The positivist approach has always seen sociology as a science. It began early with the work of two of the so-called founding fathers of sociology Comte and Quetelet. They basically said that philosophising was not enough and that quantitative results needed to be found. They realised that natural sciences were very good at explaining the physical world. They believed that this same approach when looking at society could also work well. They believed that human behaviour was subject to laws and external forces. Karl Popper also follows a lot of the ‘positivist’ views. However he argues that it is not possible to uncover all the truths as hypothesis. It was crucial for early sociologists to make sociology appear as a ‘science of society’ in order for it to be taken seriously.
However there are different views of the nature of science. Thomas Kuhn challenges the idea that the type of science, which exists, has changed so much that it has little resemblance to how it used to be. He claimed that scientists now are more focuses on ‘normal science’. This is the idea that all the scientists share the same accepted knowledge and the science exists within a paradigm. A paradigm is basically a framework of concepts and theories that states how the natural world works. The scientific community shares the paradigm framework. Kuhn criticises this approach to science, as it does not leave room for imagination or any attitude to challenge it. The only time in which the shared knowledge of the scientific community changes is when there is a ‘scientific revolution’. This is basically when someone who challenges the current knowledge and finds a better explanation, this in turn creates a new paradigm.
Talcott Parsons came from the functionalist approach and he believed society was a structure and that forces and laws acted upon individuals. However this view still supported a view of sociology as a science. Anti-positivists don’t want sociology to be seen as scientific. This is due to a number of reasons. The idea is that everyone is an individual with a free will; they cannot be looked at in a scientific way, in terms of a ‘group’.
Rooty (1980) claimed tat science and modernity are closely linked. He believed that rationality, truth and science are all ‘bound’ together, and anything contrary to this he would consider an inferior explanation. Post modernists challenge this view; they basically believe that science cannot provide an answer for everything. They believe that there will always be things that science cannot explain.
A key factor in why its good for sociology to be seen as a social science is to do with the funding it receives because it can be taken more seriously. The research, which is conducted, receives funding from the government, charities and big companies if it is seen to be scientific. The other factor, that ties in with funding, is the idea that science can explain and help understand the world. The result of it being recognised as a serious subject gives it funding for academic subjects such as A level and university courses.
It is therefore very difficulty to say whether sociology could be described as a science as there are so many factors. A major factor is that by calling sociology a science it gives the subject academic status as well as the funding which comes with the subject being taken seriously. Positivists believe sociology is a science although a fundamental floor in this. Scientific method can explain certain things such as how Durkheim was able to understand why the ‘suicide group’ committed suicide. However it cannot explain the reasons for individuals to do such a thing. The fact that it’s by taking individuals in a group then a lot of generalisations will be made. Society cannot be looked at in the same way as a science, for example heat and water = evaporation. The water isn’t going to decide, “hey wait a minute, I don’t feel like evaporating today”. There are far more causations on an individual acting the way they do than the most obvious. The best sociologists would not like a final answer on why someone or a group acts the way they do as it is always changing. So sociology can be described as a science to a certain extent, however it just depends on the perspective you have if you prefer more vague ever-changing theories or quantitative answers which may be inaccurate.
