17) Sociology and common sense.

Many people mistakenly believe that sociology is the study of the obvious. They claim that sociology is nothing but the application of common sense. But equating any science with simple common sense could not be further from the truth! Common sense is not always “common,” nor “sensible.” Statements like “Birds of a feather flock together” and “Opposites attract,” while supposedly based on common knowledge, contradict each other. Because common sense does not always accurately predict reality, people need something else.

Not every sociological finding is revolutionary; many findings do appear consistent with common sense. By systematically testing common sense beliefs against facts, sociologists can sort out which popular beliefs hold true and which do not. To accomplish this, sociologists use a variety of social science research designs and methods.

Sociology as a discipline is more than common sense. Sociology is a method of inquiry that requires the systematic testing of beliefs against evidence. Sociologists, therefore, make determining whether specific ideas are fact or fiction their job.

18) Sociology as Science

The definition of sociology uses the phrase “scientific study.” Many people do not consider the social or soft sciences—such as sociology and psychology—to be “true” or hard sciences—such as chemistry and physics.

Whereas inherent differences exist between the soft and hard sciences, the same fundamental principles of scientific inquiry apply. The word science comes from the Latin scire meaning “to know,” and for centuries “science” referred to virtually any academic discipline, including theology, languages, and literature. Only in the last hundred years or so has science come to mean a field of study that relies on specific research values and methods. (Remember that Emile Durkheim in the late 19th century was the first sociologist to use the scientific method.) Thus, whether or not a particular discipline like sociology is a science depends more on the methods used than on the particular subject area studied.

19) Positivism and its critique

Positivism is a philosophy of science based on the view that in the social as well as natural sciences, information derived from sensory experience, and logical and mathematical treatments of such data, are together the exclusive source of all authoritative knowledge. Positivism assumes that there is valid knowledge (truth) only in scientific knowledge. Obtaining and verifying data that can be received from the senses is known as empirical evidence. This view holds that society operates according to general laws like the physical world. Introspective and intuitional attempts to gain knowledge are rejected. Though the positivist approach has been a recurrent theme in the history of Western thought, the concept was developed in the modern sense in the early 19th century by the philosopher and founding sociologist, Auguste Comte. Comte argued that society operates according to its own quasi-absolute laws, much as the physical world operates according to gravity and other absolute laws of nature.

Positivist Self Critiques

Positivist themselves have raised doubts about the ideal stated above by prior Positivists. The self critique of recent Positivists are as follows:

1. Forms of controlled inquiry – In Social Science there is narrow range of possibilities than in Naural Sciences.

2. Knowledge is a Social variable – That is knowing one is a subject of study, changes one behaviour and the results can modify the future ( self-fullfiling prophesy)

3. Generalization are limited by complexity of culture and history – It is impossible to create statements for all times and places

4. Subjectivity and valuse orientation – Research in reality cannot be objective as all researchers must have values, morals and beliefs as they live in social world. They are not isolated persons. Some are deeply unconcious and there fore research in reality cannot be value-free particularly in social science inquiry.  That is the objectivity od sicentific method is not practicable or impossible.

Positivist method of Social Science is not possible in all social science inquiru and they arise from the universality of logic the applicability to all inquiries is questionable in practice. Due to this limitations of Positivist methodology other social science or other alters form of Positivism is used in Social Sciences today. They are, Logical Positivism, Post Positivism, Interpretive Sociology and anti-postivism research methods.

Contemporary thinking in Sociological Research methods and Practices to gather sociological Knowledge

In the contemporary Sociology many sociologists appreciate the importance of scientific method and they use as one of the method of inquiry critically. However they dont use the principles of orthodox positivists in Sociology in current times due to its limitations as expressed above. In addition some reject Positivism altogether because it is ahistorical, depoliticized and inappropriate theoretical concepts In practice however most use the philosophy of Positivism and Anti positivism. Some also argue that humans have free will, irrationality, imagination and one cannot predict individual behavior as generalization or at best have rigid laws of society. In contemporary thinking many Sociologists have a stance between the two extreams and use a methodology understanding the limitations of scientific method and also recognizes that at least in group level one can given the context can have some general statements of group behavior however it is difficult to predict behavior at individual level. The quantitative and qualitative methods of research are necessary in Social Science to generate new knowledge which are more objective rather than using only scientific method as human behavior id more complex and historical and cultural as well.