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 dont 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)

Comtes 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 Darwins Origin of Species appeared in 1859, Spencer

welcomed it warmly.

Darwin, in his turn expressed his esteem of Spencers 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.

 Kuhns Model of Scientific Progress

Paradigm I:
Normal
Science

Paradigm II:
Revolution Anomalies
Normal
Science

Crisis
 The Microscopic - Macroscopic Continuum

World
Interaction Organizations Systems

Microscopic Macroscopic

Individual Groups Societies

thought
and
action
 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, Social construction

interaction, of reality, norms,
bureaucratic values, and so
structures, law, forth.
and so forth.
 Major Levels of Social Analysis
MACROSCOPIC

I. Macro-objective II. Macro-subjective

Examples: society, law, Examples: culture,

bureaucracy, architecture, norms, and values.
technology, and language.

OBJECTIVE SUBJECTIVE

III. Micro-objective IV. Micro-subjective

Examples: patterns of Examples: the various

behaviour, action, facets of the social
and interaction. construction of reality.

MICROSCOPIC
 Levels of Social Analysis and
the Major Sociological Paradigms

LEVELS OF SOCIAL REALITY SOCIOLOGICAL PARADIGMS

Macro - Subjective Social Facts

Macro - Objective

Micro - Subjective Social Definition

Micro - Objective
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.