Popper believed in the scientific method, he believed in a ‘‘continuous quest for knowledge’’, Popper felt scientists should search for evidence and modify existing knowledge, Popper believed true science would involve not just proving facts but prove to falsify past truths as well. And so by adopting a scientific approach we can socially re-construct norms, values and remove or re-define stereotypes.
Sociologists such as Kaplan believe adopting a scientific approach to sociology is wrong, Kaplan argues that the logic of science only emerges after the research is completed
Kaplan argues that a final published account of research appears to be logical. It reconstructs the research process to make it so; in other words it doesn’t show the mistakes and luck of the scientists. Which would suggest science is not a useful approach to sociology because science does not fundamentally prove anything, but just comes across important pieces of research.
More evidence to show that adopting a scientific approach to sociology doesn’t work is research by scientists such as Darwin, who ignored gaps in fossil evidence on evolution. Sir Cyril Burt who was the psychologist responsible for the idea that children can be selected at 11 for particular types of education- has been accused of falsifying his research. So the scientific approach can not even be objective so how can it be value free, and sociology needs objective and value free research if it going to make assumptions about society.
Realists such as Bhasker and Sayer suggest that both natural and social science is possible. They believe that scientists have a job to uncover and explain they believe careful methodology is the answer.
An alternative approach to sociology could be through the methodology, rather than using scientific approaches such as questionnaires. You could use the interpertivist approach of research such as observation, interviews. These are equally as useful and approach sociology in a different way, although they can be criticised for being time consuming, unethical (participant not being aware of being observed) and causing demand characteristics.
Does this mean, then, that sociologists are just a bunch of unprincipled careerists who can actually tell us nothing about the truth of the society we live in?
Of course not. Sociologists can never generate absolute be all and end all explanations of the social world, in the manner in which natural scientists seem able to do for aspects of the natural world. Indeed, as societies themselves change and adapt to the course of events, our knowledge about them must always be under review. Rather, sociologists aim to increase our understanding about the society, which we all inhabit. In trying to do so, they recognise that there must be limits to this understanding. The world is so complex and interconnected that no one person can hope to illuminate and understand its entirety. But that should not prevent the attempt to do so.
Such attempts do try to investigate the social world using an objective and systematic approach. It is generally accepted that the values and subjectivity are an unavoidable part of the research process. Merely to choose a topic to study is to attach importance to it. But recognising the influence of subjectivity does not mean we must abandon objectivity. This remains an ideal which sociologists strive for in a variety of ways- either by adopting scientific procedures, by declaring one’s own values, or treating the world as an alien might. Once published, however, any piece of sociological research becomes property of scrutiny for many years.
So by adopting a scientific approach to the study of sociology. We can get an alternative approach to the anti-positivist study of sociology, therefore positivists can collect empirical data that can easily be tested and concluded from. And these studies can easily be re-tested or manipulated in different ways to see how it affects the out-come, and are more reliable than non-scientific approaches. And so adopting a scientific approach to sociology can be useful. Although it can be heavily criticised for not being value free or objective, but as long as sociologist scientists strive towards being value free and being objective their work can not be ignored.
