“Sociology is not, cannot be and should not be a science”. To what extent do sociological arguments and evidence support his view? There has been a constant debate that sociology is or is not a science. Positivists believe that sociology should be studied in an objective and no bias way gathering quantitative data. On the other hand, interpretivists study sociology by putting themselves in the shoes of whom they are studying as this created verstehern.
The limitations faced by the researcher were lack of contemporary and modern views on Locke’s political obligation. Research Questions: The researcher attempts to answer the following research questions through this paper: 1. What were Locke’s views on Human Nature 2. How did his assumptions on human beings go on to shape his ideas on the state of nature? 3.
A clear similarity to Marx’s alienation and Durkhiem’s anomie is that they both critically describe states of social order from utopian standards. However one of the most notable differences between the two theories is that whilst they describe very similar behaviour and discontents, though from different perspectives, they look at different causes and different solutions. It must however be understood that these classical definitions/theories of anomie and alienation are different from contemporary definitions. In fact it can be argued that time and sociologists have changed or ‘obscured’ the classical meanings of alienation and anomie
Quantitative data is information that is given in a numerical form. An example of quantitative data would be official statistics. Also information collected by market research surveys and opinion polls usually appear in quantitative data. Quantitative data is favoured by positivists as they feel like society has an objective and it influences its members and forms their behaviours and patterns of behaviour. Positivists believe that sociology is a science and look for cause and effect relationships.
However, not all agree that sociology is a science. The scientific philosophers Popper and Kuhn are sceptical of sociology’s scientific status. Moreover, interpretivist sociologists believe that whether sociology is a science or not is an irrelevant debate. They argue that validity is the key to understanding society and social problems and that positivists waste too much time and effort weighing up the scientific merits of sociological research. Positivists believe that sociology should base its logic and methods on the natural sciences such as chemistry, biology and physics.
Abstract This paper looks at the constructivist approach to the study of international relations. The constructivist approach is defined in terms of the philosophical underpinnings of the approach and the scientific/social scientific premises that highlight this social theory of international relations. The approach is critiqued based upon the postmodern approach to understanding and knowing. Also important to the critique of the approach is the understanding of scientific/social scientific criticisms of the constructivist approach. Social constructivism is analyzed for its offerings in the study of anarchy, regimes, world polity, and as systemic level theory of international relations.
Browne once said "sociological perspectives centre on how much freedom or control the individual had to influence society" He goes on to comment on the two main approaches "structuralism is concerned with the overall structure of society and the way social institutions act as a constraint, or limit and control individual behaviour". Structuralism offers a view of the individual being controlled by the society they live in, Marx and Durkheim are similar in that they can both be described as structuralists, however their individual ideas are somewhat different. Functionalism was developed by Emile Durkheim, he believed like Comte that sociology should be viewed as a precise science and that society should be studied objectively. Durkheim placed an enormous amount of emphasis on social facts which he saw as ways of acting, thinking or feeling that are external to individuals and have their own reality outside the lives and perceptions of individual people. This is known as the macro approach, which places a great emphasis on the structure of society and how an individual operates with that society.
ON PHENOMENOLOGICAL SOCIOLOGY  james L. heap and phillip A. roth University of British Columbia American Sociological Review 1973, Vol. 38 (June): 354-367 The works of Tiryakian, Bruyn and Douglas are examined as representative of "phenomenological sociology." Radical problems are discovered in their use of key concepts in phenomenology: intention, reduction, phenomenon and essence. These problems are shown to arise out of a failure to grasp the nature of the phenomenological enterprise and its relationship to sociology. Turning back to the original formulation of this relationship by Husserl, we discover problems of transcendental intersubjectivity, of type and essence, and of objectivism.
Interpretivists are those who support the use of more humanistic methods within research as they believe society cannot be studied as a science because human behaviour is not governed by society. These sociologists each make different claims to support their use of either quantitative or qualitative data. Within this essay, the claims supporting the use of each data will be discussed as well as the claims to dispute them. Quantitative data, according to Mustapha (2009), is data that usually takes the form of statistical and numerical information. This form of data is obtained using various quantitative research methods such as questionnaires and structured interviews.
Historical trends in psychological enquiry, in addition to fundamental shifts in Psychology’s subject base has led to the use of the scientific method. Ultimately, the aim of the scientific method is to test hypothesis by falsifying them. It is impossible to prove a hypothesis correct but we are able to prove a hypothesis wrong. Karl Popper saw falsifiability as a black and white definition, that if a theory is falsifiable, it is scientific, and if not, then it is unscientific. Empirical data is information that is gained through a direct observation or an experiment rather than a reasoned argument or unfounded belief.