LECTURE NOTES-INTRO TO SOCIOLOGY

TOPIC: SOCIOLOGY AND SCIENCE

A great deal of debate surrounds the approach to the study of sociology. There are those who contend
that it should be treated as a natural science and those who insist it should not. By extension there are
those who argue that sociological research should be based on objective measurements of observable
data, while others favor methods that allow for the examination of the meanings that people hold about
the world.

Natural Sciences—describe those sciences concerned with researching the “world of nature” the natural

world. Science is concerned with the accumulation of verifiable (capable of being proven true)

knowledge. It has traditionally used two methods observation and experimentation. It is important that

observations are precisely and accurately made. To establish the truth of an observation it helps to

repeat it. Sociologist makes full use of observation but very little use of laboratory experiment.

Scientific research of an explanatory kind often involves establishing whether the scientist initial idea

(hypothesis) is true or false. The research is the means by which the hypothesis becomes a proven

theory. The process of explanatory scientific enquiry involves seven stages.

1. Observation of phenomena

2. Hypothesis

3. Collection of data using systematic methods

4. Analysis of data

5. Test hypothesis against data

6. Confirmation or refutation of data

7. Theory-a generalization built upon a repeatedly confirmed hypothesis. These are sometimes

referred to as scientific laws, for example, the law of gravity or Einstein’s law of relativity. These

laws state that given precisely the same conditions, specific factors or elements will interact in

the same way. An important consequence of this is that natural science provides the basis of
 prediction, that is, it provides a logical means of establishing what will happen to certain things

in given conditions.

IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE?

It is widely held that the idea of sociology as a science has its roots in a school of thought known as

positivism. Auguste Comte who coined the term sociology, held the view that the study of sociology

should be based on the principles and procedures similar to those applied to the study of the natural

sciences. He argued that taking this approach would show that the behavior of human beings, like the

behavior of matter was governed by “invariable laws of cause and effect”. The positivist approach rest

on two main points;

1. The behavior of human beings like the behavior of matter can be observed and objectively

measured.

2. In order to explain human behavior, it is impo rtant to measure it.

Drawing on those two positions, the positivists in the field contend that statements of cause and effect

can be derived from observations of behavior that are based on objective measurement. Then out of

these statements’ theories may be formulated to explain observed behavior. Positivist discredits any

perspective that seeks to explore factors that are not directly observable, for example, meanings and

feelings.

There are those who argue that sociology has demonstrated that it can and does function as a science.

They would say that while it may be extreme to talk about invariable laws, sociologist have come up

with “laws” that apply when certain conditions occur together. For example, there is a law that the

extended family structures tend to prevail where the family is also a farming unit.

Positivist agrees that sociology shares four key characteristics with all sciences.
 1. It is empirical-It is based on observation and reasoning, not imagination or revelation and its

results are not speculative. Sociologists do not guess.

2. It is theoretical-This means that sociology attempts to summarize complex observations in

abstract, logically related principles which will explain causal relationships in the subject matter.

3. It is cumulative- This means that sociological theories build one on the other. New theories

correct, extend and refine older ones.

4. It is objective and non-ethical- Sociologist try to put their personal biases aside and strive to be

detached in their approach to the part of social life that they are investigating. Sociologists do

not ask whether a particular action is good or bad, they just seek to explain them.

Counter Arguments

There are some sociologists who insist on severing the link between sociology and the natural sciences.

Anthony Giddens, contends that, “the conception that sociology belongs to the natural sciences and

hence would slavishly try to copy their procedures and objectives, is a mistaken one”. He objects on the

bases that “we cannot treat human activities as though they were determined by cause and effect in the

same way as natural events”. Giddens further contend that the rigid cause-effect approach of the

natural sciences cannot be imported into the study of sociology. He argues that human beings do not

only respond to stimuli but are creatively impacting their environment.

Interpretive sociologists are less concerned with causal explanation or factual description than with

human understanding. Interpretive sociologist willingly embraces what embarrasses the positivist, the

subjective elements in society and sociological research. Subjectivity cuts two ways: Researchers have

their own values, and those being studied behave individually and therefore in a way that cannot be

precisely predicted.
Ethnomethodologist such as Circourel and garfinkel, claim it is impossible for sociologist to be passive

observers of the “truth”. What they see is bound, in some sense, to be the result of the interaction

between themselves and what they study.

Phenomenologist further argues that people can think and choose. They may even decide to

deliberately mislead the researcher. Because of this the level of accurate prediction in the social

sciences can never be as high as in the natural sciences.

Few sociologists since Comte have believed that either the method or precise aims of the natural

sciences could be applied wholesale to sociology. In practice, sociologist have adapted some of the

methods of the natural sciences for their own use, as well as, developing some that rarely, if ever, used

in the natural sciences.

If science is defined broadly as the accumulation of verifiable knowledge, then sociology is a science. If it

is defined narrowly as the testing of hypothesis by positivistic methods, then sociology can hardly claim

to be science. It is true that sociology rarely produces results that are as precise and repeatable as those

produced by the natural sciences, Nevertheless, Durkheim, Marx, and Weber never stopped trying to be

as scientific as possible and their work laid the basis for the further development of the discipline along

scientific lines.

Prepared by

Ruiz Warren