Introduction: Objectivity is one of the most cherished values in scientific research.

According to
Green, “Objectivity is the willingness and ability to examine evidence dispassionately”. There is
difference of opinion among social scientist about the role of objectivity in social science. Social
scientists are divided about if objectivity is a good thing, achievable and desirable in social
science research. Sociologists like Weber argue that research should be objective and neutral. To
be objective, a researcher must not allow their values, their bias or their views to impact on their
research, analysis or findings. Others argue that objectivity in social sciences is impossible at all
stages of research because of various factors. Besides, objectivity is also undesirable.

Objectivity in Social Science: Objectivity is the driving force behind scientific investigation.
Objectivity requires that a researcher has to avoid personal biasness, likes, dislikes and value
judgment during the research process and examine evidence dispassionately. And he should try
to be as objective and as neutral as possible. There are many arguments about the importance of
objectivity in social sciences. Some of these arguments are:

Arguments for Objectivity in social science:

a) A researcher may have his personal bias but this should not be reflected in his research
work. He should shun subjective views, personal bias and personal convictions when
working as academics. A biased work is half-truth and cannot advance research in the
true sense of the term. Guarding against such biases becomes a matter of perpetual
vigilance for a true researcher.
b) An academic research which is not objective is removed bereft of rationality and
reasonability. Ignoring objectivity would open the door to irrationalism. An academic
research must deal with facts with no place for emotions. For research to be reliable and
to be considered scientific, objectivity is paramount. An objective research is scientific
research.
c) It is argued that social science is value free, that is, its goal is to study what is and not
what ought to be. For this reason, research should adhere to the inherent principle of
value neutrality, and try to achieve the highest possible degree of objectivity.
d) Only an objective work is worthy of criticism. In the absence of objectivity, it makes no
sense to critically look at a research work. Criticism is what takes research forward.
 e) Research is often directed and circulated for a large readership. It is therefore very
important that only a neutral and objective research goes out to the readership. A
subjective research work can tint the readers in negative way.
Argument against Objectivity:
a) According to some, social sciences are opposite to natural sciences not only in the terms
of empirical subject matter but also in the terms of basic method and mode of
conceptualization. Hence, unlike natural sciences, objectivity must not be forced in social
science research.
b) . Objectivity or value neutrality is unattainable, unnecessary and undesirable. One cannot
consider intrinsic evaluation, feeling, beliefs and standards as insignificant or not
influential.
c) Social scientists ought to have a standpoint on social issues, and they must produce value
judgments if they wish to solve social problems. Social sciences are normative. Apart
from studying what is, they should be concerned with what ought to be.
d) Our general orientation is based on and is constructed with values; these values direct our
thinking and action and cannot be isolated or ignored.
e) It has been said that it is very difficult to achieve objectivity in social science research.
This difficulty arises out of the adverse influences of (a) personal prejudices and bias, (b)
value judgment, (c) personal involvement and (d) complexity of social phenomena.
f) Natural scientists deal with ‘objects’ while social scientists deal with ‘human actions,
behaviour and their social problems’. Under such a context, research in social science
cannot be expected to be objective. Complete objectivity is neither possible nor a
desirability in social sciences.

Conclusion: Consequently, we can conclude that objectivity is a cherished ideal in social science
but complete and total objectivity is impossible and also undesirable. Objectivity must play a
significant role in social sciences but it shall not be made the lone standard in judging research
studies in social sciences. Attempts should be made to make social sciences as much objective as
much possible while maintaining the difference "necessary" for realizing the very purpose of
social sciences. It has been argued that with complete objectivity the uniqueness of social
sciences will wither away without any tangible gains for the mankind. Therefore a reasonable
amount of objectivity necessary for the conduct of scientific and rational inquiry is good.