What Is Science and Can Sociology Be Scientific?

Ever wondered if studying society can be as precise as studying chemistry or physics? This fundamental question has divided sociologists for over a century, and the answer shapes how we understand everything from crime to education.

Science relies on four key features: empirical evidence (measurable data), testability (others can verify findings), cumulative knowledge (building on previous research), and objectivity (removing personal bias). However, studying humans creates unique challenges that don't exist in natural sciences.

The main problems include unpredictability (humans don't always behave logically), artificiality (labs don't reflect real social situations), and the Hawthorne effect (people act differently when they know they're being watched). Plus, there are serious ethical issues with treating humans like lab rats.

Kuhn's paradigm theory suggests that science isn't as objective as we think. Scientists work within accepted frameworks called paradigms - sets of theories and methods that everyone agrees on. Most of the time, they're just solving puzzles within these boundaries rather than challenging fundamental ideas. Only during scientific revolutions do paradigms actually change.

Quick Tip: Think of paradigms like the rules of football - players work within them most of the time, but occasionally someone suggests changing the offside rule entirely!

Positivists believe sociology can be scientific by gathering quantitative data and creating testable theories. Interpretivists disagree, arguing we need verstehen (understanding through empathy) because humans create meanings that can't be measured like physical objects.

Values and Objectivity in Sociological Research

Can sociologists ever be truly neutral, or do their personal beliefs always creep into their research? This debate affects everything from government policies to how we understand social problems.

Weber argued that whilst choosing research topics reflects our values, the actual research process should be value-free. Researchers must be willing to abandon their theories if evidence contradicts them. However, critics point out that even seemingly objective facts require subjective judgements about what to measure and how.

Positivists believe objectivity is both possible and essential. They focus on observable behaviours, use mathematical analysis, and design studies that others can replicate. This approach treats social research like natural science, aiming to discover universal laws about human behaviour.

Interpretivists argue that subjectivity isn't just unavoidable - it's actually necessary. Since people's experiences depend on their viewpoint, researchers need to understand different perspectives rather than pretending to be completely neutral.

Reality Check: Even choosing what questions to ask involves values - why study crime rather than kindness?

Funding and careers also shape research. Government departments and businesses pay for studies, potentially influencing what gets researched and what findings get published. Sociologists might also self-censor to protect their careers, making truly independent research difficult.

Committed sociology suggests researchers should openly declare their values and use sociology to challenge inequality. Becker famously argued "we cannot avoid taking sides" - the question isn't whether to have values, but whose side we're on.

Functionalism: Society as a System

Think of society like a human body - every part working together to keep the whole system healthy. This biological analogy forms the foundation of functionalism, sociology's first major theoretical perspective that dominated thinking in the 1950s and 60s.

Parsons developed the organic analogy, comparing social institutions (family, education, religion) to body organs. Just as your heart and lungs work together to keep you alive, these institutions collaborate to meet society's basic needs. The key insight is that everything serves a function - a purpose that helps society survive and thrive.

Social order depends on value consensus - everyone agreeing on basic norms and values. Through socialisation, we learn what society expects from us and internalise these expectations. Social control then uses rewards and punishments to keep everyone in line, creating a harmonious, stable society.

Parsons identified four system needs: adaptation (economic system meets material needs), goal attainment (political system sets priorities), integration (education and religion unite people), and latent pattern maintenance (family manages stress and passes on culture). These AGIL functions must all be fulfilled for society to survive.

Think About It: Your school serves multiple functions - not just education, but also childcare, social control, and preparing future workers.

Merton criticised Parsons for assuming everything was beneficial (universal functionalism), perfectly integrated (functional unity), and irreplaceable (indispensability). Merton showed that some things can be dysfunctional and that functional alternatives often exist.

However, critics argue functionalism is too deterministic (treating people like puppets), teleological (explaining causes by their effects), and conservative (justifying inequality as necessary for social harmony).

Marxism: Class Conflict and Social Change

Whilst functionalists see harmony, Marxists see conflict. For Marx, society isn't a balanced system but a battleground where the rich exploit the poor, and this conflict drives all social change.

Historical materialism argues that economic factors shape everything else in society. The mode of production (how we make things) forms the economic base, which then influences the superstructure (law, politics, religion, media). As technology advances, class conflicts emerge that eventually transform entire societies.

Capitalism creates two main classes: the bourgeoisie (who own factories, land, and resources) and the proletariat (who only own their labour power). Workers are legally free but economically forced to sell their labour for survival. However, they're not paid the full value of what they produce - the boss keeps the surplus value as profit.

This exploitation leads to alienation - workers lose control over their labour and become disconnected from their human creativity. The division of labour reduces people to mindlessly repeating the same tasks, turning work into a soul-crushing experience rather than a fulfilling activity.

Modern Example: Think about warehouse workers monitored by AI, with every movement tracked and timed - classic alienation in action.

Marx predicted that class consciousness would develop as workers realise their shared exploitation. They'd transform from a class in itself (people in similar economic positions) to a class for itself (organised group fighting for change). This would lead to revolution and eventually a classless, communist society.

Neo-Marxists like Gramsci focused on ideology and hegemony - how ruling classes maintain control through ideas rather than just force. Althusser identified ideological state apparatuses (education, media, religion) that shape thinking, and repressive state apparatuses (police, army) that use force when ideology fails.

Feminism: Challenging Patriarchy

Feminism fundamentally changed sociology by asking: "What about women?" This perspective revealed how mainstream sociology had been malestream - seeing society only from men's experiences whilst ignoring half the population.

Liberal feminists are optimistic reformers who believe gradual progress toward equality is happening. They focus on changing socialisation patterns and discriminatory laws. Oakley's distinction between sex (biological) and gender (cultural) showed that gender roles aren't natural but learned, meaning they can be changed through better education and role models.

Radical feminists see patriarchy as the fundamental problem - a system where men dominate women universally. They argue that "the personal is political" because male power operates in private relationships, not just public institutions. Their solutions include separatism (women living independently from men) and consciousness-raising groups where women share experiences.

Marxist feminists blame capitalism rather than men directly. Women's unpaid domestic labour serves capitalism by reproducing and maintaining the workforce whilst keeping women economically dependent. Barrett's ideology of familism shows how society promotes the idea that women can only find fulfilment through family roles.

Key Insight: Different feminisms disagree on the main cause of women's oppression - is it patriarchy, capitalism, or both working together?

Difference feminists criticise other feminisms for essentialism - assuming all women share identical experiences. They highlight how class, ethnicity, and sexuality create different forms of oppression. Black feminists, for example, argue that the family provides protection against racism rather than just oppression.

Poststructuralist feminists like Butler reject the idea of fixed gender categories entirely, seeing them as discourses that create power relations. This challenges the very foundations of traditional feminist theory.

Action Theories: Understanding Individual Meaning

Forget grand theories about social structures - action theorists focus on how individuals create society through their everyday choices and interactions. This micro-level approach treats people as active agents rather than passive victims of social forces.

Weber combined structure and action, arguing that complete explanations need both structural causes (economic and social pressures) and subjective meanings (how people interpret their situations). His famous study of the Protestant work ethic showed how religious beliefs motivated the hard work and saving that created modern capitalism.

Weber classified action into four types: instrumentally rational (choosing efficient means to achieve goals), value-rational (acting on principles regardless of consequences), traditional (following customs), and affectual (emotional responses). Understanding these motivations helps explain why people behave as they do.

Symbolic interactionists argue that humans are unique because we use symbols (especially language) to create meaning. Unlike animals who respond instinctively, we interpret situations before acting. Mead explained how we develop self-concepts by learning to see ourselves through others' eyes - first through significant others, then the generalised other (society as a whole).

Daily Example: When you choose clothes each morning, you're interpreting what different outfits might mean to others and managing the impression you want to create.

Labelling theory applies these insights to deviance. Becker showed how being labelled as deviant can become a self-fulfilling prophecy - people internalise labels and act accordingly, potentially developing deviant careers. However, labels can also be rejected, creating self-defeating prophecies.

Goffman's dramaturgical model treats social life like theatre, where we're all actors managing impressions for our audiences. We have front stage (public) and backstage (private) behaviours, constantly working to present convincing performances of our chosen roles.

Postmodernism: Challenging Truth and Reality

Welcome to a world where reality isn't what it seems and truth has become democratised. Postmodernism challenges everything sociology thought it knew about knowledge, identity, and society itself.

Postmodernists reject metanarratives - grand theories like Marxism or functionalism that claim to explain everything. Lyotard argued we've developed "incredulity towards metanarratives" because we no longer believe in single, universal truths. Instead, we have multiple, equally valid "language games" - different ways of understanding the world.

Knowledge isn't about truth anymore but about power and control. Foucault showed how those who define what counts as knowledge can dominate others. There's no objective way to prove one theory is better than another - it's all about perspective.

Baudrillard's concept of simulacra reveals how images and symbols have become more important than reality itself. We live in hyperreality where copies have no originals - think Instagram filters, reality TV, or Disneyland. The boundary between real and fake has completely dissolved.

Mind-Bending Question: If you mainly experience events through social media, are you living in reality or simulation?

This creates fragmented identities based on consumption rather than traditional categories like class or gender. We construct ourselves through what we buy and how we present ourselves online, constantly reinventing our identities.

Critics argue that postmodernism is self-defeating (why believe a theory that says no theories are true?), too pessimistic (abandoning the possibility of progress), and ignores real inequalities (poverty isn't just a matter of perspective). Some prefer late modernity theories like Beck's risk society, which updates rather than abandons modernist thinking.

Globalisation has accelerated these changes, creating time-space compression where distant events affect us immediately. Traditional boundaries between local and global, real and virtual, are breaking down in ways that transform how we understand society.

Social Policy: When Sociology Meets Government

Ever wondered how sociological research actually changes the real world? Social policy - government programmes designed to solve social problems - provides the crucial link between academic theory and practical action.

Functionalists and positivists see sociology as a tool for piecemeal social engineering. Durkheim believed scientific sociology could discover the causes of social problems and fix them systematically. This approach treats the state as serving society's interests, designing policies that help social systems function better.

Social democrats use sociological research to promote greater equality. Townsend's poverty research led to recommendations for higher benefits and increased public spending. The Black Report identified class-based health inequalities and proposed comprehensive policy solutions, though the Conservative government largely ignored its findings.

New Right theorists like Murray argue that welfare creates "perverse incentives" that encourage dependency rather than self-reliance. They believe generous benefits weaken family structures and personal responsibility, advocating for minimal state intervention instead.

Real Impact: The Breakdown Britain Report influenced Conservative policies promoting marriage and stay-at-home parenting through tax and benefit changes.

Feminists highlight how social policies often reflect patriarchal assumptions. Family policies typically assume nuclear families are "normal," making life harder for single parents or cohabiting couples. However, feminist research has also influenced positive changes like anti-discrimination laws and domestic violence refuges.

Several factors affect whether research influences policy: electoral popularity (unpopular policies get ignored), ideological alignment (research matching government beliefs gets heard), globalisation (international pressures), cost (expensive solutions face barriers), and funding sources (who pays may shape findings).

Critical sociologists worry that sociology has become too closely tied to powerful interests, serving capitalism rather than promoting genuine social change. Postmodernists question whether uncertain knowledge can provide adequate basis for policymaking at all.