Sociology as a science

?
  • Created by: Jade1602
  • Created on: 26-02-20 10:52
View mindmap
  • Patterns, laws and Inductive reasoning
    • Reality isn't random or chaotic but patterned, observed these factual patterns through science
    • Believe Durkheim "real laws are discoverable", sociologists can discover laws that determine how society works
    • Induction: involves accumulating data about the world through careful observation and measurement
      • As knowledge grows, patterns appear.
    • Positivism
      • Can sociology be a science?
        • Interpretivism
          • G.H. Mead: rather than responding automatically to external stimuli, humans interpret meaning of stimulus and then choose how to respond
          • Sociology: studies people, who do have a consciousness. People make a sense of and construct their world by attaching meanings to it.
          • Subject matter of sociology is meaningful social action and it is not a science
          • Natural science: studies matter, has no consciousness. Behaviour explained as a straight forward reaction to external stimuli
        • Thomas Kuhn
          • The Paradigm
            • Shared by members of given scientific community + defines what their science is.
            • Basic framework of assumptions, principals, methods + techniques within which members of that community work.
            • Thus it is a set of norms, or a kind of culture, because it tells scientists how they ought to think + behave
            • In Kuhn's view, a science can't exist without a shared paradigm. Until there's a general consensus on a single paradigm, there will only be rival school of thought, not a science as such
          • Normal science
            • Greatest advantage of the paradigm is it allows scientists to agree on the basics of their subject + get on with productive "puzzle-solving"work
            • Contrasts with Popper.
            • Most of the time, paradigm goes unquestioned + scientists do normal science
            • Scientists engage in puzzle solving/ our job is simply to figure out how to put the pieces together to get the right puzzle
          • Scientific revolutions
            • Not all puzzle solving is successful.
              • As anomalies grow, confidence in  paradigm decreases.
            • Science enters period of crisis
              • Scientists begin to develop rival paradigms = scientific revolution
                • Kuhn: rival paradigms are in-commensurable - 2 competing paradigms can't be judged or measured by the same set of standards to decide the "best"
                  • Eventually, 1 paradigm wins + accepted by scientific community
            • Process is not rational
              • Kuhn compares it to religious conversions
        • Implications for Sociology
          • Pre-paradigmatic = Pre-scientific
          • Sociology can only become a science if such basic disagreements were resolved
          • Postmodernists might argue that a paradigm would also no be desirable in sociology
            • Sounds like a meta-narrative: a dominant + dominating view of what reality's like
        • Realism, science and sociology
          • Realists argue sociologists study open systems where the processes are too complex to make exact predictions
          • Keat +Urry
            • Stress similarities between sociology + types of natural science in terms of degree of control the researcher has over variables being studied
            • Closed systems: Those where research can control + measure relevant variables + can make precise predictions of the sort Popper advocates.
            • Open systems: those where researchers can't control + measure relevant variables, so can't make predictions
          • Underlying structures
            • Keat + Urry
            • Also means, interpretivists wrong in assuming sociology can't be scientific
              • If realists are correct + science can study unobservable things, then no barriers to study meanings scientifically
            • For realists, both natural + social science attempt to explain the cause of events in terms of underlying structures + processes, can see they exist by observing effects
              • In this view, most of sociology is scientific
            • Unlike interpretivists, realists see little difference between natural science + sociology, except some natural scientists are able to study closed systems under lab conditions
      • Suicide
        • Durkheim
        • Claimed to have discovered "real law": sociology has own unique subject matter + these can be explained scientifically
        • Conclusion: these patterns couldn't be product of individual motives but social facts
        • He decided, social facts that determined suicide rates were levels of integration and regulation
        • Studied the suicide to show sociology = science with own distinct subject matter
      • They believe it is favourable to apply logic + methods of natural sciences to study of society
        • Provide true and objective knowledge
  • Verstehen and qualitative research
    • Interpretivism
      • G.H. Mead: rather than responding automatically to external stimuli, humans interpret meaning of stimulus and then choose how to respond
      • Sociology: studies people, who do have a consciousness. People make a sense of and construct their world by attaching meanings to it.
      • Subject matter of sociology is meaningful social action and it is not a science
      • Natural science: studies matter, has no consciousness. Behaviour explained as a straight forward reaction to external stimuli
    • To achieve verstehen and understand meanings people give to their actions, we need to see the world through their eyes
    • Abandon detachment + objectivity, put yourself in place of the individual (using Weber's verstehen)
    • Use qualitative data + data such as  participant observation
    • Produce richer, more personal data = high validity
  • Interactionists
    • Reject positivist view of having definitive hypothesis before research
      • Glaser and Strauss: argue this risks researcher bias rather than taking actors viewpoint
    • Can produce testable hypothesis after.
    • Prefer 'bottom-up' approach. Ideas emerge gradually from observations we make during research.
  • Postmodernists, Feminism and scientific sociology
    • Pms argue against scientific sociology; natural science = meta-narrative
    • Scientific approach dangerous as it claims monopoly of the truth, excluding other perspectives
    • Postructuralist feminists argue searching for a single, scientific feminist theory is a form of domination.
  • The fallacy of Induction
    • Main reason to reject verification = "the fallacy of induction"
    • Popper disagrees with positivists: doesn't agree distinctive features of science lie in inductive reasoning + verification.
    • Induction: process of moving from observation of particular instances of something to arrive at a statement/law.
  • Asks 2 questions:
    • 2. Why has scientific knowledge been able to grow so spectacularly in just a few centuries?
    • 1. What is it that distinguishes scientific knowledge from other forms of knowledge?
    • Karl Popper
      • Can sociology be a science?
        • Thomas Kuhn
          • The Paradigm
            • Shared by members of given scientific community + defines what their science is.
            • Basic framework of assumptions, principals, methods + techniques within which members of that community work.
            • Thus it is a set of norms, or a kind of culture, because it tells scientists how they ought to think + behave
            • In Kuhn's view, a science can't exist without a shared paradigm. Until there's a general consensus on a single paradigm, there will only be rival school of thought, not a science as such
          • Normal science
            • Greatest advantage of the paradigm is it allows scientists to agree on the basics of their subject + get on with productive "puzzle-solving"work
            • Contrasts with Popper.
            • Most of the time, paradigm goes unquestioned + scientists do normal science
            • Scientists engage in puzzle solving/ our job is simply to figure out how to put the pieces together to get the right puzzle
          • Scientific revolutions
            • Not all puzzle solving is successful.
              • As anomalies grow, confidence in  paradigm decreases.
            • Science enters period of crisis
              • Scientists begin to develop rival paradigms = scientific revolution
                • Kuhn: rival paradigms are in-commensurable - 2 competing paradigms can't be judged or measured by the same set of standards to decide the "best"
                  • Eventually, 1 paradigm wins + accepted by scientific community
            • Process is not rational
              • Kuhn compares it to religious conversions
        • Implications for Sociology
          • Pre-paradigmatic = Pre-scientific
          • Sociology can only become a science if such basic disagreements were resolved
          • Postmodernists might argue that a paradigm would also no be desirable in sociology
            • Sounds like a meta-narrative: a dominant + dominating view of what reality's like
        • Realism, science and sociology
          • Realists argue sociologists study open systems where the processes are too complex to make exact predictions
          • Keat +Urry
            • Stress similarities between sociology + types of natural science in terms of degree of control the researcher has over variables being studied
            • Closed systems: Those where research can control + measure relevant variables + can make precise predictions of the sort Popper advocates.
            • Open systems: those where researchers can't control + measure relevant variables, so can't make predictions
          • Underlying structures
            • Keat + Urry
            • Also means, interpretivists wrong in assuming sociology can't be scientific
              • If realists are correct + science can study unobservable things, then no barriers to study meanings scientifically
            • For realists, both natural + social science attempt to explain the cause of events in terms of underlying structures + processes, can see they exist by observing effects
              • In this view, most of sociology is scientific
            • Unlike interpretivists, realists see little difference between natural science + sociology, except some natural scientists are able to study closed systems under lab conditions
      • The fallacy of Induction
        • Main reason to reject verification = "the fallacy of induction"
        • Popper disagrees with positivists: doesn't agree distinctive features of science lie in inductive reasoning + verification.
        • Induction: process of moving from observation of particular instances of something to arrive at a statement/law.
      • Falsification
      • Criticism and Open Society
        • Science is a public activity he argues this is why it grows so rapidly.
        • Science thrives in "open" societies
        • "Closed" are societies dominated by an official belief system that claims to have an absolute truth
      • Implications for sociology
        • He believes most of sociology is unscientific because it consists of theories that can't be put to the test with the possibility that it might be falsified.
        • However, he believes sociology can be scientific because it is capable of producing hypotheses that can be falsified.
        • Although he rejects Marxism as unscientific because it's unreliable, he doesn't believe that untestable ideas are worthless.
          • Such ideas might be useful as they could become testable later + we can examine them for clarity + logic consistency
  • Falsificationism
    • What makes science unique is very opposite of verificationism
      • Falsification
  • For Popper, good theories have 2 features:
    • 2. It's bold - it claims to explain a lot. Makes big generalisations that predict large numer of cases/events.
      • It's greater risk of being falsified than more timid theories.
    • 1. It's falsifiable but when tested, stands up to all attempts to disprove it
  • Truth
    • A good theory isn't necessarily a true theory, it is simply one that has withstood attempts to falsify it so far.
    • Karl Popper
      • Criticism and Open Society
        • Science is a public activity he argues this is why it grows so rapidly.
        • Science thrives in "open" societies
        • "Closed" are societies dominated by an official belief system that claims to have an absolute truth
      • Implications for sociology
        • He believes most of sociology is unscientific because it consists of theories that can't be put to the test with the possibility that it might be falsified.
        • However, he believes sociology can be scientific because it is capable of producing hypotheses that can be falsified.
        • Although he rejects Marxism as unscientific because it's unreliable, he doesn't believe that untestable ideas are worthless.
          • Such ideas might be useful as they could become testable later + we can examine them for clarity + logic consistency
    • "all knowledge is provisional, temporary, capable pf refutation at any moment"
  • There can never be absolute proof that any knowledge is true
    • "all knowledge is provisional, temporary, capable pf refutation at any moment"
  • A society that believes in free expressions + the right to challenges accepted ideas.
    • Watkins: Popper sees falsification as the unique feature of science. Kuhn says it's puzzle solving within a paradigm that makes science appeal.
      • Realists reject positivist view that science only concerned with observable phenomena
      • Argue science often assumes existence of unobservable structures

        Comments

        No comments have yet been made

        Similar Sociology resources:

        See all Sociology resources »See all Theory and Methods resources »