Should Sociology Be Scientific?

In sociology on that point argon 2 primary(prenominal) contrasting construes to how the physical exertion of sociology should be approached and studied, as a acquisition or not. In this es contrastiveiate I testament be explaining the accounts of each side of the discussion fully, and gravel to show the absolute and negative points of every approach to studying sociology. The first argument I will analyse is Positivism. Positivists reserve the view that sociology should be studied as a science, arguing that golf club and the activities of the somebodys in hostelry as a substantial mark off main similarities and attri besideses to the physical or congenital g review.Positivists study that hearty factors atomic number 18 largely voluminous in find out kind behaviour, an deterrent example organism that positivists take that community wish to seek partners in order to allow them to marry and puzzle children, allowting them fulfil societies expectations of them. Positivists use scientific systemology, which means that their procedures resemble methods of collecting information that be usually seen in blueprint in natural sciences. Examples of some of these methods are questionnaires, structured interviews or statistics.Using scientific procedures in the Positivists view means that much accurate results will be roll up, they hold the view that it is thinkable to see friendship in an objective way. An example of this is Durkheim, who trustd the br early(a)ly facts of fellowship could be considered in the similar way as objects and events of the natural world. He thought that genial facts did not whole consist of things that could be detect objectively or in a operate modality, but also belief systems which be in the consciousness of individual(a)s.To look at these belief systems in a scientific manner Durkheim thought that they couldnt be budged at will, but were controlled by society reservation them available t o scientific approaches. Correlation is another(prenominal) part of scientific methodology, where by feel at different social facts correlations are name between them, where in that respect is differentiate of a relationship between two or more different factors. Durkheim rig that in his study of felo-de-se thither was a relationship between suicide and religions, (e. g. Protestantism and a high suicide rate). afterwards correlations are found between social facts the queryer may believe that ane social fact causes another to ex unmatchablerate a hypothesis, such(prenominal) as wickedness causes a person to become work associate, or worldnessness working class causes a person to commit crime. atomic number 53 problem with this part of the positivist scientific methodology is that some correlations found by inquiryers may just be by chance or in propose. This foot run into where two social facts are found together but in tangible fact dont have any direct conne ctions to each other.It gutter fall out that a third social fact has a relationship with two the other social facts, which corporation cause them to be linked. An example of this is gender being the cause of both level of criminality and location in the class hierarchy, which illust grade that class and crime arent very linked, but are both related to to gender. In positivists look they also believe that if findings are verified and found in umteen different contexts such as in different societies around the world and during different time periods the research hindquarters be see as being a law of human behaviour, which is the main bring of the positivist perspective.This is where a contention is found to be straightforward in all circumstances, a comparison being scientific laws such as soberness being established, positivists hold the view that these laws gutter be found in human behaviour. Durkheim thought he had found a law of human behaviour when his research into suicide had the conclusion that suicide rates always increased when in society there was a drastic change in the economy.Using scientific methodology such as questionnaires does have the positive of being tried and straightforward, as the selective information could be collected repeatedly and it is likely to get to the same conclusions over and over again, but also has the weakness that people croup lie and be biased in the questionnaires towards themselves. another(prenominal) problem is that questionnaires restrict the answers of the individual being asked the questions, which also can eliminate in structured interviews where the individual slant put across what they want to say because of the structured questions and style of the interview.Also questionnaires and scientific methodology doesnt take into account the individual differences that could be involved in the topic that is being researched. An example of this is suicide. Research into the bet of suicide has been criticised when it has been done exploitation scientific matters as Douglas do the criticism of Durkheims research that not all suicides can be treated as the same grammatical case of act as they could have different or contrasting meanings behind them, e. g. lderly Eskimos will kill themselves for the sake of their society, where as a someone in a westward society may kill themselves because they are depressed.Also, in Durkheims research into suicide, J. D Douglas criticized him facial expression that the statistics used werent valid, as the decision to if the emergent death was a suicide is made by the coroner, who in turn is influenced by the family and friends of the victim. This creates the surmisal of there being domineering bias in the decision, having the consequence of not very reliable statistics to base his conclusions on.another(prenominal) weakness of scientific methodology is it can result in generalisations in the conclusions, where the detective will split t he data collected into different categories, as Durkheim carried out in his study into suicide, which can be as well reductionist, missing out important factors in the issue being researched such as the background of the suicides etc. Another method used in sociological research is observation, which positivists believe that the social world can be objectively observed and classified. note is not only used by positivists, but is also used by many anti-positivist sociologists who have observed situations in connection with subjects like education and suicide, where Atkinson observed the summonses involved in the decisions made by coroners in the coroners courts. cardinal problem with using observation is that it is restrictive in the type of situations it can be used in, such as in the study of the subject of politics, sociologists are prohibited from observing the British Cabinet.Also because the results are found on how the situation was observed by means of the researcher, i t is possible for there to be interference from the researcher in the data collected. Another host that support the idea of sociology being a science is realists, who see much of sociology being scientific. An example of this is the realists sociologist Keat, who saw Marxist sociology as scientific as the models split uped by Marx was evaluating processes and institutions in society ground on empirical data.Realists suggest that both natural and sociological sciences have the same aim in the research carried out which is to develop theories and create perspectives to explain the world based on collected evidence. Auguste Comte was a render of sociology, and through founding the subject try to show it as a science using a scientific manner in his research, studying social phenomena. He talked about discovering the laws social phenomena being the main aim behind the subject of sociology, and scientific methods being the surpass way of accomplishing this.He also thought that socie ty as a whole was greater than the individuals in spite of appearance it, which in other words meant that society was more complex than the number of people in it, that it involved many other variables. One procedure that Comte support was the HD procedure, which was where you started with a supposition, created a hypothesis based on that guess, slected a research method that could be verified and analysise the data collected through this method to see if the hypothesis was correct.One problem with this procedure is that although it does have reliable data that is collected, and a straight advancing procedure involved, a negative fount of creating a hypothesis to work with earlier carrying out the research is that it brings in the possibility that the researcher will pick a research method which will be biased to the hypothesis by be the method most likely to bear witness it. An example of where this come outed was the research into aids attempting to lay down it as a gay p lague. Another example of a positivist theory was made by Karl Popper, who created the theory of falsification.Popper believed that the best way to see if a theory or conclusion was true was to let it stand the test of time. In this he meant that the longer a theory was supported and unreputed by other sociologists, the more true it was. Popper was critical towards Marx, saying that he was pseudoscientific because he didnt use empirical data and that Marxs theory couldnt be proved falsely or right as Marx leftfield his theory open to when the revolution would real happen, meaning that if a revolution didnt happen in that time period, Marx would still be able to argue that it was going to happen some day in the future.The other side of the argument of should sociology be scientific is held by anti positivists, such as Max weber. Weber claims that to come to true conclusions the motives of a situation or a persons actions must first be understood. An example of this is if a person is fishing, are they doing it because its their hobby, or maybe because they are hungry. One process supported by Weber was verstehen, which is where the sociologist imagines himself or herself as the person or in the position of the person whose being studied.Weber thought that the motives behind an action are just as important as the actions themselves for coming to the truth behind a subject. There third perspective involved in the debate is mark Modernism, which believe in the grand narrative, or that there is no such thing as just having one dominant theory. Post Modernists believe the best results and theories are academic pick and mixs, where conclusions are drawn from many different perspectives and theories to get an all round finding that includes all the different points of view involved.Post Modernists also think that there is no such thing as one objective truth, and that no one method or way of feel at sociology can arrive at true conclusions as in reality, society is always changing as is the norms and determine within society. One post modernist who believes that there is no one technique that can find the truth (a belief held by epistemology) is Lyotard, who sees all epistemology as being based on more the researchers opinions instead of being based on objective knowledge. This is know as being a metanarrative.