interactions between people. It is the job of sociologist to Interpret what these Interactions Symbolise (Hence Symbolic Interactionism) People behave (act) according to ‘Symbols’ which they give ‘Meaning’ to. These symbols are things like objects, words, expressions and gestures. Meanings are ‘negotiated’ during interactions. Individuals develop meanings by imagining themselves in other people’s positions . Individuals develop their identities by interpreting how others see them i.e. Individual behaviour and thought is not determined by any fixed, rigid social structure but by complex interactions. The Traffic Light Scenario…… People are not controlled by external forces but by the meanings and interpretations of interactions.

Ethnomethodology This refers to the use of Interpretivist methods and procedures. Harold Garfinkel (1917 – Present) This approach assumes that society has no social structure (POST-MODERNITY) Social Order is an illusion that individuals create in their minds – reality is a SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION. Ethnomethodology is interested in discovering how individuals make sense of the social world & how they create a sense of order in their lives i.e. it assumes that there is no fixed, rigid, external, objective social structure. Max Weber (1864 – 1920) Max Weber used the concept of VERSTEHEN to demonstrate this ‘Social Action’ approach to the study of society. To understand the social world: ‘The researcher should see the world through the eyes of the individual actor’.

Woolgar (1988) Little Green Men No matter what they are faced with, Scientists must ultimately interpret the ‘things’ that they are faced with. When Cambridge Scientists discovered ‘Pulsating Neutron Stars’ they labelled these initial signals as LGM1 & LGM2 i.e. ‘Little Green Men 1 & 2’. As this was not a scientifically acceptable interpretation they then suggested that the signals represented a previously unknown type of star. There’s still debate over what these signals actually mean. Douglas (1967) An Interpretivist Approach to Suicide Douglas argues that in order to understand suicide the researcher must uncover it’s individual meaning to the individuals involved rather than imposing a formulaic, objective ‘Positivist’ theory such as Durkheim’s ‘Integration/ Regulation’ Theory. Instead of using Quantitative Statistics (Comparative Method) to study suicide the researcher should examine Qualitative information from individual case studies of suicide i.e. move away from the Positivist ‘One-Size-fits-all’ structural approach. Suicide statistics are not objective facts but are Social Constructions which only tell us about the decisions of coroners to label certain deaths suicide rather than objective fact.

Post-Modernism & Scientific Sociology: Post-Modernists such as Bauman & Baudrillard argue that science is simply a meta-narrative – a big story & as such it is no more valid than other belief systems. The post-modern appraoch suggests there are as many ‘truths’ as there are ‘points of view’ & as such it is dangerous to allow Science to have a monopoly over the ‘truth’. Far from having the answers, Science has created a Risk Society according to Beck. It has introduced nuclear weapons, global warming and other greed into society – why therefore would sociology want to be associated with it? Feminism & Scientific Sociology: Feminists such as Harding (1984) & Hart (1994) argue that Science is inadequate as it is ‘Malestream’ and as such holds little value to women.

Sir Isaac Newton & his Laws of Gravity Keat & Urry (1982) Realism, Science & Sociology Sociology & Science are very similar in that ,within both disciplines, researchers do not always have complete control over variables. Much of Science is studied within an ‘Open System’ where the researcher does not have full control over variables e.g. Meteorology, Seismology. Predictions cannot always be made with 100% accuracy. This is similar to Sociology as researchers cannot fully control the social world that they are studying. As such they too cannot make 100% accurate predictions. Not all Science is based on observable phenomena e.g. Black Holes are literally the study of ‘nothingness’. This means that Interpretivists are wrong in suggesting that the study of ‘meanings’ & ‘thoughts’ and ‘motivations’ cannot be scientific. Just because something is not ‘observable’ it’s effects generally are and therefore can be studied scientifically. Sir Isaac Newton & his Laws of Gravity In conclusion, Realists argue that Science and Sociology are very similar, it’s just that some science can be studied in a ‘closed’, controlled system e.g. Chemistry.