Can and should sociology be science?

By definition, sociology refers to systematic study of human behavior and society whilst
science literally means knowledge collected in a systematic manner. It is a popular debate in
sociology concerning whether sociological research should adopt similar methods to those of
natural science. There are three main approaches relevant to this debate, those being the
positivism, phenomenology and realism.

First of all, positivists would argue that sociology can and should be a science. This is
because positivists believe that some features of natural science can be found in the area of
sociology. Positivists argue that sociology has methods and theories like science. Sociological
study is empirical in the explanation of social world. As well as scientist, sociologist collects
data as evidence in order to verify a theory. For example, the studies of Mods and skinheads
conducted by Stanley Cohen in order to verify Marxist sub-cultural theories. Hence, positivist
would support the view that sociology can and should be a science.

However, phenomenologist would reject the view. For phenomenologist, studying the
social world is fundamentally different from studying the natural world. Alfred Schutz argues
that social world cannot be objectively observed and measured. Unlike inanimate objects,
both sociologist and subject matters are human with consciousness. They tend to lie, manipulate
or distort data. This can be well illustrated in Elton Mayo's Hawthorne experiment
demonstrating the researcher's effect where the workers were conscious that an experiment was
taking place causing them to stop behaving naturally. As such, it appears that even though
scientific methodology like experiment is conducted in the study of social world, the data
collected might not be objective and valid. Therefore, phenomenologist sees scientific
methodology as inappropriate to sociology.

Even so, positivists would argue that social facts are like facts in natural science which can
be objectively observed and measured. By using statistical data, positivists believe it is possible
to classify the social world in an objective way. This is because they argue that statistical
analysis can reveal correlations, causation and ultimately laws of human behavior just like laws
of nature such as Newton's third Law of Motion. For example, the study of suicide conducted
by Emile Durkheim. By analyzing suicide statistics, Durkheim found causal and correlation
relationship between external social forces with suicide, as in fact the law governing suicide rate.
His studies show that suicide rate rises during economic booms or slumps as they brought the
uncertainty of anomie which led Durkheim to conclude that the act of suicide is the result of
human's reaction towards external stimuli. Therefore, positivists argue that since social facts are
like scientific facts which can be objectively observed and measured, scientific methodology can
and should be appropriate to sociology.

On the other hand, phenomenologist would reject the view and argue that statistical
facts are mere categorization based on stereotypes and taken-for-granted assumptions. For
example, phenomenologist sees Durkheim as making assumptions by categorizing statistics into
different type of suicides. They do not believe it is possible to objectively measure and classify
the facts of the world. To phenomenologist, human beings make sense of the world by imposing
meanings and classifications upon it, in the sense that interpretations of facts are dependent on
subjective judgment. For instance, a fact to a person does not necessarily be a fact to
another. Hence, phenomenologists argue that there is no objective reality beyond these
subjective meanings.

Furthermore, Max Weber rejects the possibility of finding laws of human behavior as well as
the causal and correlation relationship of a behavior as he argues that individual possess different
meanings and motives to their actions. Weber identified various types of action that are
distinguished by the meanings attached, those being the affective, emotional, traditional and
rational action. These actions are attached with subjective meanings which cannot be measured
objectively. As such, Weber argues that instead of adopting scientific methodology,
understanding of human behaviors can be achieved through Verstehen. Therefore, Weber argues
that sociology should not adopt the methods of science.

However, feminist would argue that even if sociology adopts scientific methodology, the
date collected will still be unobjective. Feminist claimed that science is a male world where
women have always been exploited or excluded. For example, Hilary rose stated that it is male
science that seeks to control women's fertility through contraception and childbirth. As well as
Sandra Harding who argued that male central science claimed to have prone women as
biologically and socially inferior to men. Therefore, feminist argue that sociology is just as
unobjective even if it emulates the achievements and aspirations of natural science as it itself is
bias.

Though, Medawar argues that, in practice, scientist may be less objective as they claimed to be.
The method of scientific research may not follow logical pattern. For example, in Michael
Lynch's laboratory research on rat's brain functioning, he found that scientist collect and
adjusts data to confirm theories rather than seeking to test their ideas of objectivity.

Other than that, Thomas Kuhn argued that sociology cannot and should not be a science as it is
pre-paradigmatic. Paradigm is a complete theory and framework within which scientists operate.
Kuhn argues that although there are many paradigms or perspective in sociology such as
positivism, phenomenologist and realism, there is a lack of consensus within a particular
perspective. For example, feminism is divided into radical and liberal feminism. As such, it
appears that a single paradigm, a complete theory and framework within which sociologist
operate has not yet been mutually accepted. Therefore, Kuhn argues that sociology cannot be a
science as it is pre-scientific.

Nonetheless, despite arguments of positivists, it seems inappropriate for sociological studies to

confine itself to study the observable, to ignore the subjective, to try to falsify theories or to

make precise predictions. Realist stressed that there are similarities between social and
natural science. Russell Keat and John Urry argue that science does not confine itself to study
the observable phenomena. For example, natural science deals with unobservable like sub-
atomic particles just like sociology deals with unobservable human consciousness.

In addition, Realist, Andrew Sayer suggests that since sociology deals more with open systems
whereas science deals with closed system as objects of study such as laboratory experiment,
hence, it is not justified to expect the same level of accuracy in sociology as in science. In fact,
natural science cannot make prediction within precision too and sometimes, the cause of
phenomena is only known from their effects and not solely based on observation. For example,
meteorologist cannot predict the weather with anything like absolute precision. Similarly to
science, sociology cannot be expected to be able to predict what divorce rate will be in five years
time.

Besides, Auguste Comte's view that sociology should be a science. He believes that scientific
knowledge about society could be accumulated and uses to improve human existence so that
society could be run rationally without religion or superstition getting in the way of progress.
Moreover, through scientific methodology, sociological knowledge obtained can be more
credible as it is empirically, rigorously, and systematically tested. Hence, Comte argues that
sociology should be a science.

As a matter of fact, Karl Popper sees it as highly desirable that sociological research method
can be based on methods of natural science. However, he argued that science must adopt the
deductive method where facts are only admitted into a theory through the process of falsification.
Science must abandon the inductive method of attempting to make theories fit facts. For
example, although 999 white swans may have been observed floating past a point on river, it is
illogical to assume the next swan will also be white. Therefore, popper suggests that science
itself can strive to be a more rigorous science.
Withal, whether or not sociology can or should be a science depends on how science is defined.
If science is narrowly defined as in the case of Popper, it is very difficult for sociology to meet
the expectation and standard demanded. However, if it is much more broadly defined as Realist,
then sociology can be a science.

Mohsin Ehsan Muhaar(M.A Eng. in linguistics,LL.B)Cell:03236437546