Sociology as a Science - Essay Example

Sociology as a Science Is sociology a science? Why or why not? Discuss in relation to two contrasting social theorists. Introduction In the larger state of affairs, sociology is considered to be a science as much as psychology, statistics or mathematics can be considered a science. However, there are philosophers who debate this point and suggest that sociology can not be considered a science or at least not a natural science (Bessant & Watts, 2002). To bring about a conclusion to the debate both sides of the argument have to be examined using social theories that allow us to see whether sociology is a science or not. The differentiation is important because it allows students of sociology to know how they can approach the subject as well as the topics included in the subject if they understand the approach to be based on scientific methods. If sociology is a science, then the methods of using hypothesis to work with theories and using theories to form facts can be employed successfully, if not then some other suggested method might be more useful in approaching the field of sociology as well as social development. Despite the disagreements on sociology being taken as a science or more like an art which can be skilfully applied for guided development, the fact remains that sociology is certainly a field of thought in which several theories and ideas are quite applicable. Science and Sociology At the very root of the matter is the understanding which we have of what is a science, what is information and what can be understood as being based in scientific principles (Harris, 2005). A chemistry expert can see liquid solutions, observe blocks of elements react with each other and can test things like boiling points and melting points with experiments. Of course there is a whole branch of chemistry where sight is more or less useless when a scientist is working at an atomic level but even there, hypotheses can be tested and evaluated. On the other hand, a social experiment is often difficult to duplicate in exact terms (Harris, 2005). A survey taken on the streets of London may not give the exact same results or may not even be relevant to the same survey being conducted in the streets of Melbourne. However, water will boil in both London and Melbourne at the exact same boiling point. That does not make sociology irrelevant as a science but shows how society changes from location to location and even from time to time. Society is reflective of the behaviour and the constructed relationships of the most influential social animal on the planet, i.e. humans (Wikipedia, 2006). Therefore, when such constructions can not be seen or measured directly, they lose some of their value as scientific knowledge. Additionally, science seeks to remain objective in its search for various facts and sociologist can find it difficult to remain objective about certain topics. The study of human beings and human relations as well as the social connections we have with others is difficult to study with an objective lens since the elements being observed may not be objective themselves (Harris, 2005). Taking the example of a survey, the person conducting the survey or creating the text for the survey might word the questions in a way as to draw out a particular response. These biases exist within us as well as the scientists who conduct sociological experiments and the biases are quite difficult to avoid (Bessant & Watts, 2002). Those who suggest that sociology can not be a science push the idea that a person can not be uninvolved in what they are doing therefore biases as well as emotions of the person conducting the experiment will pollute the results. Those who accept sociology as a science point out things like anonymity and privacy control which can remove help to remove any biases as well as any emotions associated with the experiment. This idea is propagated by the Positivist Theory in Sociology. The Positivist Theory The theory which gives the strongest evidence towards sociology being a science is the positivist theory which is supported by great sociologists like Marx, Comte, and Durkheim who all thought that feelings and emotions of the scientist looking at a certain social phenomenon can be made irrelevant to the facts of the case if the scientist can remain ethically and politically uninterested in the issue being discussed or observed (Wikipedia, 2006). The positivist theory has been refined and updated several times since it was first formed by the original theorists but it is largely based on the thought that sociology can be taken as a science (Bessant & Watts, 2002). Under positivism, sociology is a science that has experimental models and events or results that can be measured. For instance, the estimated rate of individuals who get advanced degrees can be seen as a sociological representative of how valued education is or can be for a community. Moreover, such measurements and estimates are invaluable when it comes to explaining why one society is more developed than other in certain aspects e.g. technological development or even the abundance of health facilities in one country compared to the near absence of the same in another. Using a systems based approach a positivist sociologist will seek out scientific causes for certain behaviour and try to explain why society as well as individuals act like they do. Since the positivist treat the field as totally a science, the same methods that are used in natural sciences are applied to social studies (Bessant & Watts, 2002). The philosophies of empiricism as well as the demands of the scientific method are rigorously applied by the positivist theory thus separating sociology from other fields like philosophy or theology which are considerably less empirical in their applications and development (Harris, 2005). Over time, this approach became a point of contention between those who saw sociology as a pure science and those who thought it was a lot more than simple statistical calculations based on respondents and case histories. Anti-Positivist or Humanist Approach As the name suggests the Anti-positivist or humanist approach takes a different direction as compare to the positivists since sociologists who agree with this theory believe that sociology is not and should not be taken as a science. The scientists working in this field are ethically committed to the theories of humanism which suggest that it is difficult if not impossible for a scientist to be objective about the things s/he is observing. As suggested by Webber, the separation of meaning from the social construct being studied is rather difficult (Heydebrand, 1994). Being human, a person will always apply some meaning to the world and therefore observed behaviour will always be filtered through the lens of previous experience (Harris, 2005). Such views are particularly useful when a sociologist is taking a look at political and other social events that have shaped or are currently shaping our world. For instance, the current war between Israel and Lebanon can have many different interpretations based on where the sociologist is coming from. An American sociologist might have strong opinions on a personal level about abortion, gun control and religious freedom while a British philosopher might not have strong personal opinions about those things. In effect, by having an opinion about the topic being discussed, the sociologist would essentially be proving the humanist approach to be right, since the humanist approach gives the concept that it is impossible to work without some inherent biases (Harris, 2005). Moreover, this approach takes sociology to not be a science since there is no way in which numbers and figures can define something which is as complex as the reality which surrounds humans. According to the humanist perspective, the diversity and the coherence of society is such that it can not be explained by numerical analysis and quantification of how people feel and thing about certain issues (Harris, 2005). Since the scientific method often demands a number value or even a percentage figure to give an answer of sorts, the elimination of numbers means a scientific method becomes rather difficult to apply. No Perspective to Rule Them All Given that the positivist theorists suggest that sociology is a science and the humanist theorists say it is not, reconciliation between the two seems rather difficult. I believe that social ideas and the study of sociology is quite broad as well as forgiving enough to use both perspectives as and when they are needed. In certain cases where surveys can be made and calculations come as the natural part of the solution, the positivist perspective should be applied to the maximum. There is nothing better than showing with mathematical proof how a sociologist comes to a conclusion about something and the positivist approach certainly helps in those situations. At the same time, wherever the application of the positivist approach can not lead to a better and more accurate conclusion than the one obtained by the humanist approach, then the humanist approach should be utilised. Flexibility of thought and flexibility in application seem to be necessary where the house stands as divided as it is in the case of taking a proper approach to sociology. Word Count: 1,554 Works Cited Bessant, J. and Watts, R. 2002, Sociology Australia, Allen & Unwin. Harris, D. 2005, ‘Is Sociology a Science?’, Dr. Dave Harris & Colleagues, [Online] Available at: http://www.arasite.org/socassci.html Heydebrand, W. 1994, Max Weber, Sociological Writings. Continuum. Nisbet, R. 1967, The Sociological Tradition, London, Heinemann Books. Wikipedia. 2006, ‘Sociology’ Wikipedia.org, [Online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology Read More