Sociology As Science

NICE IAS in association with Unacademy
Topic – Sociology as science

Sub Topic –
1. What is Sociology?
2. What is science – Is a discipline science in itself?
3. Rise of positivism
4. Basic postulates of positivism and non-positivism
i. Subject matter
ii. Quantifiability and measurability – Issue of measurement in social
sciences
iii. Ontology and epistemology
iv. Fact-value relationship
v. Ontology & Epistemology
5. Critique of positivism –
I. Philosophies of science –
i. Karl Popper – Falsificationism
ii. T.S.Kuhn – Paradigm
iii. Paul Feyerabend – Epistemological Pluralism/Anarchism
1
II. Phenomenological school – Symbolic interactionism,
Interpretivism/Verstehen, Neo-idealism, Hermeneutics etc
III. Critical school –
i. Frankfurt school
ii. Feminist school
6. Negative consequences of science and technology
7. Distinction between Pure science and Applied science & Practicality of
scientific sociology (Sociology as a scientific discipline)
8. Sociology and common sense
2
Sociology –
The word sociology is derived from the French word, sociologie, a hybrid coined by French
philosopher Auguste Comte, from the latin socius, meaning “companion”; and the suffix -
ology, meaning “the study of”, derived from the Greek ‘logos’, “knowledge”.
Socius is a latin noun meaning “comrade, friend, ally” (adjective form: socialis) and used to
describe a bond or interaction between parties that are friendly, or at least civil; it has given
rise to the word society.
Conclusion: Sociology is study of society.
But the above definition simplifies the discipline too much and therefore, its actual meaning
is lost. The term sociology was coined by Auguste Comte as a discipline in a specific context
of French (European society), when it was undergoing a radical change from pre-modern to
modern, democratic and scientific stage in 19th century.
So more apt definition of sociology would be
“Scientific study of society”
But this definition poses its own set of issues in defining “what do we mean by science”
itself?
3
What is science?
The term science is derived from the latin word “scientia” meaning “knowledge”. It is exactly
not know, who coined the term first, but, it was philosopher William Whehell who first coined
the term scientists in 1833. Prior to that scientists were called “Natural philosophers”. Many
consider Aristotle to be the first scientists, but in modern period, Galileo is described as
“Father of science”. He earned this title for his groundbreaking inventions and discoveries.
He has been called as the “father of observational astronomy”, the “father of modern physics”,
the “father of the scientific method” and the “father of the modern science”. He invented the
thermoscope and various military compasses, and used the telescope for scientific
observations and celestial objects.
Evolution of physics as a discipline
1. Galileo Galilei – 1564 to 1642

i. Hydrostatic balance
ii. Modern Thermometer
iii. Military compass
iv. Pendulum
v. Observational astronomy
vi. Heliocentric motion
4
Prior to Galileo Galilei, scientific inquiry relied heavily on ipse dixit (“he himself said it”),
a method in which arguments were justified solely on the basis of authority of an individual,
most prominently the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. Study of science was also
deeply influenced by religious beliefs. In October 1623, Galileo’s book The Assayer (Il
Saggiatore) was published. In it Galileo famously wrote that mathematics is the language
of science and the only means to achieve lasting truth in physics. The Assayer is
considered one of the pioneering works of the scientific method. It attacked theories based
on Aristotle’s authority; and promoted experimentation, and mathematical formulation of
scientific ideas.
2. Johannes Kepler – 1571 – 1630 – German - Laws on planetary motion
i. The planets move in elliptical orbits with the son at one focus
ii. The time necessary to traverse any arc of a planetary orbit is proportional to the
area of the sector between the central body and that arc
iii. There is an exact relationship between the squares of the planets’ periodic times
and that cubes of the radii of their orbits.
Kepler did not regard these as laws, instead, regarded them as God’s design for
universe. ( perhaps this declaration was a coverup to protect from religious and political
persecution as his descriptions challenged the existing theology)
3. Sir Isaac Newton – 1642-1726 – English Physicist and Mathematician –
Important contributions:
i. Composition of white light
ii. Laws of three motion
iii. Law of gravity
iv. Calculus
5
4. Pierre Simon Laplace – 1749 – 1827 – French physicist, mathematician and
astronomer
5. Josiah Williard Gibbs – American physicist - 1839 – 1903
6. James Clerk Maxwell – Scottish scientist – 1831 -1879
7. Max Plank – German physicist – 1858 -1947
Albert Einstein – German – 1879 -1955
The term science owes essentially to the works of above intellectuals which is parallel to
culmination of physics, study of natural forces, as a scientific discipline. Thus, science and
physics, were used synonymous to each other. Such treatment of science and physics
confined science to a very narrow domain.
The methodological approach adopted in physics inspired intellectuals of other domain
tremendously. One such person was Auguste Comte. August Comte used the term “social
physics” quite explicitly in his 1822 paper, through an extensive notions of the natural
sciences. He wrote, “we now possess a celestial physics, a terrestrial physics, either
mechanical or chemical, a vegetable physics and an animal physics; we still want one more
and last one, social physics, to complete the system of our knowledge of nature. I understand
by social physics the science which has for its subject the study of social phenomena.”
6
A few years later, Comte abandoned the term “social physics” in favour of neologism
“sociology”. This was not because he now judged organismic analogies to be more
appropriate in the study of society than physical ones; rather, he dropped the term because
it had been used by Belgian statician, Adolphe Quetlet. Not knowing of Comte’s usage,
Quetlet had published in 1835 a book called On Man and the Development of Human
Faculties, which bore the subtitle, An essay on Social Physics. Outraged by this Comte
coined the term Sociology to distinguish his system from that of Quetlet. And this way
Sociology was born.
Comtean notion of sociology represents a specific strand of it which is known as
“Positivism”. Though, Saint Simon is described as originator of the term positivism, Comte
is known as the “Father of positivism.
Positivism is derived from the French word positivisme, which in turn is derived from positif
in its philosophical sense of ‘imposed on the mind by experience’ And experience refers to
empirical/sensory experience.
7
The rise of positivism:
The rise of positivism is reflected in the writings of four leading researchers of 19th
century: Le Play, Quetelet, Saint-Simon and Comte.
 In France, Le Play conducted research into typical families of workers (sociography)

and constructed family monographs for this purpose
 In Belgium, Adolph Quetlet (1796 – 1874) expressed an equally strong interest in
empirical research.
 Claude-Henri Saint-Simon (1760 -1825) is known as the originator of positivism.
Saint-Simon used research to find evidence that could strengthen his commitment to
fairness and social equality. For him, the role of social scientists was that of secular
priests, and science a new religion that could help establish an egalitarian society.
 And Finally, August Comte, who is known as the father of “Positivism” and “Sociology”
as well.
8
Basic postulates of positivism:
Postulate is a thing suggested or assumed as true as the basis for reasoning, discussion, or
belief.
The basic premise or postulates of positivism can be listed as follows:
1. Human being is also an object of nature and subject matter of sociology is no different
from the subject matter of natural science viz Astronomy, physics, chemistry and biology.
2. Since nature of subject matter is same as that of natural science, it can be subjected of
same methodological approach to study viz quantification and statistical measurement. In
other words human behaviour can be quantified and scales can be devised to measure it.
3. Since it denies the idea of subjective consciousness, it presumes that laws can be
formulated, cause and effect relationship can be arrived at in deterministic manner. In
other word, society is subjected to law of nature and follows a pattern.
4. it is based on the idea of fact – value dichotomy i.e. Facts are distinct from values and
shares no relationship with each other and they are separable. values are distinct and
disengaged from facts and play no role in scientific analysis.
9
5. It believes in possibility of pristine observation devoid of any moral or value predisposition.
6. Believes in objectivist ontology and empiricist epistemology.
Confrontation:
The postulates of positivism is confronted by an opposite set of ideas led by idealist
philosophy which has many strands like old idealism, Neo-idealism, phenomenalism etc. they
believe in
1. Human nature as different from that of other objects of nature.
2. Existence of subjective consciousness. Human beings possess consciousness that is
divinely ordained, unique and internal and shares no relationship with external factors
or objective conditions viz material conditions, biology, culture etc.
3. Fact – value distinct but not disengaged
4. Issue of measurement in social science
Issue of measurement in social sciences:

Any discipline that studies social interaction, society or culture is social science. It is
composed of sociology and social psychology, cultural anthropology, political science,
economics and aspects of geography. As far as sociology and related disciplined are
10
concerned, they study human social behaviour. Even in political science, behaviour of
individual in political situation is studied. When we study the nature of behaving individual,
the structure of the individual consciousness which express itself in social relationships,
we are taking the psychological point of view, when we study the relationship itself, we
take the sociological point of view. Both sciences are concerned with different aspects of
an indivisible reality. Individual cannot be understood apart from the units9or items) of the
relationships. The sociologists are primarily interested in the way in which being endowed
with consciousness act in relation with each other. Psychological nature of social being
needs explanation of attitudes and interests. Attitudes are the subjective reactions, states
of consciousness within the individual human being with relation to objects, e.g., when we
mention friend or enemy we indicate an interest. Understanding of actual behaviour,
situations requires knowledge of both objective interests and subjective attitudes. It is this
attitude which social scientists talk of measuring. Measurement is quantification of
observation. Measurement involves this expression of observed characteristics or
relationships in numerical form. The process of measurement may range from the simple
tabulation of a number of cases in each of a set of categories to the use of complex
procedures. The question arises, can attitude be measured? If yes how? The second
11
question is what is there in attitude to be measured? Attitude are the expression or aspects
of whole personality of the social being. It is therefore no easy matter for observer to
apprehend their quality from external sign. We do measure certain quantitative aspects of
things but we do not measure the things itself, e.g. we can measure the length and width
of a table, not the table itself. So usually attitude measurers are thinking of the degree of
favour and disfavour with which the individual regards some object. He is thinking of the
intensity of the attitudes. To be sure, the attitude measurers are generally concerned with
attitudes and not in there full significance, as reverence and admiration and respect, and
so forth, but in a simplified form as merely favour and disfavour of some object. However,
the question arises: has the object itself precisely the same significance for the various
persons who exhibit attitude towards it? Does “democracy”, “religion” etc means the same
thing to them? If not , a measuring scale cannot yield exactly comparable results applied
to the attitudes of different persons. However, carefully constructed and expertly used
attitude scales often provide us with very useful information about social institutions. Some
of the scales constructed are Bogardus social distance scale, to measure the social-
psychological distance between a person and various racial and nationality groups, Likert
scale, Thurstone scale etc.
12
Ontology and Epistemology

Ontology: It deals with nature of reality; whether objective or constructed or subjective.
 Objectivism: social phenomena and their meanings have existence that is independent
of actors
 Feature of objectivism:
 Reality and truth exist objectively and can be discovered and measured adequately
 Reality is ‘out there’, has an identity of its own, and exists apart from our awareness.
 Reality is single, solid and uniform: it generates the same meaning to all actors.
 Reality is ‘found’ by the researcher and brought to awareness and to social light.
 Obsevance of objective detachment and value neutrality is desirable.
 Constructionism:
 Reality is constructed
 Reality is one thing, understanding of the same is different
 An object gets meaning when it is provided by our mind or human being attaches
meaning to it
13
 What people perceive as reality is “not reality” rather construction through
experiences and interpretation
 The presence of the objective reality is not disputed. It exists but not accessible
Basic assumptions of Constructionism:
1. There is no objective reality; the physical world exists but not accessible to human
endeavour.
2. There are no absolute truths.
3. Knowledge does not come through the sense alone.
4. Research focuses on the construction of meanings.
5. Meanings are not fixed but emerge out of people’s interaction in the world.
6. Meanings do not exist before a mind engages them
7. The world is constructed by the people who live in it
 Central to reality construction is “communication”.

 Communication is a selective process of producing meaning in social contexts. This
process has three components:
14
(a) The choice of a piece of information
(b) The choice of the form of information that will be shared
(c) The choice of understanding of this information.
Epistemology: ways of acquiring knowledge/theory of knowledge. It is also of two types:

Empiricism and Interpretivism.
 Empiricism:
 Traced in the writings of Francis Bacon(1651 – 1726), John Lock (1632 – 1704) and
David Hume (1711 – 1776).
 Knowledge comes through experience mediated through the senses.
 Product of direct observation
 insight can only be achieved through pure experiences
 Logical empiricism or Radical empiricism argues that only things that can be verified
empirically exist. What cannot be verified does not exist; truths that are not based on
experience are meaningless.
15
 Interpretivism:
 Looks for culturally derived and historically situated interpretation of the social life
world
 Rooted in the work of Max Weber, Wilhem Dilthey, Wilhem Windelband, Henry
Rickert.
 ‘Interpretive’ means to emphasize the production of meanings and to learn the special
views of actors, in other words, the local meaning.
 Positivism and non-positivism – positivist theory contains a realist/objectivist ontology

and empiricist epistemology whereas non-positivist theories which include symbolic
interactionism, phenomenology, ethnomethodology, feminism etc. contain constructionist
ontology and an interpretivist epistemology. The theoretical construction of research can
be represented as in the table below:
16
Positivist Symbolic interactionism,
phenomenology, feminism etc.
Ontology Realism/objectivism Constructionism
Epistemology Empiricism Interpretivism
methodology Quantitative Qualitative
Fact – value relationship

Two major views:
1. Fact – Value dichotomy approach
2. Fact – Value distinction but not disengaged approach
The second approach gives rise to two implications:
1. Maintaining value neutrality (Max Weber)

2. Complete objectivity neither possible nor desirable
1. Fact – Value dichotomy approach:
17
(a) Appeared with the writings of enlightenment thinker like David Hume in eighteenth
century
(b) It is based on Naturalistic Fallacy that ethical statements cannot be deduced from
non – ethical statements i.e. “What ought to be?” cannot be derived from “What
is?”
(c) Logical positivist furthered the idea of fact – value dichotomy
(i) Values are feelings, emotions or useless metaphysical entities and not subject of
scientific analysis
(ii) Facts are based on pristine(pure) observations – i.e. Foundationalism
(d) According to Positivists, facts derived from experiment and observation, could be
called truth and rejected all talk about values (ethics, morals, religion, philosophy)
(e) Fact – value dichotomy approach has been criticized for discussion stopper, not
just a discussion stopper but thought stopper – by Hilary Putnam.
(f) Following errors have been found in this approach by non-positivists:
(i) That values play no role in the realms of facts as facts are solid and provable
whereas values are matters of personal choice
(ii) Values are not involved in the determination of facts
18
(iii) Values, being matters of personal taste, cannot be reasoned about
(iv) Values are completely subjective and have no objective qualities.
(v) Denial mode is likely not to recognize the presence of values, not identifying their
assumptions and not examining them. This is an obstruction in attaining value –
neutrality.
2. Role of values in sociological enquiry:

Two approaches about the role of values in sociological inquiries
Fact-value dichotomy approach fact-value distinction but not disengaged approach

Or Positivist approach
Values reduces the objectivity hence It is empirically impossible to separate values from
need to be excluded facts and it plays some important role. Without value
presupposition sociological enquiry is not possible.
19
Role of values:
1. Theoretical perspective provide visibility to researcher and theory selection always pre-
supposes values. (Hillary Putnam)
2. Values are prime mover of curiosity. It helps in selection of field of study as Weber says,
“selection of field of study (goal) is never rational or value free”.
3. All sociological inquiries start with certain Ontological and epistemological positions which are
themselves value.
4. Values play an important role in segregating useful data from useless data. It helps in
structuring and ordering of facts.
Every intellectual enquiry has to be guided by standards for sorting the true from the false,
established facts from uncertain ones, interesting facts and problems from those which will tell
us nothing new or significant, promising lines of enquiry from probable dead – ends, well
conducted from ill conducted enquiry.
5. Result of a sociological enquiry need to be plausible/ should meet plausibility criteria.
20
is based on is based on
Plausibility of Result Peer Evaluation various value criteria like
fit, correspondence,
reasonableness,harmonization
etc.
is evaluative. Michael Polyani addresses the value-
laden nature of the peer – evaluation of scientific
activity
Merit of a contribution is assessed on:

1. Accuracy
2. Systemic importance
3. Intrinsic interest of its subject matter these last two are valuative.
Physical chemist turned philosopher, Michael Polanyi addresses the value laden nature of
the peer evaluation of scientific activity. According to him, scientific journals engage in
‘censorship’ in order to “eliminate obvious absurdities” and refuse publication merely because
the conclusion of a paper appear to be unsound in light of current scientific knowledge.
21
Secondly, results of a scientific enquiry is to be plausible & plausibility is attained through
peer evaluation. According to Polanyi, plausibility is a complex judgement which is based on
several value criteria viz. Fit, Correspondence and reasonableness. Arguments and
conclusion that may lead away from pre-conceived or accepted ideas may be labelled as
pseudo-science, even though they are presented with robust evidence and rational
methodology.
Polanyi, further says “the second criterion by which the merit of a contribution is assessed
may be described as scientific value, a value that is composed of following three coefficient:
1. Its accuracy
2. Its systematic importance and
3. Intrinsic interest of its subject matter.
Accuracy may be seen as an empirically supported concept but systematic importance and
intrinsic interest of subject matter is clearly valuative.
22
Critique of Positivism: Positivism is criticized on following counts
1. Manners in which reality was addressed and defined (ontology)

2. The manner in which knowledge extraction was conducted (epistemology)
3. The ways in which research was designed and conducted ( research design and
method of data collection). Adoption of methods of physical sciences as tools of social
research
4. The relationship between researcher and the researched
5. The perception of gender
6. Neglect of class divide etc.
Critique of Positivism:
Philosophy Phenomenological Critical

of Sciences School of thought school of Thought
23
Philosophy of Sciences:
 Karl Popper -
 Thomas S.kuhn
 Paul Feyerabend
Karl Popper
 Rejected classical empiricism
 Put forward the theory of Falsification
 Critical rationalism
 Criticized inductivist model of science and termed scientific method as hypothetico –
deductivism
Maintains that our observations Knowledge is derived from the theoretical

are theory independent. presumptions. Theories are our own
construction, not the functions of anything
like pure observations.
24
Analogy:
Inductivism Hypothetico-deductivism
Accused is considered innocent till he Accused is considered culprit/guilty till

is proved guilty evidence in his favour is arrived at
Onus of proof on complainant Onus of proof on accused
 Scientific theories are abstract and can be tested only indirectly, by reference to their
implications.
 No number of positive outcomes at the level of experimental testing can confirm a scientific
theory, but a single counter example is logically decisive
 Popper attacked Marxism as a pseudo-scientific theory as it cannot be falsified. Marxism
adopts a deterministic approach and Marxian theory is considered/declared true. This
25
claim in itself is unscientific. If we compare this with Weber’s theory, the later is more
scientific as it is falsifiable. Falsifiability means elimination of errors.
 Thus, inductivist method i.e. Verificationism/Positivism is against the critical spirit
of science.
Popper’s philosophy:
1. Does justice to critical spirit of science as it makes a scientific enquiry always tentative
and vulnerable to be falsified.
2. Hypothetico-deductivism prevents science from being narrow and helps in progressive
generalization
3. Replaces truth by the term verisimilitude (truth likeness or truth nearness). Theories
being relaced by better theories i.e. higher degree of verisimilitude.
Scientific method
Two types
Inductivism/verificationism hypothetico-deductivism
Observation independent of theory observation, a product of theoretical presumptions
26
 If Newtonian theory is based on Inductive-generalization then Einstein’s relativity
theory is a product of hypothetico deductivism.
 In sociology the two approaches positivist & non-positivist has helped in
understanding society
 Positivism at the one hand has helped in the understanding of the order and
stability then non-positivism has helped in understanding the change in the society.
Note: Popper is also criticized for veiled supporter of positivism
Thomas S.kuhn
 T.S.Kuhn theory is a criticism of inductivism and hypothetico deductivism, the two scientific
(positive methods). According to Kuhn inductivism and falsification theory of Karl Popper
(hypothetico deductivism) both talk about the linear progress of science which cannot be
taken for granted.
27
 In his book, “The structure of scientific revolution” he talks about paradigm*. According to
him, every scientific discipline passes through pre paradigmatic stage and paradigmatic
stage.
Major sciences
Two stage
Pre-Paradigmatic stage Paradigmatic stage
When a discipline reaches to paradigmatic stage, it is said to be ‘mature’ or ‘science’ in the

proper sense of the term.
 Astronomy was the first to make such transition ( pre paradigmatic to paradigmatic stage)
followed by physics, chemistry and biology.
 Social sciences, according to Kuhn, are still in pre-paradigmatic stage with only
economics showing some sign of transition.
 Once a science possess paradigm, it develops a “normal science tradition”. Normal
science is a cumulative enterprise. It does not question the existing paradigm rather
attempts to increase the precision of existing theory.
28
 When a paradigm fails to promote fruitful, interesting and a smooth normal science, it is
considered to be in crisis.
 Leads to replacement of existing paradigm. This process of replacement is known as

“scientific revolution”. E.g. In physics, analogue paradigm being replaced by digital
(Discrete) paradigm. In sociology, we can say that Conflict paradigm of Marx being
replaced by Functional paradigm.
 Normal science occupies much larger span than revolutionary science.
 Hence, science is not characterized by cumulative growth of theories.
*Paradigm specifies the ultimate constituent of sphere of reality, identifies model problems,
specifies possible range of solution, Provides necessary strategies and techniques for
solving problems, provides example which shows how to solve certain problems
29
Epistemological pluralism/Anarchism
 “Epistemological pluralism” is an epistemological theory advanced by Austrian philosopher of
science Paul Feyerabend in his book “Against Method”. The approach is inspired by J.S.Mill’s
concept of methodological pluralism.
 He was said the worst enemy of science.
 According to him, History of science shows that there is no useful and exception free
methodological rules governing the progress of science or the growth of knowledge. Thus the
idea that science can or should operate according to universal and fixed rule is unrealistic,
pernicious and detrimental to science itself.
 According to Feyerabend, the world we want to explore is largely unknown entity. Hence we must
keep our option open and not limit ourselves to anyone method.
 One epistemological prescription may look splendid when compared with other epistemological
prescriptions… but who can guarantee that they are the best way to discover not just a few
isolated facts, but some deep lying secrets of nature.
30
 According to Feyerabend, all methodologies have their own limitations and the only rule apply
that survives is “anything goes”.
 Thus the idea that science can or should operate according to universal and fixed rule is
unrealistic, pernicious and detrimental to science itself.
 Hence epistemological pluralism is essential for science.
Phenomenological School:
Phenomenology is a philosophical movement, which was founded in the early years of the twentieth
century in by Edmund Husserl(1859-1938) and was later expanded by his followers in Germany.
Husserl defined it as “the essence of consciousness”.
This philosophy was used first by Alfred Schutz(1899-1959) in sociology. Schutz work provided a
critical philosophical foundation to Max Weber to develop interpretative sociology(Verstehen
Sociologie).
Edmund Husserl:
31
 Phenomenology is mainly concerned with the internal working of human mind and the way it
classifies and make sense of the world around them. It becomes the basis for development of
social action approach of Max Weber but it is not itself concerned about the causal explanation
of Social Action as Weber was.
 Phenomenologists try to understand the meaning of phenomenon or things rather than explaining
how they came into existence.
 According to phenomenologist, the only medium that brings individuals in contact with the outside
world is their senses, but the face value of sensory experience is meaningless. The experience
becomes meaningful, make sense only when the observer(Individual) attaches some meanings
to it.
 To overcome the meaninglessness of sensory experiences, human begins to organize the world
around them into phenomenon i.e. classify their sense experience into things that appear to have
common characteristics.
 Eg. (Based on characteristic features like colour, moveability etc) a distinction can be made
between animate and inanimate objects. Animate objects can be further classified on mammals
32
and non-mammals and further mammals may be divided into different species, different breeds
etc.
 According to Husserl, this process of classification is not objective. It is product of the human
mind, and could not be evaluated in terms of whether it is true or false.
 Husserl does not deny the existence of physical objects beyond human mind, but since people
could only come into contact with them through their senses, they could never be sure about their
true nature.
 Thus, in trying to secure knowledge, humans had to ‘bracket’ reality and common-sense beliefs;
that is, put them as it were, inside brackets and forget about their true nature. (Bracketing means
suspending the judgement about truthfulness of the things, instead, focusing on analysis of
experience)
 Once they do this, they turn their attention to a phenomenological understanding of the world.
Alfred Schutz:
 Alfred Schutz extended phenomenological philosophy of Husserl to understand the social reality.
Schutz’s main contribution was to insist that the way the humans classified and attached meaning
33
to the outside world was not a purely individual process. Typification is not unique to each person,
but shared by members of a society.
 The typification, shared by members of a society, is passed on to children through a language,
reading books or speaking to other people.(Socialization)
 By the use of typifications, people are able to communicate with others on the basis of the
assumptions that they see the world in the same way. Gradually, members of a society build up
a stock of what Schutz calls “common-sense knowledge”, which is shared with other members of
society that allows humans to live and communicate together.
 Schutz stresses that such knowledge is shared but not fixed and unchanging. It is constantly
modified in the course of human interaction.
 Further, Schutz acknowledges that each individual has a unique biography, and interprets and
experiences the world in a slightly different way; but the existence of a stock of commonsense
knowledge allows humans to understand, at least partly, each other’s action.
 In doing so, they convince themselves that there are regular and ordered patterns in the world,
and in social life.
34
 From this point of view, humans create between themselves the illusion that there is stability and
order in society, wherein in reality there is simply a jumble of individual experiences that have np
shape or form.
Ethnomethodology: Harold Garfinkel
 The term, ethnomethodology, was coined by Harold Garfinkel in 1967. While Schutz merely
speculated about the nature of society without carrying out any detailed research,
Ethnomethodlogists applied phenomenological ideas in carrying out the research.
 Roughly, ethnomethodology means a ‘study of the methods people use.’ It is concerned with the
methods used by people to construct, account for and give meaning to their social world.
 Garfinkel follows Schutz in believing that there is no real social order. The existing order is
perceived reality rather than objective reality. Social life appears orderly only because members
actively engage in making sense of social life.
 According to Garfinkel, members of society employ the ‘documentary method’ to make sense of
and account for the social world and to give appearance of order. This method consists of
selecting certain aspects of the infinite number of features contained in any situation or context,
defining them in a particular way, and seeing them as evidence of an underlying patterns. The
35
process is then reversed and particular instances of the underlying pattern are used as evidence
for the existence of pattern.
 Eg. In Atkinson’s case study of coroners, those deaths defined as suicide were seen as such by
reference to an underlying pattern. This pattern is the coroner’s common-sense theory of suicide.
However, at the same time, those deaths defined as suicide were seen as evidence for the
existence of the underlying pattern. In this way, particular instances of the patter and the pattern
itself are mutually reinforcing and are elaborate to each other. Hence, the two are reflexive.
Symbolic interaction:
 Though considered to be developed by G.H.Mead, the term is the innovation of Herbert Blumer.
 It developed separately from European philosophy of phenomenology. It is American counterpart
of phenomenology.
 According to Manis and Meltzer, symbolic interaction is concerned with the ‘inner’ or
phenomenological aspects of human behaviour.
36
 In the ultimate analysis, these two are same except that phenomenology puts emphasis on
nature of subject matter whereas symbolic interaction emphasizes on the process of
interaction.
G.H.Mead:
 Human beings interact in terms of symbols, the most important being the language.
 Symbols not only define objects but action too.
 It imposes particular meanings on objects and events and in doing so largely exclude other
possible meaning. E.g. chair.
 Symbols provide the means whereby men can interact meaningfully with his natural and social
environments. Symbols are manmade.
 Symbolic interaction is necessary because man is not genetically programmed to react
automatically to particular stimuli. Social life can proceed only if the meanings of symbols are
largely shared by members of society.
37
 Common symbols provide only means by which human intercation can be accomplished. In
order for interaction to proceed each person involved must interpret the meanings and
intentions of others.
 Role taking: explain
 Mead’s view of human inetraction sees man as both actively creating the social environment
and being shaped by it.
Herbert Blumer:
 Disciple of G.H.Mead
 Developed Mead’s ideas more systematically.
 Three basic premises:
1. Human beings act on the basis of meanings which they give to objects and events rather
than simply reacting either to external stimuli such as social forces (functionalism) or internal
stimuli such as organic determinism (naturalism).
38
Refutes societal and biological determinism
2. Meaning arises from the process of interaction i.e. meanings are created, modified,
developed and changed within interaction situations rather than being fixed and performed.
Each event of interaction is capable of creating new meanings
3. Meanings are the result of interpretative procedures employed by actors within interaction
contexts.
Blumer maintains that society must be seen as an ongoing process of interaction involving actors
who are constantly adjusting to one another and continuously interpreting the situation.
Thus meanings are in flux.
39
Idealism and Neo-idealism:
Idealism and Realism have been the two philosophical poles of historical theory and inquiry since
the early nineteenth century. The term itself was used by Liebnitz as early as 1702 to refer to the
doctrines of Plato. A word with “a multitude of shifty meanings”, idealism is linked to modern
historiography in two distinct but interrelated senses – one metaphysical, the other epistemological.
These two may be referred to as the “old” and “new” idealist traditions. Epistemological dealism is
known as neo-idealism. Neo-idealism is closely associated with “Neo-Kantianism,” the revival of
interest in Kant that flourished in central Europe about 1870-1920. It was part of a reaction against
Hegel and speculative philosophy in general that set in about 1850 and the subsequent rise of the
idea that philosophy’s proper task was not metaphysical but epistemological: the analysis of human
knowledge. This was seen in terms of Kant’s distinction between knowledge of things “in
themselves” and things as they are perceived. In history neo-idealism arose from the controversy
over the relationship of the methods of natural science vis-à-vis other branches of learning. Pioneers
of the new approach – for example, Wilhem Dilthey, Wilhem Windelband, Henrich Rickert – argued
that the “cultural sciences” or “sciences of the mind” (Geisteswissenschaften) differed radically from
the “natural sciences” (Naturawissenschaften). According to this distinction precise and impersonal
40
observation is possible in the natural sciences, but cultural sciences depend strongly on intuition
and empathy; the point of (nomothetic) natural sciences seek to comprehend human affairs in their
unique temporal contexts. In contrast to the old idealism, neo-idealism viewed history as a discipline,
or system of ideas with its own logic of investigation, not an esoteric spiritual process. Yet –
especially in Germany – the new idealism was still decidedly “spiritual” in tone. Dilthey, for instance,
held that the subject matter of history was “Objective Mind”. By this he meant that the “human spirit’
is Objectified in certain visible phenomenon such as language, literature, laws, architecture, religion,
music, tools, art, towns etc …. The historian can study these objective expressions of man’s mind
in the past and through them he can can enter into and “relive” the human experiences in the past.
(Excerpts from “Dictionary of concepts in history” By Harry Ritter)
Critical School:
Frankfurt School:
 The Frankfurt School (German: Frankfurter Schule) was a school of social theory and critical
philosophy associated with the Institute for Social Research, at Goethe University Frankfurt.
Founded in the Weimar Republic (1918–33), during the European interwar period (1918–39), the
41
Frankfurt School comprised intellectuals, academics, and political dissidents dissatisfied with the
contemporary socio-economic systems (capitalist, fascist, communist) of the 1930s.
 The Frankfurt theorists proposed that (existing)social theory was inadequate for explaining the
turbulent political factionalism and reactionary politics occurring in 20th century liberal capitalist
societies. Critical of capitalism and of Marxism–Leninism as philosophically inflexible systems of
social organization, the School's critical theory research indicated alternative paths to realizing
the social development of a society and a nation.
 Frankfurt School counters Positivism at two important counts
(i) Purpose of Sociology
(ii) Status quoism
Critical school criticizes Marx determinism, Weber’s existentialism and Durkheimians emphasis on
observation from outside. To them, purpose of sociology is not simply to explain and understand
society, but, too change it. All of the above contributors, mainly positivists, have confined themselves
to observing the society from outside and believing that society is governed by natural laws
(Naturalism). Positivism focuses on the things that can be observed (from outside) and therefore on
the surface, rather than things which are hidden or the underlying ranks between them. As a result,
42
Positivism is unable to conceive of “the possibility of things otherwise than they are”. Sociology
should be developed from the point of view of subaltern group, the exploited class of society and its
aim should be to create a just society.
Positivism does not consider the role of power differential b/w men and men, b/w bourgeoisie and
proletariat. Positivism is a bourgeoisie ideology to project world order (capitalism) as natural. By
doing so they promote status – quo in society.
Positivist defense of scientific objectivity and value-neutrality is itself a value commitment (one which
supports the status quo)
Feminist school:
1. While Frankfurt school draws heavily on the power differential between haves and have not’s,
Feminist school uses the power differential between men and women to criticize positivism.
2. They have criticized positivist methodology for being masculine and androcentric. For which they
have provided following rationale:
(a) By using the concept of “rational man”, positivists have, intentionally or
unintentionally, excluded women as the agents of knowledge. This ideology entails
43
the often unstated assumption that the characteristics of ‘rational man’ are actually the
characteristics of males. Whereas ‘man’ is associated with culture, rationality, knowledge
and science, ‘women’ as “Other of man”, is associated with nature, superstition and
emotion. Associated with nature, ‘women’ could only be object, not the subject, of scientific
knowledge.
(b) The evidence is stated in the fact that there is hardly any, in fact none, women as
prominent positivists.
(c) Women have altogether been excluded from the legitimate research.
3. According to them positivism is an attempt to maintain status quo in a patriarchal society. They
have shown that how science has been used in the interests of (white, bourgeoisie) men
by, for example, constructing masculinity and feminity in particular ways and by
naturalizing these notions. Hence, gender, the sexual division of labour and the sexual status
quo have been constituted as putatively natural facts rather than as socio-political constructions
and practices. That is, science has played a part in the construction and regulation of
gender and oppressive gender relations (Walkerdine, 1986; Foucault, 1979; Ussher, 1991).
44
Negative Consequences of Science and Technology:

Development of science and technology is synonymous to modernization of society. It’s negative
consequences are
1. Imparts instrumental rationality and consequently loss of meaning to life
2. Induces division of labour, profit motive and hence Alienation
3. Anomie
4. Atomisation of individuals
5. Increases, economic, social and power inequality
6. Ecological destruction
7. Weapons of mass destruction
All these to be discussed in subsequent topics.
45

Sociology As Science

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sociology As Science

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NICE IAS in association with Unacademy

Topic – Sociology as science

1. Galileo Galilei – 1564 to 1642

 In France, Le Play conducted research into typical families of workers (sociography)

The basic premise or postulates of positivism can be listed as follows:

Issue of measurement in social sciences:

Ontology and Epistemology

Basic assumptions of Constructionism:

 Central to reality construction is “communication”.

Epistemology: ways of acquiring knowledge/theory of knowledge. It is also of two types:

 Positivism and non-positivism – positivist theory contains a realist/objectivist ontology

Epistemology Empiricism Interpretivism

methodology Quantitative Qualitative

Fact – value relationship

1. Maintaining value neutrality (Max Weber)

1. Fact – Value dichotomy approach:

2. Role of values in sociological enquiry:

Fact-value dichotomy approach fact-value distinction but not disengaged approach

Merit of a contribution is assessed on:

1. Manners in which reality was addressed and defined (ontology)

Philosophy Phenomenological Critical

Maintains that our observations Knowledge is derived from the theoretical

Accused is considered innocent till he Accused is considered culprit/guilty till

Onus of proof on complainant Onus of proof on accused

Note: Popper is also criticized for veiled supporter of positivism

Pre-Paradigmatic stage Paradigmatic stage

When a discipline reaches to paradigmatic stage, it is said to be ‘mature’ or ‘science’ in the

 Leads to replacement of existing paradigm. This process of replacement is known as

 Role taking: explain

Refutes societal and biological determinism

Each event of interaction is capable of creating new meanings

Thus meanings are in flux.

Negative Consequences of Science and Technology:

You might also like