Positivism Vs Anti-Positivism

1704 Words7 Pages
------------------------------------------------- Identify and explain the main arguments proposed by positivist thinking that sociology is a science. Consider and explain the responses from anti-positivist thinking that propose an interpretist approach. Assess the advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches, illustrating your answer with references to sociological theorists, methodology and research. Positivism in short is the view that the study of sociology can be carried out in a scientific manner. It was a term coined by one of the founding fathers of classical sociology Comte and it involves: “Knowledge that is disciplined, empirical and scientific free from religious or political bias.” On the other hand as society and the early science of sociology evolved a different approach was seen by many to be the way forward. This anti-positivist thinking or interpretist approach believes that society cannot be studied as a science; this methodological anti-positivism proposed the theory of the human in society as an individual and thus research be directed to human cultural norms, values and symbols. The interpretist will take a more subjective approach were as the positivist tries to look at society objectively. Let us now look to compare and contrast positivism with an interpretist approach. Positivists are of the opinion that society can be studied using a scientific approach comparable to the way scientists study the natural world. The early sociologists such as Comte were of this opinion and Durkheim’s famous study ‘Le Suicide’ demonstrated many aspect of this positivist approach. On the other hand an interpretist will take a more humanist approach and are of the opinion that is in fact the individuals free will that shapes societythis social action is in stark contrast to the social systems approach. This is a viewpoint whereby the individual
Open Document