Sociology as a Science

Is Sociology a Science? Daniel Jumpp Wolmers Boys High School, 6B Group 2

Sociology as a Science

In recent years, some persons have expressed sentiments that the study of sociology has no real scientific ground. This paper serves to examine the fundamental assumptions, as well as the possibility of Sociology being a science, but more specifically a social science. It begins by producing some definitions of the key terms, within the context of sociology, to which the student will make reference. The terms include science, social science and sociology. The paper then proceeds to compare sociology to the natural sciences, by establishing and assessing the characteristics which sociology has in common with the natural sciences.

Sociology as a Science Is Sociology a Science?

Sociology is the systematic study of human society, essentially meaning that it is the study of human social relationships and institutions. Jake Gordon (2002) said in an internet article, Sociologists study society as a 'social science' however, the status of sociology as a science is easily questionable when compared to how acknowledged scientists study the natural world. Science, as defined by Giddens (2001), is the use of systematic methods of investigation, theoretical thinking and the logical assessment of arguments, to develop a body of knowledge about a particular subject matter. In order to determine whether or not sociology can be accepted as a true science one must first compare the views of both sociologists and scientists on society and the natural world respectively. We must also scrutinize the knowledge used by scientists as it is only necessary under certain profound situations. The natural world can be defined as what can be seen or sensed and has matter. Scientists study the world using experimental and factual approaches to their situations. Scientists can study different fields because experiments show that they exist. Scientists study things in their journey of gaining knowledge. A key element of what constitutes something as a science is the ability to provide rational and plausible explanations. Society differs from the natural world in the case of it not being a thing that can be seen, touched or investigated with just our senses. Society is defined by the groupings of humans and the study of how they behave. When sociology is being studied what is being looked at is behaviour in relation to the mindset of individuals. Behaviour and the mind, well not literally the brain, do not take the physical form of say an atom in science does, so they can actually be argued that they do not exist as they have no literal way to prove them other than theories. Otherwise, they just cannot be studied

Sociology as a Science scientifically. Back to the brain, perhaps they can be proven to exist through the chemicals inside the brain, so maybe they can be scientifically studied. Scientifically, one of the main objectives in obtaining the facts science is based upon is prioritizing objectivity so that all scientists are on the same level of knowledge regardless of how

subjective their views are. This would surely state that they study inanimate objects. Sociologists study people and people dont behave like inanimate objects, they may react differently towards the methods used in social research, so bias may be created. For example, an individual may be given a questionnaire and he or she may emphasize on a certain question that may directly relate to them, thus creating a certain level of bias which may destabilize the survey. This level of bias is less likely in the study of the natural world as the facts are stated more clearly. Both Sociology and Science surpass the level of common sense to rigorous study to prove their studies and use different backgrounds in their attempt to back their statements. A scientist in his line of research may stumble upon a new development and may state the mass of this atom is which can be taken as an objective fact. Other scientists may study the same development and do any amount of calculations and come up with the same fact, which provides additional scientific proof and strengthening the original scientists study. In the case of the sociologist, he or she may struggle in their studies as the result they may present will be difficult to prove and replicate in other sociologists studies as there is likely no physical proof. Still, any results found by both the scientist and sociologist still warranty critique based on the empirical understanding of reality. Understanding reality is a crucial additional to studying sociology. According to Gordon (2002), Epistemology, a branch of philosophy has two main teams idealists and the materialists. Idealists such as The Late Martin Luther King Jr. believe that every material object was created by a supreme being,

Sociology as a Science whether it being a powerful God or spirit. Materialists on the other hand believe that everything was created by man and that the ideas and the mind are directly related to the brain.

Most people feel that they are in full control, meaning they can think for themselves, not being influenced by anything else of matter. This belief is based on ones philosophy on idealism while modern science relies on purely materialistic philosophy. As stated by Marx (1818 1833) Nothing else than the material world reflected in the human mind, and translated into forms and thoughts this would show that Materialists feel that what people perceive as free-will is not free-will. As Halborn and Haralambos (2007) stated positivists claim that science uses establish methods and procedures, and that these measures and procedures can also be applied to the social sciences. They believe that social facts can be observed objectively, measured and quantified, the same way that science can. From this view sociological studies using certain methods can be considered to be scientific. Positivists see the use of scientific methods as high plausible and tend to criticize those sociologists who study subjectively and unobservable mental states. Positivists view ideas, thought and mind the same way scientists view atoms and should be in the same state of mind as the physicist, chemist or psychologist when he probes into a still unexplored region of the scientific domain (Durkheim 1964: xiv). Positivism shares many similarities to the profound study methods used by scientists, most recognized as mentioned before the objective detail in their collection of data, in the same way positivists can only study what can be seen, measured and observed while providing proof or showing what causes it to be discovered. Interactionism and behaviourism opposes positivism , focusing on the theory of action by American sociologist Talcott Parsons. Interactionists claim human behaviour is to be meaningful and worthy of study beyond empiricism. They see ideas, thoughts and minds as pure mental theories, so we cannot understand society due to our individual views.

Sociology as a Science Emile Durkheim, in 1897, published in his book Suicide: A Study in Sociology, a study of suicide and thus many studies of suicide after that have been greatly influenced by his work. Durkheims study on suicide was the first attempt to study sociology as a science. Some sociologists have tried to show Durkheims approach in explaining suicide was successful; others trying to improve his theory; while others having totally throwing out his whole approach. Many methodological approaches have been tested and disputed in the area of suicide. Durkheim wished to use his study to show how there was a sociological level of analysis which was distinct from other disciplines and which made an important contribution to the explanation of social theories.

Durkheim was a positivist; he thought it was both possible and desirable for sociologists to order social behaviour. In his study of suicide, Durkheim found human behaviour to be the product of social forces influence by external factors. Essentially saying that peoples behaviour was established by the external stimuli, whether it being nature or people and their ideas and feelings being irrelevant. As a result, behaviour can be objectively measured rather than subjectively, the same way scientists study nature. Interactionists suggest people apply meaning to the world and society, and thus sociology should not attempt to be scientific. Human behaviour is said to be meaningful and so cannot be understood in the same way a natural phenomena can be. It is said in metaphysics that a tree is a tree, and there is no meaning for it to be a tree. Human thoughts and ideas have arent just thoughts and ideas, they all have meaning, the same way in which when someone commits suicide, there must be a meaning for them to do so. For example the actions of the mall attack in Kenya, 2013, are seen as an act of terrorism, to those committing the acts, they most likely had a different view/meaning to everyone else.

Sociology as a Science

Essentially, the interactionists are basically saying that reality is too complex to be studied using quantitative analysis and numbers. Qualitative methods are essential for understanding reality fully. Ontology, the philosophical study of nature and the fundamental beliefs and individual holds about the nature of something, can arise as another problem. For example, metaphysically, an orange is an object that can neither be sensed nor touched. Dialectically, the practice of logical discussion employed in solving a theory, it isnt always what it seems to be. The orange is always changing and cannot be defined. The orange could easily be just a figment of ones imagination and could just be a chemical reaction felt when sensing it. Sociology students are required to write essays and attend lectures on sociological theories, which is the most common way sociology is taught. Research is not necessary emphasized as much as the use of the mind for thinking. Science, on the other hand, is taught with the great emphasis on research and experimentation which are key factors in determining the facts of science. Sociology provokes though and qualitative analysis of ideas whilst science involved the learning of structures, laws and formulas. These may also be involved in sociology but are not involved in the whole process. Looking at sociology it is not as restrictive as the sciences being that it can be both objective and subjective in the case of the positivists and the interactionists. To study it as a science is to, in a way, negate from its original intent, essentially removing some of its essence. The question which should be asked is not Is Sociology a Science but Do all study Sociology as a Science? As stated by Gordon (2002) Equally, if it is so important to make sociology a recognised science, then it must be split in two. That sociology which can be scientifically tested, and that which cannot be. Objective sociology based on facts, laws and common scientific principles; and subjective sociology which cannot study anything objectively because that's no longer in its field, and so anything subjective can no longer be researched in objective ways.

Sociology as a Science Marx and Durkheim, two founding fathers of sociology, studied sociology as a science, as have many other sociologists. This shows that, hence sociologists can, with evidence being that they both have, study society in the same way scientists study the natural world.

Sociology as a Science References Blundell, J (unknown) Teaching Is Sociology a Science? http://sociology.org.uk/atssp7.htm. 2002 Durkheim, E (1951) Suicide: A Study in Sociology, Glencoe: The Free Press Durkheim, E (1964) The Rules of Sociological Method, Glencoe: The Free Press Haralambos and Holbourn (2008) Sociology: Themes and Perspectives, HarperCollins Jake Gordon (2002) Is Sociology a Science? http://jakeg.co.uk/essays/science 2013 Macionis & Plummer (1997) Sociology, A Global Introduction, Pearson Education Limited Sewel & Woods (1983) What is Marxism? http://www.marxist.com/what-is-marxismeconomics-materialism.htm. 2013