Is Sociology a Science

Is Sociology a science? This paper will aim to explore the question ‘Is Sociology a science? ’ We will explore the definitions of Science and Sociology and then go onto examine various perspectives and theories surrounding the subject heading. Sociologists such as Durkheim, Comte and Weber will be examined. This paper is intended as an overview of two different schools of thought, those of positivist and anti-positivist approaches I will outline the main principals for each Sociologist covered. I will then give my personal views on the question, and attempt to answer it within my conclusion. Firstly, in order to examine the essay title it must be laid out exactly what we mean by ‘Science’ and ‘Sociology’ Science definition. Science is, according to the Oxford dictionary 2002 â€Å"The systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiments†. Sociology definition. Sociology on the other hand is described as, according to the Hutchins encyclopaedia , â€Å"the systematic study of the origin of human society, in particular of social order and social change, social conflict and social problems. It studies institutions such as the family, law and the church, as well as concepts such as the norm, role, and culture. Sociology attempts to study people in their social environment according to underlying moral, philosophical and political codes of behaviour. † There are various ‘schools of thought’ when it comes to answering the question we are debating. This paper will take a brief look at approaches such as positivist and anti-positivist approaches. It is often debated that thee are two separate schools of thought when discussing Sociology. There is the first notion that Sociology is based on fact and figures using quantitive data and analysis. The second suggestion is that Sociology is based on qualitative data and is surrounded by the need to understand why’s, where’s and how’s that make up society. It is only right to start with the views of Emile Durkheim, who is seen as some, the father of sociology and one of the greatest positivists of all time. The term ‘positivist’ simply relates to a person/group of sociologists whom believe that Sociology to be a science ie quantative data analysis He expressed the need for quantitive data and in depth analysis in order to gain a true insight. He appreciated the fact that data and results were an accurate way of analysing and assessing the world and he applied these principals to the examination of society. In his text ‘The Rules of Sociological Methods’ (first published in 1895) Durkheim set out how he believed logic and methodology was the key to the successful study of ‘sociology’. Emile Durkheim carried out what could be described as a famous study where he studied the suicide rates of European countries. This process weighted heavily on analysis of data and actual facts, just as science is based on facts. Durkheim’s argument was that any theory should be backed up with evidence. This evidence could only be found by the gathering and analysis of data. He believed that the correct route was to gather the data and develop theories that supported that evidence. Positivists view things â€Å"in the same state of mind as the physicist, chemist or physiologist when he probes into a still unexplored region of the scientific domain† (Durkheim 1964: xiv). Durkheim is what we would call a ‘Positivist’. Positivists believe that there are many similarities to the research methods embraced by scientists. When we consider this fact is it very easy to state that a posivitist will only study when its subjects and analysis can be quantified ie they are measurable, and can be observed and reported on. Auguste Comte, whom is arguably one of the first Sociologists, sought an empirical way of thinking towards sociological issues . Comte states that sociology should only be concerned with matters where you can get results based on data collation and facts- not based on assumption. Comte believed it was possible to have a good handle on the prediction of further trends and patterns within society. Empirical evidence is the key in positivism. Comte argued that positivism goes through three stages, † the law of the three stages†. It ‘claims that human efforts to understand the human world have passed through theological, metaphysical and positive stages. ‘ (Giddens, 2006, page 11) Now we will go on to examine the ‘other sides of the coin’ and look at the subjectivists’ and realists sociologists’ theories regarding sociology as a science. Various writers could be seen to be labelled anti-positivist, or believers that sociology is not a science. Such sociologists believe that the researcher should concern themselves with human cultural norms, values and processes that are viewed from a subjective perspective. Weber (1864-1920) defined sociology as ‘a science which attempts the interpretive understanding of social action in order to thereby arrive at a casual explanation of its course and effects’ (1964 p88). Weber was one of the founders of the â€Å"Verstehen† method, along with Simmel. Verstehen simply means â€Å"understanding† or †interpretation†. This method involves an outsider attempting to relate to a person or persons from a specific group of people from their point of view. The realists approach to Sociology generally consist of accepting that there are differences between science and sociology – but it should be mentioned that this approach does allow for a social science. Andrew Sayer (1992) expressed differences between ‘open and closed systems as arenas of study’ (Sociology in focus 638)A good example of this ‘closed system’ would be a science lab where conditions can be heavily controlled, this gives way to fixed conditions that can be maintained or fluctuated by the lab. It has to be noted that a large amount of scientific research takes place outside of a controlled environment and this would be classed as an ‘open system’ Sayer argues that the behaviour and interaction of human beings takes place in open arenas and therefore the results cannot be predicted with any accuracy attached to it. But realists do not rule out completely the fact that sociology is indeed a science. Realists can be perceived to argue that the study named sociology could be based on the same principals as ‘science’ in the fact that both are concerned with exploring and evaluating an end roduct. Ray Pawson described the notion that there are two separate types of sociology as the ‘methodological myth’. He argues that two sociologies do not exist and that sociology is made up from a wide range of opinions Conclusion It has been shown within the context of this paper that Sociology can be viewed from both perspectives ie. As a science and t he opposing view that it cannot be classed as a science. From a personal perspective I believe that Sociology is indeed a science, if carried out in its ‘true sense’. In order for sociologists to be taken seriously in the world we must quantify what we are saying. This must be done with the assistance of data and observation, then opinions must be formed based on this data and facts we have collated. It is simply not good enough to provide readers with ideas of what may be true, as this is surely just opinion, rather than fact! If sociology was solely about opinions rather than showing empirical evidence to back up ones claims then surely each and every individual on the planet could rightly call themselves sociologists.. Bibliography Bilton, T, Bonnett, K et al (1996) Introductory Sociology 3rd Edition. Mc Millan Press: London http://sociology. org. uk/atssp7. htm. Accessed 14/2/2010 Cotgrove, S (1967) The Science of Society: An Introduction to Sociology, Allen & Unwin: London Hutchins encyclopaedia Keat & Urry (1975) Social Theory as Science, Routledge: London Oxford Dictionary ( 2002) Taylor et all (2000) Sociology in focus Causeway press:London www. jstor. org/stable/4026005 accessed 1/2/10 http://www. emile-durkheim. com/ accessed 18/2/10 Is Sociology a Science Is Sociology a science? This paper will aim to explore the question ‘Is Sociology a science? ’ We will explore the definitions of Science and Sociology and then go onto examine various perspectives and theories surrounding the subject heading. Sociologists such as Durkheim, Comte and Weber will be examined. This paper is intended as an overview of two different schools of thought, those of positivist and anti-positivist approaches I will outline the main principals for each Sociologist covered. I will then give my personal views on the question, and attempt to answer it within my conclusion. Firstly, in order to examine the essay title it must be laid out exactly what we mean by ‘Science’ and ‘Sociology’ Science definition. Science is, according to the Oxford dictionary 2002 â€Å"The systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiments†. Sociology definition. Sociology on the other hand is described as, according to the Hutchins encyclopaedia , â€Å"the systematic study of the origin of human society, in particular of social order and social change, social conflict and social problems. It studies institutions such as the family, law and the church, as well as concepts such as the norm, role, and culture. Sociology attempts to study people in their social environment according to underlying moral, philosophical and political codes of behaviour. † There are various ‘schools of thought’ when it comes to answering the question we are debating. This paper will take a brief look at approaches such as positivist and anti-positivist approaches. It is often debated that thee are two separate schools of thought when discussing Sociology. There is the first notion that Sociology is based on fact and figures using quantitive data and analysis. The second suggestion is that Sociology is based on qualitative data and is surrounded by the need to understand why’s, where’s and how’s that make up society. It is only right to start with the views of Emile Durkheim, who is seen as some, the father of sociology and one of the greatest positivists of all time. The term ‘positivist’ simply relates to a person/group of sociologists whom believe that Sociology to be a science ie quantative data analysis He expressed the need for quantitive data and in depth analysis in order to gain a true insight. He appreciated the fact that data and results were an accurate way of analysing and assessing the world and he applied these principals to the examination of society. In his text ‘The Rules of Sociological Methods’ (first published in 1895) Durkheim set out how he believed logic and methodology was the key to the successful study of ‘sociology’. Emile Durkheim carried out what could be described as a famous study where he studied the suicide rates of European countries. This process weighted heavily on analysis of data and actual facts, just as science is based on facts. Durkheim’s argument was that any theory should be backed up with evidence. This evidence could only be found by the gathering and analysis of data. He believed that the correct route was to gather the data and develop theories that supported that evidence. Positivists view things â€Å"in the same state of mind as the physicist, chemist or physiologist when he probes into a still unexplored region of the scientific domain† (Durkheim 1964: xiv). Durkheim is what we would call a ‘Positivist’. Positivists believe that there are many similarities to the research methods embraced by scientists. When we consider this fact is it very easy to state that a posivitist will only study when its subjects and analysis can be quantified ie they are measurable, and can be observed and reported on. Auguste Comte, whom is arguably one of the first Sociologists, sought an empirical way of thinking towards sociological issues . Comte states that sociology should only be concerned with matters where you can get results based on data collation and facts- not based on assumption. Comte believed it was possible to have a good handle on the prediction of further trends and patterns within society. Empirical evidence is the key in positivism. Comte argued that positivism goes through three stages, † the law of the three stages†. It ‘claims that human efforts to understand the human world have passed through theological, metaphysical and positive stages. ‘ (Giddens, 2006, page 11) Now we will go on to examine the ‘other sides of the coin’ and look at the subjectivists’ and realists sociologists’ theories regarding sociology as a science. Various writers could be seen to be labelled anti-positivist, or believers that sociology is not a science. Such sociologists believe that the researcher should concern themselves with human cultural norms, values and processes that are viewed from a subjective perspective. Weber (1864-1920) defined sociology as ‘a science which attempts the interpretive understanding of social action in order to thereby arrive at a casual explanation of its course and effects’ (1964 p88). Weber was one of the founders of the â€Å"Verstehen† method, along with Simmel. Verstehen simply means â€Å"understanding† or †interpretation†. This method involves an outsider attempting to relate to a person or persons from a specific group of people from their point of view. The realists approach to Sociology generally consist of accepting that there are differences between science and sociology – but it should be mentioned that this approach does allow for a social science. Andrew Sayer (1992) expressed differences between ‘open and closed systems as arenas of study’ (Sociology in focus 638)A good example of this ‘closed system’ would be a science lab where conditions can be heavily controlled, this gives way to fixed conditions that can be maintained or fluctuated by the lab. It has to be noted that a large amount of scientific research takes place outside of a controlled environment and this would be classed as an ‘open system’ Sayer argues that the behaviour and interaction of human beings takes place in open arenas and therefore the results cannot be predicted with any accuracy attached to it. But realists do not rule out completely the fact that sociology is indeed a science. Realists can be perceived to argue that the study named sociology could be based on the same principals as ‘science’ in the fact that both are concerned with exploring and evaluating an end roduct. Ray Pawson described the notion that there are two separate types of sociology as the ‘methodological myth’. He argues that two sociologies do not exist and that sociology is made up from a wide range of opinions Conclusion It has been shown within the context of this paper that Sociology can be viewed from both perspectives ie. As a science and t he opposing view that it cannot be classed as a science. From a personal perspective I believe that Sociology is indeed a science, if carried out in its ‘true sense’. In order for sociologists to be taken seriously in the world we must quantify what we are saying. This must be done with the assistance of data and observation, then opinions must be formed based on this data and facts we have collated. It is simply not good enough to provide readers with ideas of what may be true, as this is surely just opinion, rather than fact! If sociology was solely about opinions rather than showing empirical evidence to back up ones claims then surely each and every individual on the planet could rightly call themselves sociologists.. Bibliography Bilton, T, Bonnett, K et al (1996) Introductory Sociology 3rd Edition. Mc Millan Press: London http://sociology. org. uk/atssp7. htm. Accessed 14/2/2010 Cotgrove, S (1967) The Science of Society: An Introduction to Sociology, Allen & Unwin: London Hutchins encyclopaedia Keat & Urry (1975) Social Theory as Science, Routledge: London Oxford Dictionary ( 2002) Taylor et all (2000) Sociology in focus Causeway press:London www. jstor. org/stable/4026005 accessed 1/2/10 http://www. emile-durkheim. com/ accessed 18/2/10