Science and Sociology

What is science? Write a brief definition. Is Sociology a Science? Why, or why not?

In one sentence, describe some of the similarities between sociology and the natural sciences. In one sentence, describe some of the differences between sociology and the natural sciences.

Science, as practiced by social and natural scientists has many similarities. The logic of data collection methods and analysis is one similarity. Values are important to both natural and social scientists in helping to form research questions and topics. “Values also have the potential to bias or distort observations, and both the natural and social sciences must guard against distortion.” Use of the scientific method can help reduce this problem.

As Guppy (p. 513) states, however,: There is … a profound difference between the subject matter of the natural and the social sciences: Bacteria don’t blush. Sociologists study meaningful action -- that is, activities that are meaningful to the people involved. For example, bacteria may not blush when studied, but people often react self-consciously when they know they are being observed. Because of this difference in subject matter, sociologists have developed an array of methods to help them understand human activity.

The Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution and Sociology

More than the thinkers of any preceding age, the men of the Enlightenment held firmly to the conviction that the mind could comprehend the universe and subordinate it to human needs. … these philosophers … were enormously inspired by the scientific achievements of the preceding centuries. Those achievements led them to a new conception of the universe based on the universal applicability of natural laws. Utilizing the concepts and techniques of the physical sciences, they set about the task of creating a new world based on reason and truth. (Zeitlin, p. 1)

If science revealed the workings of natural laws in the physical world, then perhaps similar laws could be discovered in the social and cultural world. Thus the Philosophes investigated all aspects of social life; they studied and analyzed political, religious, social, and moral institutions, subjected them to merciless criticism from the standpoint of reason, and demanded to change the unreasonable ones.

This intellectual revolution provided the context for some of the founders of the discipline of sociology. Two of the earliest thinkers who self-consciously identified them selves as doing sociology are: August Comte and Herbert Spencer.

According to Coser (p. 3) “Comte’s aim was to create a naturalistic science of society, which would both explain the past development of mankind and predict its future course.” In addition to developing a theory of human progress that involved stages of development, Comte felt that there was a hierarchy of the sciences, and that different sciences would progress at different rates. In fact, Comte saw sociology (and related social sciences) as being at the top of the scientific hierarchy because they were the most complex and the most dependent on the emergence of other sciences.

Spencer, was also interested in the development of societies, and developed his own theory to account for such processes. Spencer was a contemporary of Charles Darwin. When Darwin’s Origin of Species appeared in 1859, Spencer welcomed it warmly. Darwin, in his turn expressed his esteem of Spencer’s “development theory” even before the Origin was published. While Darwin and Spencer worked in the same mileu, it is incorrect -- as Coser (p. 110) notes -- to call Spencer a “social Darwinist” because his main doctrine was developed before Darwin had published anything on evolution.

The point here, is that early sociologists developed sociology on the tails of the Enlightenment, and lived during a time period where exciting and controversial scientific ideas were hotly debated in intellectual circles. Sociology was very much a product of this intellectual revolution.

Scientific Progress and Scientific Revolutions

Drawing upon the ideas of Thomas Kuhn, Ritzer offers the following definition of paradigm: A paradigm is a fundamental image of the subject matter within a science. It serves to define: what should be studied what questions should be asked how they should be asked and what rules should be followed in interpreting the answers obtained.

The paradigm is the broadest unit of consensus within a science and it serves to differentiate one scientific community (or subcommunity) from another. It subsumes, defines and interrelates: the exemplars, theories, methods and instruments that exist within it.

Kuhn’s Model of Scientific “Progress” Paradigm I: Normal Science Anomalies Crisis Revolution Paradigm II: Normal Science

Microscopic Macroscopic Interaction Groups Organizations Societies World Systems The Microscopic - Macroscopic Continuum Individual thought and action

The Objective - Subjective Continuum ObjectiveSubjective Actors, action, interaction, bureaucratic structures, law, and so forth. Mixed types, combining in varying degrees objective and subjective elements; examples include the state, family, work world, religion. Social construction of reality, norms, values, and so forth.

Major Levels of Social Analysis OBJECTIVESUBJECTIVE MACROSCOPIC MICROSCOPIC I. Macro-objective Examples: society, law, bureaucracy, architecture, technology, and language. II. Macro-subjective Examples: culture, norms, and values. III. Micro-objective Examples: patterns of behaviour, action, and interaction. IV. Micro-subjective Examples: the various facets of the social construction of reality.

Levels of Social Analysis and the Major Sociological Paradigms LEVELS OF SOCIAL REALITY Macro - Subjective Macro - Objective Micro - Subjective Micro - Objective Social Facts Social Definition Social Behaviour SOCIOLOGICAL PARADIGMS

Ritzer identifies three basic sociological paradigms. These are: Social Facts Social Definition Social Behaviour

THE SOCIAL FACTS PARADIGM 1. Exemplar: Emile Durkheim. 2. Image of the subject matter: social facts, or large-scale social structures and institutions. Those who adhere to this paradigm focus not only on these phenomena, but also on their effect on individual thought and action. 3. Methods: Interview-questionnaire and historical-comparative. 4. Theories: structural-functionalism, conflict theory, systems theory.

THE SOCIAL DEFINITION PARADIGM 1. Exemplar: Max Weber. 2. Image of the subject matter: the way in which actors define their social situations and the effect of these definitions on ensuing action and interaction. 3. Methods: interview-questionnaire method, observation. The distinctive method is observation. 4. Theories: action theory, symbolic interactionism, phenomenology, ethnomethodology, existentialism.

THE SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR PARADIGM 1. Exemplar: The work of B.F. Skinner. 2. Image of the subject matter: the unthinking behaviour of individuals. The rewards that elicit behaviours, and the punishments that inhibit undesirable behaviours. 3. Methods: The distinctive method is the experiment. 4. Theories: Behavioural Sociology, and exchange theory.

According to Brym (p. 21): Sociology is concerned mainly with how patterned relations among people affect behaviour, not just with how individuals choose to act.

While religion and other endeavors involve the pursuit of some form of truth, only science requires that we carefully observe and count, that our theories be systematically and publicly tested against evidence. (Brym (p. 21)

Scientists treat traditional and authoritative opinion with skepticism. They develop special techniques and instruments to facilitate accurate observation. They are careful to take samples that are representative of the populations about which they wish to generalize. They purposely look for disconfirming evidence, and when such evidence accumulates, they discard or reformulate theories. They construct theories that are logically consistent. THE SCIENTIFIC RULE

THE VALUE RULE Brym notes that sociological researchers are affected by values in several ways. 1. Values help sociologists pick research problems. 2. Values can affect untested (and often unconscious) assumptions related to testing theoretical ideas. For example, the concepts and hypotheses developed may reflect the experiences of the researcher. 3. The values that are held by a sociologist can influence the ways in which her/his work is put to use.

Brym argues that valid and useful research needs to be based on a balance between the two rules. Sociological research should be socially relevant, and should have a sufficient level of scientific rigor. The extremes of ideologism and scientism should be avoided.