Download The science debate

What is science?
Science is defined in terms of its methodology. It uses an experimental procedure and
produces knowledge which is ‘certain’.
Characteristics of ideal type view of science (scientific method/experimental design):

Follow the hypothetico-deductive model based on a hypothesis or testable statement
e.g. ‘young people have a greater involvement in crime due to status frustration’.

Falsify hypothesis (try and prove it wrong)

Only look at what is directly observable or empirical (no feelings,
emotions etc.)

Objective/value free – approaching topics with an open mind,
avoiding bias, prejudices and personal beliefs.

Data is high in reliability.
Critique of the ideal type view of science:
1. Natural scientists do not always work in the way described above:
 Not always objective/ value free – All scientists have ideologies which affect their
research. Scientific theories shape the way they interpret evidence. For example
Darwin explains natural matter and social behaviour in terms of natural selection
and evolution.

Funding institutions affect the way in which research is
done and the outcomes. For example tobacco firms only
fund research which concludes there is a limited impact on
health by smoking.

Concerns with academic status and career prospects can
lead scientists to be biased and even fraudulent. For
example Cyril Burt made up results from ‘phantom
identical twins’ to support his genetic explanation of
intelligence.
2. Lynch argues that scientists are less objective than they claim.
Lynch argues that scientists disregard evidence that goes against their theories. This is
demonstrated by the case of Dr Velikovsky in 1950. He published ‘Worlds of Collision’ in
which he put forward a radical and new theory about the origins of the earth. Instead of
putting Velikovsky’s new theory to test, scientists rushed to boycott the publisher and
reject the theory before they had even read the book. Any scientist who called for a fair
hearing of the new theory were victimised and some even lost their jobs.
3. The way they interpret evidence is driven by their theories (ideologies). Little attempt to
falsify hypothesis ever occurs – they use evidence to confirm theories.
4. Khun – Science takes place within a paradigm (a set of beliefs). This means that science
is not objective as these assumptions influence the questions you ask, the way you
interpret evidence.
The science debate
Positivist views
Sociology can be a science:
1. Subject matter of society is similar to natural science. Therefore they believe
that humans like rocks, gases etc. react to external forces. Human behaviour
like natural matter is therefore seen to be caused and predictable. For example
structural functionalists claim that kinship and cultural institutions such as
religion and education constrain human behaviour through socialisation.
2. Sociologists can follow the logic of natural science research. Although
experimental research is rarely used because of practical (difficulties controlling
variables) and ethical issues (potential harm to participants), the logic of natural
science research can be followed.
 Quantitative/statistical
 Standardisation
 Objective/value free
 Only look at what is directly observable (no feelings, emotions etc.)
 Follow the hypothetico deductive model
This leads positivists to use methods such as statistics and social surveys. For
example Durkheim made use of official suicide rates to establish a scientific and
causal theory of suicide.
Interpretivist (anti-positivist, interactionism) views
Sociology cannot be a science:
1. There are fundamental differences between the social world and the
natural/physical world. Interpretvisits claim that humans unlike natural
matter do not react in a causal like way to external forces and their
behaviour cannot be predicted with certainty. Humans act in terms of
feelings, meanings and emotions. Individual social actors are also said to
interpret events during social interaction and that this gives meaning to
actions. For example phenomenologists such as Katz claim that crime is not
simply structurally caused but guided by individual meanings such as the
search for excitement and establishing a reputation.
2. There are ethical issues; humans are not
likely to agree to being tested, experimented
on, interrogated or observed in laboratories
like rats in a cage!
3. It is not possible to follow scientific
methodology. All research is inevitably
subjective (value laden). For example the topic that is chosen for research,
questions asked in interviews and the way that data is analysed. Also the
‘Hawthorne Effect’ may occur, where people’s behaviour changes when
they know they are being studied.
4. Much of social life or alleged social facts are social constructions. For
example it is difficult to get reliable statistics on health and crime because
the data is dependant on members of public reporting their illness or crimes
they observe (i.e. the statistics are social constructions).
Sociology should be a science:
 Produces knowledge that is certain.
 Can generalise.
 Establish laws of cause and effect.
 Make predictions.
 Can be replicated.
 Gain data that is high in reliability.
For example positivistic researchers at the home
office claim to be able to generalise about crime trends and make predictions about
patterns of victimisation because of their use of large scale social surveys.
Sociology should not be a science:
1. Not desirable to be scientific. Therefore
interpretivists favour the use of qualitative
methods such as observation and informal
interviews to find out about meanings, feelings
and actions. Furthermore a non scientific
approach generates data that is highly valid,
insightful and achieves verstehen. For example
interpretivist feminists Dobash and Dobash
gained a true and detailed understanding of
women’s experience of domestic violence by
carrying out informal interviews which lasted for up to twelve hours.
2. A further example is illustrated trough McIntyre’s journalistic CPO study into
football hooliganism. McIntyre managed to build up rapport and
consequently achieved verstehen with the Chelsea head-hunters.
Critical philosophical points- Is there such a thing as scientific knowledge?
 Kuhn – scientific revolutions – Paradigm shifts (new scientific theories replace old ones). Scientific theories change (as shown by the history of science) and hence claims of scientific truth is always uncertain. For example Stephen Hawkin has recently changed
his theory of black holes being empty.
 Postmodernism – Postmodernism rejects the idea that scientific thought exists. This is because all knowledge is uncertain. No scientific theory can claim truth because all knowledge is open to doubt. Thus they reject meta-narratives (grand theories) and
argue instead that we should recognise and tolerate competing explanations of natural and social events.
 Postmodernism - Science is just another meta-narrative and has recently lost support due to problems such as GM food and super bugs – rational thinking has failed and therefore sociology has nothing to learn from the natural sciences.
 Realism – (Urry) – Realists re-define what is meant by science. Science can incorporate more subjective analysis, does not have to make firm predictions, legitimate to study social processes which are not immediately observable. In this way positivist and
interpretivist sociology can be seen as scientific. Job of scientists (natural and social) is to explain the causes of events in a ‘more or less scientific’ way.