The Science of Social Science: Theoretical and Philosophical Underpinnings - Essay Example

What is social science? Social science is typically defined as an academic discipline that is concerned with society and the relationships among individuals within that society. It can encompass many disciplines, which include anthropology and economics, archaeology, history, law, and linguistics. The terminology has also been used to describe the science of society as established in the 19 century, or "sociology" which is derived from the Latin language "socius" which means “companion," and the Greek "logos" meaning "knowledge" or "study." Many of the pioneer architects of modern social science include Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, and Max Weber (Mayer, 1941). There are many different types of social scientists, one of which includes the positivist social scientists, who use methods similar to those of natural science, for the means of understanding society and tend to practice a stricter discipline in study. Those who practice interpretivist social science, by contrast, may use symbolic interpretation or social critique, as opposed to their trying to construct empirically falsifiable theories. The social science model of inquiry process is conducted in a number of stages that are found to be similar to those used in natural sciences, these are the identification of a problem or the formulation of a research question, the development of a relevant hypothesis, the gathering of data, the analysis of the collected data and the drawing of conclusions based on this data. Following the age of enlightenment, in which many revolutions in philosophy and science occurred around the year 1650, scientists began to understand how little they truly knew about the natural world and humanitys place within it. Great philosophers such as Rousseau and Diderot began laying down the groundwork for modern social science practice in the 18th century, which was codified by works such as those put forth by Auguste Comte and Charles Fourier. It was Comte who first coined the phrase "science sociale" to describe the study and practice of the field taking root. It is therefore noteworthy to investigate the theories of the philosophers in exploring the science in social science. The Science in Social Science. Social scientists often make use of an eclectic or multiple methodologies, such as the combining of quantitative and qualitative techniques, although the term social research also can encompass a wide umbrella of techniques in and of itself (Kuper and Kuper, 1996). Parsons (1938) affirms that no science develops in a vacuum either socially or intellectually. The scientific content of any given intellectual tradition can be noted as always being closely interwoven with the elements of a different character. In this regard, although the scientific method has developed from and utilizes the use of a practical and experimental approach, theory is noted to still be required in this method as it equips it with a number of benefits. The first of these benefits is that in the vast welter of miscellaneous facts that are present in social science research, theory often provides researchers with selective criteria as to the aspects that can safely be neglected in the research. Parsons (1938) also points out that another benefit of theory as applied to social science research is that it provides a solid basis that can be used not only for the organization and selection of known facts, but also it does this in a manner that helps to reveal the gaps that are present in our existing knowledge and their overall importance. Although social science does have a number of competing theories, the application of these theories to social science can be identified as constituting a critically important guide that helps to point out the direction as to fruitful scientific research. Through the use of numerous logical implications of different analytical systems for each other, theory in social science research is noted to provide a potent source of cross fertilization of different related fields of utmost importance. This often leads to very important developments within a scientific field that would not have taken place if the field had remained in a stage whereby it was theoretically isolated. Other than theory, philosophy is also noted to play a central role in social science research. This is because the philosophical study of social research has been credited with being an important dimension of social science that has the advantage of being able to critically analyze the various problems seen to be inherent in social science description and its relationship (Kincaid and Kincaid, 1996). The role of philosophy in social science research is that philosophy helps to adequately describe the social phenomena within natural science. It is therefore noteworthy to explore this assertion, in an attempt to investigate the science in social science. This exploration will be done through the writings of philosophers of both the social sciences and natural science. The first philosophy to explore is that of Aguste Comte who the proponent of the positivist approach is. According to Heywood (2000), positivism is the doctrine that all forms of philosophical enquiry and social sciences should be structured in a manner that will see them strictly adhere to the methods of natural sciences. The philosophy states that only authentic knowledge is knowledge that is based on actual sense of experience in addition to holding monopoly of knowledge in science. For positivism, social science is regarded as an attempt to try and gain explanatory and predicate knowledge of the external world and to achieve this objective, the approach argues that researchers must construct theories that are seen to consist of highly generalized statements that express the regular relationships (Bishop, 2007, Alexandra, 2012). It was also Comte who categorized the various social disciplines in order of "strength of scientific endeavour," with the physical sciences such as biology at the bottom of the hierarchy, and sociology at the top. He argued that sociology will be the last and greatest of sciences when it comes to social phenomenon, with, however, a limitation to empirical and quantitative analyses of social phenomena. This acknowledgement points to social phenomena being complex. The study of human social behaviour as a science, Comte would go on to argue, would allow humanity to make better, more moral decisions about how we structure our society, which would, in turn, better aid governments (Horgan, 2013). In later development, and the subsequent move from positivism to post-positivism that occurred as the twentieth century progressed, recognized the extreme limitations of only studying tangible facts, objective reality, and led to a better understanding of human behaviour as a determinant of societally constructed lives that existed through being based in values and beliefs as they exist at a given point in time. In this sense, and within our current understanding, it can be argued that the upholding of hard science as being the only true path to knowledge becomes absurd and, fundamentally, is an opinion that persists because it came first. Thus, when the work of positivists and those who hold that only scientific enquiry can be true is examined, one sees a post-positivist world of innumerable truths, a dynamic and changing world created by the human mind and one that is based in human behaviour and the extent of human knowledge. Therefore, the rather disdainful work of writers such as Ayer (1946), who held that anything which was not tangible and could be physically studied was merely an ‘emotional response, while objectively accurate, failed to grasp the fact that ‘emotional responses, or human behaviour, is the kernel of existence, the very core of knowledge. Among others who contributed to the arguments on the science of studying social phenomenon, Comte was one of the first that applied natural science to this study exclusively, with the belief that human behaviour must obey strict laws (Rosenberg, 2012, Delanty and Strydom, 2003, Bishop, 2007). With laws, he claims, engineering the human society is possible. Mills also shares this same view as to social science being grounded in the laws of nature of the individual (Hollis, 2011). Comte therefore, argues that the social sciences are not different in their approach from natural science, logic and mathematics if they were to truly be scientific (Bishop, 2007). Thus, Comte’s views, which makes links via mechanical deductive interpretations of contemporary science, bridges the gap between human actions and social interactions. Comte argued that all entities, theories or concepts that are incapable of being verified empirically must of necessity be pruged from scientific explanation. According to Comte, as opposed to helping us understand what are usually noumenal realms that lie just beyond our senses and as such are unknowable, the true aim of all scientific explanation is prediction. He believed that a keen appreciation of the past coupled with an adequate ability to build up on it towards the future was essentially key in the overall transitioning from metaphysical to the theological phases. Comte emphasized on the uncovering causal laws of behaviour in order that predictions or explanations could be made on social events and the need for justifications of empirical approach of those laws (Bishop, 2007). Comte viewed causal laws, interior observations and formal proofs as being prescientific holdovers that had to be transcend before it could be possible for positivism to become fully established. Comte and his disciples were of the belief that only the succession orders should be sought and they referred to this as Laws of Phenomena, of note is that they objected to the use of the word cause. However Trusted (2003), observes that Mills did not agree to this and he worked to distinguish the mere empirical laws and the laws of association of properties from the considerably more fundamental laws of succession that he referred to as causal laws. Mills was of the view that in making his observations, Comte had essentially made no distinction between the empirical laws that inherently carried no single hint of necessity and the basic laws of nature within which the range of our experience are seen as being necessarily true. According to White (2000), Mills openly rejected the distinction that was often made between causes and mere conditions and he argued that there was actually no adequate justification that could be used as a basis for the singling out of one among the antecedents as the cause. He was of the strong belief that the cause is essentially the whole set of antecedents of the actual effected that happened to determine it, and without which, it would not have been possible for the cause to occur. Comte also advocated for the unity of the scientific method by his arguing that both social and natural sciences should adopt a positivist approach. Although this approach was questioned by Dilthey as an unbridgeable gap between social and natural science, yet Dilthey thought social science should aim for the interpretation of the inner life and people’s experience that were equal or superior to the natural sciences ( Bishop, 2007). Other evidence of the science in social science was propounded by Emile Durkheim (1858-1917). Durkheim laid emphasis on the collection of empirical data. Empiricism is the doctrine that is of the belief that sense experience is the only basis of knowledge and as a result of this, all theories and hypotheses should be tested by a process of experience and observation. In the philosophy of social science research, empiricism is a theoretical knowledge that is designed to emphasize on scientific knowledge aspects that are closely related to evidence. In his view, the empirical data collected should support theoretical speculations, a process, he argues, makes sociology distinct from psychology and other social sciences. He argued that social events have their explanations in a lawful connection to some social fact. It is on this basis that social science should aim at describing casual laws to discover links between social facts and human behaviour. Durkheim therefore supports Comte’s positivism in the social science methodology, which is scientific in nature. ( Delanty and Piet Strydom, 2003 ). While the scientific method is necessary in the development of scientific knowledge, it is also found to be useful in everyday problem-solving processes. The method is found to work best in situations whereby it is possible for the researcher to isolate phenomenon of interest through the accounting or elimination of extraneous factors. It is also best in situations whereby one can be able to repeatedly test the system being studied after making a series of limited, controlled changes to it. In situation where it becomes impossible for one to either isolate the phenomena or repeat the measurement over and over again, the use of the scientific method is found to not be feasible and this necessitates that the researcher uses other methods. However, Kuhn has a differing view. Kuhn, theorized that social sciences are a special kind of science as they cannot be able to set aside fundamental philosophical concerns as easily as the physical sciences are able to. He also noted that there are indeed some social elements in all scientific research and its associated paradigm shifts. Kuhn claims that a particular scientific discipline starts with a pre-paradigmatic state. This state is described as where there is little or no agreement about the subject matter, evidence or what the key problems are. He therefore regards the social science to be where no reigning paradigms exit (Rosenberg, 2012). Kuhn argues that social sciences are defined by multiple paradigms that are often mutually contradictory and this is the reason as to why some social sciences are in the pre- paradigmatic state of normal science (Bishop, 2007). Hence social scientists cannot revert back to a previously agreed-upon solution to a problem in a similar manner to that which physical scientists are able to; the controversies of social scientists are precisely about what the exemplary ought to be (Nickels, 2003). The social sciences can be noted to be grounded on competing views of attempting to try and establish exactly what the world is and what it should be. It is not possible to define by consensus certain basic concepts such as “identity”, “state” or “institution”. It can subsequently be argued that as a result of this attribute, competing social science paradigms such as those of Hayekian, Marxist and Keynesian economists will continue to coexist. However, according to Popper, there are three dominant concepts that characterize the social sciences; these are the scientific, the objective and the empirical concepts. Cibangu (2012) argues that Popper understood the social sciences as sciences in the full sense of the word and this position is seen to refute the postulations by philosophers such as Kuhn who were of the notion that social sciences represent a weak form of science. According to Popper, similarly to the natural sciences, the method of social science can be seen to consist of attempts to a number of tentative solutions to those problems from which investigations are seen to start. Solutions are proposed and then comprehensively criticized. Popper further points out that if a solution is found to not be open to objective criticism, this solution is excluded as unscientific (Popper, 1996). He thus rejected the inductive logic in preference to theory of deductive method of empirical testing of hypothesis. This theory uncovers casual mechanisms and must involve laws ( Rosenberg, 2012). In his scientific methodical injunction, he explains that hypothesis should be made to go through several tests. The more the test withstands the better the corroboration. Also, he claims that a theory in the role of growth of knowledge must consist of a daring hypothesis whose principle are highly falsifiable. ( Popper 1996, Delanty and Strydom ,2003) According to Max Weber, natural science method could be used in social sciences. He specifically refers to the uncovering of causes of event in the social realm. He propounds that in order to discern the meaning and causes of events, empirical method should be employed. This is so because people’s experiences influence their actions and what they see themselves doing. As Weber views strongly states, sociology, one of the social sciences, is a comprehensive science that deals with social action. This is because it seeks to promote the interpretative understanding of social action. This social action therefore, can explain its cause and consequences. ( Hollis. 2011, Rosenberg, 2012, Delanty and Strydom, 2003). Max Weber championed the use of methodical data collection, in which certain social phenomenon were identified and understood in a context. This has important implications with regard to the approach and the seeking of epistemological and ontological supported truths. This is because it involves the point at which knowledge exists – should it be within a seeking process that accepts the importance of a setting or situation, in which case an interpretative paradigm becomes the relevant arena (thus the research path and the propositions emerge from the research), or should the starting point be one where concepts that have already been established are applied to the phenomena being studied. Conclusion In conclusion, the scientific method can be noted to be intricately associated with science and it is an advanced process of human inquiry that can be noted to pervade the modern era on a number of levels. Although the method might appear to be logical and simple in description based on the series of straight forward stages involved in using it, it can be argued that there is perhaps no more complex question than that of knowing just how we come to know things. The method is clearly distinguished form other forms of explanation based on its requiring the use of systematic investigation. The science of social science is noted to have both theoretical and philosophical underpinnings. Whereas the role of its theoretical underpinnings is that they provide a number of benefits such as a basis for the coherent organization of factual material without which conducting a study would be found to be unintelligible. As applied to social science, the philosophical approach can be deemed as having two aims, the first of these is to seek to produce what is a rational reconstruction of social science by helping to describe the philosophical assumptions that are noted to underpin the practice of social inquiry and the second aim of the philosophical approach is to critique the social sciences with the sole objective of helping to enhance their overall ability to explain the social world or help in greatly improving our understanding of it. Recognizing that a myriad of cultural and personal beliefs often tend to influence or interpretation and perception of natural phenomena, the use the scientific method in social science research is quite appropriate in research as it successfully minimizes the influence of the experimenter’s prejudice and bias during the testing of a theory or hypothesis. Thus arguably, social science is indeed science. Bibliography Andersen, M. L., & Taylor, H. F. 2008. Sociology: Understanding a diverse society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Berg, K. E., & Latin, R. W. 2008. Essentials of research methods in health, physical education, exercise science, and recreation. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Bird, A., and Ladyman, J. (Eds.). 2013. Arguing about science. Routledge. Bishop, Robert.C. 2007. The philosophy of the social sciences. New York: Continuum international publishing group. Cibangu, K. S. 2012. "Karl Popper and the social sciences." Social Sciences and Humanities: Applications and Theories 1 (2012) Creswell, J. W. 2013. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage. Delanty, Gerard., and Strydom, Piet. (Eds). 2003. Philosophies of social sciences. Maidenhead: Open University Press Faigman, D. (1995). The evidentiary status of social science under Daubert: Is it" scientific,"" technical," or" other" knowledge?. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1(4), p.960. Feibleman, J. K. 1972. Scientific Method: The Hypothetico-Experimental Laboratory Procedure of the Physical Sciences. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. Gauch, H. G. 2003. Scientific method in practice. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Gower, B. 1997. Scientific method: An historical and philosophical introduction. Psychology Press. Heywood, A. 2000. Key concepts in politics. Macmillan. Hollis, Martin. 2011. The Philosophy of social science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Hughes, J. A., & Sharrock, W. W. 1980. The philosophy of social research. London: Longman. Jarvie, I., & Zamora-Bonilla, J. 2011. The SAGE Handbook of the Philosophy of Social Sciences. London: SAGE Publications. Keyes, G. (2010). Teaching the Scientific Method in the Social Sciences. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 10(2), pp.18-28. Kincaid, H., & Kincaid. 1996. Philosophical foundations of the social sciences: Analyzing controversies in social research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kynell-Hunt, T., & Moran, M. G. 1999. Three keys to the past: The history of technical communication. Stamford, Conn: Ablex Pub. Corp. Molina, M. J. T. 2007. The Global Scientific Method. Molwick. Moulton, G. E. 2013. CliffsNotes Praxis II middle school science (0439). Boston, Mass: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Nickles, T. 2003. Thomas Kuhn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Padmanabhan, S. 2014. Handbook of pharmacogenomics and stratified medicine. London: Academic Press. Parsons, T. 1938. The role of theory in social research. American Sociological Review, 3(1), 13-20. Popper, R.K. 1996. In Search of a Better World: Lectures and Essays from Thirty Years. Routledge, New York. Rosenberg, Alexander. 2012. Philosophy of social science. Boulder: Westview Press Skinner, B. (1956). A case history in scientific method. American Psychologist, 11(5), p.221. Trusted, J. 2003. Physics and metaphysics: theories of space and time. Routledge. Turvey, B. E. 2011. Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis. Burlington: Elsevier Science. Uddin, M. N., and Hamiduzzaman, M. 2009. The philosophy of science in social research. Journal of International Social Research, 2(6), 654-64. Zumdahl, S., & DeCoste, D. J. 2014. Introductory chemistry: A foundation. Cengage Learning. White, P. A. 2000. Causal attribution and Mills methods of experimental inquiry: past, present and prospect. British journal of social psychology, 39(3), 429-447. Read More