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
Revolution
Paradigm II:
Normal
Science
Crisis
Anomalies
The Microscopic - Macroscopic Continuum
Interaction
Organizations
World
Systems
Microscopic
Individual
thought
and
action
Macroscopic
Groups
Societies
The Objective - Subjective Continuum
Mixed types,
combining in varying
degrees objective and
subjective elements;
examples include
the state, family,
work world, religion.
Objective
Subjective
Actors, action,
interaction,
bureaucratic
structures, law,
and so forth.
Social construction
of reality, norms,
values, and so
forth.
Major Levels of Social Analysis
MACROSCOPIC
I. Macro-objective
II. Macro-subjective
Examples: society, law,
bureaucracy, architecture,
technology, and language.
Examples: culture,
norms, and values.
OBJECTIVE
SUBJECTIVE
III. Micro-objective
IV. Micro-subjective
Examples: patterns of
behaviour, action,
and interaction.
Examples: the various
facets of the social
construction of reality.
MICROSCOPIC
Levels of Social Analysis and
the Major Sociological Paradigms
LEVELS OF SOCIAL REALITY
SOCIOLOGICAL PARADIGMS
Macro - Subjective
Macro - Objective
Social Facts
Micro - Subjective
Micro - Objective
Social Definition
Social Behaviour
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)
THE SCIENTIFIC RULE
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 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.