Positivism and Positive Philosophy - Research Paper Example

? The Principles of Positivism: Do they still guide the design of social survey research Background Auguste Compte’s treatise ‘The in PositivePhilosophy’ first introduced the terms ‘positivism’ and ‘positive philosophy’ that are considered symbols of a recognised mode of thought, and which, according to Mill, are better known through the enemies of this mode of thinking, rather than due to its adherents (1882). Compte himself regarded Francis Bacon, Descartes and Galileo as antecedents of his concept of human knowledge; he defined his version of ‘positive philosophy’ stating that the only existing knowledge is the one of phenomena, and that this knowledge is not absolute but relative, hence, what is known, as Mill describes it later, is neither the essence nor the real mode of production of any fact, but only its relations to other facts, which relations are constant – always the same in the same circumstances (1882). According to that concept, the constant sequences that unite the phenomena as antecedent and consequent are their laws and all foresight of phenomena depend on knowledge of their sequences, and not upon any notion formed in respect of their origin or nature (Mill, 1882). The doctrine of ‘Positivism’ had been later elaborated in a subsequent work of Auguste Compte, A General View of Positivism, which is credited with defining the empirical goals of sociology (Compte, 1848; Guneriussen, 1996). Compte’s ideas had profoundly inspired the oeuvre of Emile Durkheim, whose works on the methodology of sociology, like The Rules of Sociological Method (1895), are considered a significant example of positivist social science (Guneriussen, 1996). Another descendant of Compte’s mode of thought appears the ‘logical positivism’, or neopositivism, propagated by a group of “scientifically trained philosophers and philosophically interested scientists” known as ‘the Vienna Circle’, whose most prominent protagonists were the mathematician Hans Hahn, the physicist Philipp Frank, and the social scientist Otto Neurath; following the World War I the circle included Moritz Schlick, the philosopher Viktor Kraft, as well as the mathematicians Theodor Radacovic and Gustav Bergmann, and, since 1926, the philosopher and logician Rudolf Carnap (Uebel, 2011). The Principles of Positivism ‘Positivism’ is seen by Auguste Compte as consisted of two inseparable components - “a Philosophy and a Polity”, the first of which being the basis, and second - the end of “one comprehensive system” (1848, p.1). The original fundamental principles of this doctrine, as described by Compte, are as follows (1848, pp. 2- 38): the science of society (sociology) is considered the most important one, which provides the only means of bringing the various observations of phenomena into “one consistent whole”; the philosophy is aimed at presenting a systematic view of human life, including every social and individual aspect, including thoughts, feelings, and actions, which would be a basis of modifying the imperfections if represented naturally existing relations; all subjects necessarily pass through three successive stages – at the beginning is the theological one, which is characterised by spontaneous fictions; it’s followed by the metaphysical stage with prevalence of personified abstractions, and finally, the positive stage sets in, based “upon an exact view of the real facts”; this is considered a general law named ‘the law of Filiation’; the law of Classification deals with the order in which different conceptions pass through each of the aforementioned phases, being determined either by decreasing generality or increasing complexity of the phenomena; in human nature, hence in the Positive science, ‘Affection’ is the preponderant element – over both ‘Reason’ and ‘Activity’; the Heart preponderates over the Intellect (aka the Subjective principle); the proper function of Intellect is the service of Social sympathies the external order of the world, as revealed by science, is the objective basis of the system; ‘morality’ is considered both the link and the line of demarcation between philosophy and politics, which is the most important application of philosophy; human activity is thought to pass through three successive stages – offensive warfare, defensive warfare and industry, which in respective connection with the preponderance of the theological, metaphysical and positive spirit leads to a complete explanation of history; there is a clear distinction between the two classes of laws that exist in the order of nature – the abstract and concrete ones; In brief, according to Halfpenny (1982), there are four senses of the term ‘positivism’, which are thought to have originated in Auguste Compte’s concept – firstly, positivism is seen as a view where the increased knowledge is the main cause of both progress and social stability; secondly, it represents a notion that the true belief could be only based on scientific observations; thirdly, positivism is understood as the unity of sciences; and last but not least, positivism is perceived to be a secular religion of social reform. A particular advance over the theory of Auguste Compte is represented by Spencer’s theory of society; while Compte appears more focused on the subjective nature of the progress of human conceptions, Spencer is seen as more interested in objectivity, or the progress of the external world (Ritzer and Goodman, 2004). Having characterised himself as a positivist, Spencer defined sociology as the study of societal evolution whose ultimate goal is complete harmony and happiness (Ritzer and Goodman, 2004). After Spencer’s theory of evolutionary change, a fifth sense of the term ‘positivism’ has become apparent, namely the competition between differing individuals, who are seen above all as a source of moral law in a given society, leads to progress (Halfpenny, 1982). Compte’s concept was further developed by Durkheim, who, having wrote on methodological issues, asserted that sociology ought to study the society “from the outside”, as an object, rather than based on individual social actors’ subjective views, thus rejecting the role of their perceptions, understanding and motives in the search for chains of causality and function (Guneriussen, 1996). Considering the social facts to be things existing outside (objective existence), independently of individuals, hence forming an inert, stable order that consists of laws, functions and casual relations, Durkheim advocated exploring and discovering the structure and laws of social order by methods similar to the ones of the physicists that discover the laws of nature (Guneriussen, 1996). Emile Durkheim’s modes of explanation, and the so-called ‘casual explanations in particular, which sought regular casual relations between factors and events of a certain period, independent of individuals’ intentions and ideas, or in other words statistical relations between variables, provided another view and meaning of Positivism as being quantification of social data through statistics (Halfpenny, 1982; Guneriussen, 1996). Doctrines that originated amongst the Vienna Circle are thought to have added two more senses of the concept – the verification principle, or the Waisman’s thesis on Wittgenstein's view that the meaning of a proposition is its method of verification through empirical science, as well as the framework-relativity of analytic statements of Schlick and Carnap’s understanding of the syntactical and semantic unification of the sciences (Halfpenny, 1982; Uebel, 2011). Conclusion Having evolved from its original Comptean usage as scientific approach to uncovering the laws dealing with human and physical events, as well as attracting a lot of criticism, Positivism – although mainly understood in terms of methodology, or technical issues of the survey method – is considered nowadays a predominant approach to construction of social research, inasmuch as key principles and features of positivist concept of human knowledge are deeply embedded in the design ideology and practice of the research (Wacquant, 1993). Nevertheless, most contemporary scientists, including British sociologists par excellence, seemed to have been less than enthusiastic about the use of quantitative methods perhaps due to the stigma to being defined as ‘positivists’ (Bryman, 2010). References Compte, Auguste, 1848, A General View of Positivism. Translated from French by J.H. Bridges, 1908, London: George Routledge & Sons ltd [online] Available at [Accessed 10 November 2011] Bryman, Alan, 2010, Research Methods: Quantitative versus Qualitative Methods? In A. Giddens and Philip W. Sutton, eds. 2010. Sociology: Introductory Readings, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press [online] Available at [Accessed 13 November 2011] Guneriussen, Willy, 1996, Emile Durkheim. In H. Andersen and L. Bo Kaspersen, eds. 2000. Classical and Modern Social Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Inc. [online] Available at [Accessed 12 November 2011] Halfpenny, Peter, 1982, Positivism and Sociology: Explaining Social life. In T.B. Bottomore and M.J. Mulkay, eds. 1982. Controversies in Sociology, series: 13. London: George Allen & Unwin Mill, John Stuart, 1882, Auguste Compte and Positivism, London: George Routledge & Sons [online] Available at < http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=106395774> [Accessed 11 November 2011] Ritzer, George and Douglas J. Goodman, 2004, Classical Sociological Theory, 4th ed. NY: McGraw-Hill Uebel, Thomas, 2011, "Vienna Circle", In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta, ed. [online] Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2011/entries/vienna-circle/ [Accessed 10 November 2011] Wacquant, Loic J.D., 1993, Positivism. In W. Outhwaite, ed. 2003, 2006. The Blackwell Dictionary of Modern Social Thought, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Measuring People’s Attitudes – Obstacles and Difficulties Introduction Mills writes that In the Age of Fact, information – whether it is related to private orbits in which the ordinary men and women live, or reflects seemingly impersonal changes in the structure of world-wide societies – often dominates people’s attention as well as overwhelms their capacities to assimilate that information (2010). Hence, the role of scholars, scientists and researchers is seen to understand the larger scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life of a variety of individuals as well as to situate those individuals’ personal experience within their social and physical environment (Mills, 2010). On the other hand, people’s attitudes, as per usual in the case of democracy, are more or less decisive with regard to formulation and implementation of certain policy, and therefore to the society’s development as whole. Given the aforesaid, measuring public attitudes ought to render an account of all problems that would produce false consciousness about social, economic, or other controversial issues. Conceptual Problems with Definition Before looking at the specific difficulties accompanying a social survey research intended to measure people’s attitudes, one would need to pay attention to the confusion that might originate in the very concept of the term ‘attitude’. According to Hill, the definitional problem includes not only disagreement in respect of referent, for instance affect, behaviour, etc., but also a lack of agreement regarding the scope of the concept itself (1981). The latter significantly varies between authors, such as Gergen (1974), for example, who has defined the concept so broadly that it comprises the complete range of dispositional variables, whereas others, like Edwards (1957), delimited it much more narrowly, to the extent that the concept refers only to affective or evaluative orientations (Hill, 1981). Despite repeated critical analyses and pleas intended to address the issue, the confusion remains. Inasmuch as describing the concept of the term ‘attitude’ undoubtedly involves interpretation and the term itself includes individuals’ orientation towards the external environment expressed as thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and/or values, any attempt at measuring that highly subjective phenomenon inevitably faces the researcher with immediate problems. Methodological Disagreement The definitional confusion also appears accompanied by a hefty dose of methodological disagreement. It is not only the original sociological dilemma of using either quantitative or qualitative research methods, which is seen as a source of potential problems whether due to the prejudice of some researchers against the latter as “too subjective to provide the basis for a social science”, or because of others’ reluctance to accept the very principle of trying to measure meaningful human action, but even the very distinction between quantitative and qualitative research poses difficulties (Bryman, 2010). Although many sociologist have found the combination of both being worthy of notice and, as Hill points out (1981), increasingly sophisticated measurement methods have been developed, there is very little, if any, consensus on which of these methods, or techniques, are most appropriate for use in regard to a substantive research. On the other hand, when a particular strategy is employed, the correlations observed are only partially a function of that strategy, as implied by the insufficient evidence available (Hill, 1981). However, the idea of triangulation, as applied to the context of social research by some authors (Webb at al., 1966, as cited in Bryman, 2010, p.50), implies a possibility where the results of a research employing a method associated with a particular research strategy are cross-checked against those of using another method associated with different research strategy (Bryman, 2010). Specific Problems of Measuring Public Attitudes The most frequently faced problems in a research aimed at measuring people’s attitude are those concerning the degree of distortion of both subjects and researchers’ interpretation of the indicators’ meaning, and the construction of a hypothesis as well – or in other words, the problems of validity and reliability. Another problem is presented by the time and financial constraints when a researcher seeks to collect data by a survey within a large group, let alone the aforementioned technical problems of method and philosophical ones of methodology, The latter category is defined by Buckingham and Saunders as follows: problems of method are technical ones in regard to the proper use of research tools, whereas the problems of methodology are related to the possibility – whether it’s advisable or not – of using such tools in first place (2010). Practically speaking, certain difficulties could arise from leading questions, use of jargon and colloquialism, double-barrelled questions, double negatives, etc. Researchers are quite frequently faced with problems stemming from the fact that attitudes are highly unstable and vary over time, which is particularly true of people’s opinions; therefore the relative influence of the effects due to a certain group of responses would also vary, thus reducing the predictive ability of the research itself. Last but not least, here should be mentioned problems that originate amongst the respondents, such as the knowledge problem and social desirability bias, which, along with the researchers’ acquiescence to bias, or persuasive argument in favour of a particular point of view, could significantly distort, and thus doom any research to fail. Conclusion As Hill writes, attitudes, being narrowly defined as evaluations of objects, are more or less related to behaviour (1981). Therefore, according to this optimistic assumption, “although most of the concern with measurement has been focused on reliability and validity of attitude assessment, the measurement of behavioural criteria also is subject to error” (Hill, 1981, pp.352-353). References Bryman, Alan, 2010, Research Methods: Quantitative versus Qualitative Methods? In A. Giddens and Philip W. Sutton, eds. 2010. Sociology: Introductory Readings, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press [online] Available at [Accessed 13 November 2011] Buckingham, Alan and P. Saunders, 2010, What is a Social Survey? In A. Giddens and Philip W. Sutton, eds. 2010. Sociology: Introductory Readings, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press [online] Available at [Accessed 13 November 2011] Hill, Richard J., 1981, Attitudes and Behavior. In M. Rosenberg and Ralph H. Turner, eds. 1981. Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives, New York: Basic Books Mills, C. Wright, 2010, Private Troubles, Public Issues: The Promise. In A. Giddens and Philip W. Sutton, eds. 2010. Sociology: Introductory Readings, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press [online] Available at [Accessed 13 November 2011] Questionnaire Design Research topic: Global warming Research question: Are there differences in the way people perceive global warming, and if so, what are the motives behind these differences? Dependant variable: people’s attitude towards global warming Independent variables: educational level; field of occupation; age; use of Internet; watching TV; reading newspapers; membership in environmental groups; Intervening variables: spare time; Hypotheses: 1/ If the higher level of education implies better general information, including environmental awareness, then it may affect people’s views on global warming; 2/ if people working in the industry (energy generation, mining, etc.) sector regard global warming a less important issue to worry about, as against possible unemployment, then the occupational field may have an impact on people’s attitudes towards global warming; 3/ if younger people are more susceptible to environmental issues, then age may determine people’s perception of global warming; 4/ if the more frequent use of Internet, newspapers reading, and watching TV is related to bigger awareness of global warming issue, then, these may affect people’s attitude towards it; Questionnaire Dear Sir/Madam, We are interested in learning how you perceive global warming, as well as the importance of this climatic change to the modern way of in longer-term context. Since global warming is recently amongst the most vigorously debated topics, with certain impact on policy-making, your responses, which will be treated with complete confidentiality and anonymity, are very important to us. We appreciate your time, sincerity and willingness to answer the questions listed below. 1. Do you consider that global warming is? (please tick only one) An extremely serious problem An important problem An insignificant problem A problem only due to a media exaggeration Not a problem at all Don’t know 2. In general, would you say your knowledge of global warming is: (Please tick only one) Excellent Very good Fair Limited Poor 3. Do you think that global warming is generally a problem of too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? (Please tick only one) Yes No 4. In your spare time you’d prefer to: (Tick one or more of the listed below) Read newspapers Watch TV Surf the Internet Engage in sports Other 5. Your age group is: Up to 18 19 – 30 31 – 64 65 and over 6. Are you in employment? Yes No 7. If so, your field of occupation is: Business Industry/production Education and teaching Military related Community and social services Transportation Farming, fishing and forestry Healthcare practitioners and support Government and law 8. Please circle the highest year of school completed: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23+ (Primary school) (Secondary school) (College/university) (Postgraduate education) 9. Have you ever been a member/adherent of an environmental group or organisation? Yes No (Please tick only one) Thank you for your help! Read More