Contrasting Views and the Nature of Sociological Research
The second page continues the discussion on sociology's scientific status, presenting alternative perspectives and addressing the complexities of sociological research.
Interpretivists argue that sociology cannot and should not be a science. Their reasoning includes:
- Ethical concerns about studying conscious beings.
- The difficulty of controlling human subjects as variables.
- The challenge of observing internal meanings behind actions and behaviors.
Quote: "Other perspectives have different views" such as interpretivists who believes that sociology cannot be a science and should not be a science.
Interpretivists emphasize that sociology can only show patterns, not establish definitive cause-and-effect relationships due to numerous extraneous variables.
The realist perspective, represented by Keat and Urry, suggests that sociology's scientific status depends on the definition of science. They distinguish between:
- Closed systems: All variables are controlled (sociology doesn't fit this model).
- Open systems: Not all variables can be controlled (sociology could fit this model).
Highlight: Depending on the definition of science, sociology could be considered a science under an open system model.
Popper's concept of falsification is revisited, emphasizing that scientific hypotheses should be open to retesting and potential disproval. The swan analogy is mentioned to illustrate this principle.
Example: The swan analogy demonstrates how hypotheses can be retested and proven wrong, supporting the concept of falsifiability.
Popper argues that some elements of sociology, such as social cohesion, cannot be easily falsified, challenging sociology's current scientific status. However, this leaves room for sociology to potentially become more scientific in the future.
The conclusion suggests that sociology's status as a science remains ambiguous, with evidence supporting both sides of the argument. This reflects the complex nature of sociological research and its position between natural sciences and humanities.
Highlight: Overall, sociology could be a science; it's neither definitively a science nor definitively not a science, as there is evidence supporting both positions.
