Paper 1 + 3

• Structuralists / Positivists would include?..

  • New right
  • functionalists
  • Marxists
  • Feminists
• What is Positivism?

  Prefer quantitative methods such as surveys, questionnaires and official statistics because they have good reliability and replicability. They see society as shaping the individuals and believe that ’social structures shape individual action

  • they are more interested to uncover social facts and establishing patterns and trends
  • they believe sociology should use the same methods to study the social world that natural sciences (bio, chem, physics) use In their research
• What is interpretivism?

  focuses on understanding and interpreting social phenomena through subjective meanings and interpretations.

  • they believe individuals are subjective and unique and different ppl experience the same social situations in very different ways.
  • they criticise “scientific sociology” (positivism) because many of the statistics relies on are themselves.
  • Argue that to understand human action we need to achieve vestehen or subjective understanding
• Definition of objectivity

  Removal of personal bias and opinions in the research
• what does subjectivity mean?

  Personal perspective.
• What does reliable mean?

  Trustworthy
• What does valid mean?

  How close the study is to the real picture
• What does verstehen mean?

  to fully understand a social group and walk in their shows
• What does representative mean?

  Study can be generalised
• What is an epistemological position (and who uses what)?

  It’s  about how we find out the truth – the method we use to study society.

  • Structuralists (like Positivists) use quantitative methods (e.g., surveys, stats)→ They believe we should study society scientifically.
  • Interactionists (like Interpretivists) use qualitative methods (e.g., interviews, observations)→ They believe we should understand people’s meanings and experiences.

  ✅ Epistemology = method of gaining knowledge
• What is an ontological position (and how do theories see society)?

  It’s about what reality is like – what we believe exists in society.

  • Structuralists believe society is made up of structures that shape our behaviour (like education, family).→ Reality exists outside of us, and we are shaped by it.
  • Interactionists believe society is based on individual meanings and actions.→ Reality is created by people through interactions.

  ✅ Ontology = what we believe reality is made of
• What is realism?

  Realism is a new approach in sociology. they argue that sociologists cannot study society like a natural science since people aren’t predictable like chemicals. On the other hand they do agree that human actions may Be in part shaped by institutions. They also believe that sociologists should do more than just study individual actions since this doesn’t allow for generalisation to be made. Therefore they argue that sociologists should use both quantitative and qualitative methods
• How does Marxism influence research design?

  s

  • Structuralist approach → prefers quantitative data
  • May use questionnaires or structured interviews
  • Research focuses on:
  • How social institutions control behaviour
  • Inequalities between social classes
• How does Functionalism influence research design?

  Structuralist

  • approach → prefers quantitative data
  • Likely to use questionnaires or surveys
  • Focus on social institutions (e.g., education, family)
  • Based on an ontological position (society exists outside individuals)
• How does Interactionism influence research design?

  Prefers qualitative data

  • Aims for Verstehen (deep understanding of meanings)

  • Favour unstructured interviews and participant observation

  • Focus on labelling and individual meanings
• What do Positivists say about sociology being a science?

  Believe it IS, CAN AND SHOULD be a science + sociology should be studied using scientific methods And look for correlations between different social facts and causal connections to establish CAUSE AND EFFECT.

  this is by using a MULTIVARIATE analysis (when a researcher looks at more than one variable at the same time to see how they effect each other) for eg; DURKHEIM studied gender, religion, age to understand society better, helping him to not blame it on one factor.

  • the best way to achieve this is by using the hypothetico-deductive method
• *Positivists -> sociology being a science?* What is the Hypothetico-Deductive method?

  1. Make a hypothesis (a prediction based on theory)

  2. Deduce what results you should find if the hypothesis is true

  3. Collect data through observation or experiment

  4. Compare the results to your hypothesis

  5. Accept, reject, or revise the hypothesis based on the evidence
• *Positivists -> sociology being a science?* What is the problem about their views?

  Positivists believe research can be detached and objective, they shouldn’t let their own subjective feelings influence the research.

  • this poses as a problem because the researcher may ‘contaminate’ the research, for example; by influencing interviewees to answer in ways that reflect the researchers opinion rather than their own (‘the A level course is excelling, don’t you think?’)
• *Positivists -> sociology being a science?* Le Durkheim ‘Le Suicide’ study

  What he studied:

  🔹 Suicide rates across different European countries (using official statistics)

  • Purpose of the study:

  🔹 To prove that sociology is a science

  🔹 Showed that even personal acts like suicide have social causes (not just psychological)

  • Research method:

  🔹 Comparative method (quantitative, secondary data)

  🔹 Analysed patterns across religion, marital status, gender, etc.

  • What he found:

  🔹 Protestants had higher suicide rates than Catholics → less social integration

  🔹 Single people had higher suicide rates than married people

  🔹 Periods of rapid change led to more suicide → due to anomie (normlessness)

  • Conclusion:

  🔹 Suicide is influenced by social facts like integration and regulation

  🔹 Sociology can be studied scientifically using a positivist approach
• What do Interpretivist say about sociology being a science?

  Sociology is NOT a science, CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be a science. They criticise positivists scientific approach as inadequate and completely unsuited to the study of human beings.

  • they argue that the purpose of sociology is to study meaningful ‘social actions’ and interpreting the motives behind them. they seek VERSTEHEN to grasp the meaning of actions, they favour qualitative methods and data such as ppt observation, unstructured interviews etc
• * Interpretivist -> sociology being a science?* They Argue science and sociology a fundamentally different.

  • natural science : aims to discover universal laws, uses objective, systematic and quantitative methods
  • Sociology : society is made up of conscious individuals who attach meanings to their actions. Human behaviour isn’t predictable, and isnt determined in the same way as chemicals
• * Interpretivist -> sociology being a science?* Douglas’ study

  douglas studied suicide but using the methodology of interpretivists, he argued that to understand suicide we must uncover the meanings for those involved. He argued that statistics aren’t social facts at all and that suicide statistics (which Durkheim used) merely show the social construnctions of coroners
• *Popper - Falsification* -> sociology being a science* what does he argue about sociology being a science?

  Sociology is not what could be, and should be a science. He argued that idea that a theory is scientific only if you can test it and you can also prove it false. he criticised theories like Marxism for being un scientific because they explain everything, but they cannot be falsified.

  • so YES sociology can be a science if it can be fortified
  • and YES sociology should be a science, so evidence can be tested and progress can be made
• *Popper - Falsification* -> sociology being a science* What are his implications for sociology?

  • Marxism is not scientific since it makes predictions about the future, which can’t be falsified.
  • Sociology must aim to be more scientific by making testable predictions
  • pushes sociology to use more evidence based methods
  • And encourages sociologist to actively try to disprove their heories
• *Kuhn - Paradigms* -> sociology being a science* what did he say about sociology being a science?

  Sociology is not science, but it could be, and it should be.

  He argued that falsification will only lead to find tuning, but we need a more sophisticated approach to science. he argues that science works without having a paradigm. (This is a shared set of ideas values, methods that guide what the questions scientist asks how they collect data and how they interpret results.)

  • he says this leaves to dogmatism (Inflexibility.) mature science, since it prevents them from considering all the perspectives
  • This means that sociology cannot be a science since it is not uniparadigmatical, which means that they are multiple approaches to science to different theories and meanings attached. He argues that for so soldier to be a science, everyone must agree the same thing. For eg, how also psychologists believe in gravity.
• *Realistists * -> sociology being a science* what do they say about sociology being a science

  Sociology is a science and should be a science. They reject the positive view of science and points out that science itself is not confined to studying observable phenomena..

  • Keat and Urry stress, the similarities between sociology and certain kinds of natural science. In terms of the degree of control the researcher has over the variables being researched. They distinguished between open (Where the research can’t control and measure all the variables, so can’t make precise predictions) and a closed system where research can control and make precise predictions.
• *Kuhn - Paradigms* -> sociology being a science* What do they say about sociologists using open systems?

  We cannot predict the crime rate, precisely because there’s too many variables involved, most which which can’t be controlled. They rejected you. That science is all concerned with the observable phenomenon and the rejected interpretive view that science can’t be scientific.

  • FOR REALIST, NATURAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN THE CAUSES OF EVENTS IN TERMS OF THE UNDERLYING STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES.. although these often unobservable we can work out that they exist by observing their effects. For example, we can’t directly see a thing called social class, but we can observe the effect on peoples life choices.
• *Kuhn - Paradigms* -> sociology being a science* what do they say about Marxists?

  They regard Marxists as scientific because it sees underlying structures such as capitalism producing affect such as poverty. Similarly, sociologists are scientific when the interpret behaviour in terms of the internal meanings of the people, even though you can’t observe them. So science isn’t just about what we can see it’s about the hidden structures.
• Are early positivists like Durkheim and Comte value free or value laden?

  Believed that sociology should be value-free, like the natural sciences.

  • They argued that researchers can observe society objectively, uncovering universal social laws without letting personal opinions interfere.
  • Durkheim’s study of suicide (Le Suicide) used official statistics to show how suicide rates were linked to levels of social integration and regulation, not individual feelings — this shows a belief in objective, measurable facts.
  • They thought sociology’s purpose was to reveal how society functions, not to change it based on personal morals or political beliefs.
• Was Weber value-free or value-laden? What did he argue about the role of values in sociology?

  believed that sociology cannot be completely value-free, but values should be used carefully and at specific stages of research. 
• Why did Weber say that values play an important role?

  Because they …

  • Values guide research topics: Sociologists choose topics based on what they think is important (e.g. inequality, religion).
  • Data collection & hypothesis testing: Should be as objective and scientific as possible — values should not interfere here.
  • Interpretation of data: Values may influence how sociologists interpret their findings — so they should be transparent about their perspectives.
  • Sociologist as a citizen: Weber believed researchers have a moral duty to share their findings and stand up for their values in public debates (outside of academic work).
• What is committed sociology?

  The idea that sociologists shouldn’t be neutral — they should be openly involved in political and moral debates, and take sides to bring about social change.

  For eg

  • Marx: Took the side of the working class, argued capitalism creates exploitation, and aimed for a classless society.
  • Feminists: Take the side of women and fight against patriarchy, highlighting issues like domestic violence and the gender pay gap.
  • Howard Becker: Argued that sociologists should take the side of the “underdog” — like the powerless, criminals, or mentally ill — not the powerful (e.g. police, government).
• What did Gouldner argue about values in sociology?

  Argued that sociology can never be truly value-free, and it’s neither possible nor desirable to try.

  • He criticised the idea of being value-neutral, saying all research is influenced by values — even choosing what to study involves bias.
  • He claimed many so-called “objective” sociologists were actually just serving the interests of the powerful, like the government or businesses.
  • Trying to hide your values makes you less honest and transparent as a sociologist.
• What do modern positivists believe about values in sociology

  Argue that sociology should be value-free, just like natural sciences — but their reasons are often more practical than philosophical.

  1. Desire to appear scientific:

  • They want sociology to be respected like biology or physics.
  • Being value-free makes the research seem more objective, reliable, and trustworthy.
  • It helps sociology gain status and funding
  • 
    
  • 2. Social position of sociology:
  • In modern capitalist societies, most research is funded by powerful institutions like the government or universities.
  • Sociologists are often under pressure to avoid controversial findings.
  • So, they avoid taking sides to protect their careers and credibility
• What did Howard Becker argue about values in sociology?

  believed that all research is value-laden, and that sociologists should take the side of the underdog — the less powerful in society.

  • truly understanding society means giving a voice to those who are marginalised, like:
  • Working-class people
  • Criminals
  • Ethnic minorities
  • Patients in mental hospitals
• How does Goffman’s research support Becker’s idea of committed sociology

  .

  • Goffman explored what life was like for patients in mental hospitals.
  • He revealed how they were dehumanised, controlled, and stripped of identity by staff and routines.

  🔍 This supports Becker’s belief that sociology should expose the experiences of the powerless, not just reflect the views of institutions.

  📢 Goffman challenged dominant narratives that saw mentally ill people as simply dangerous or irrational — instead, he showed how institutions create deviance.
• What is the postmodernist (relativist) view on values in sociology?

  they reject the idea that sociology can be value-free or scientific. They argue that all knowledge is value-laden and based on different perspectives — no one version of truth is more “correct” than another.

  🧠 Key Ideas:

  • Relativism: There is no absolute truth — just different “stories” or interpretations (e.g. Marxist truth vs feminist truth).
  • Sociologists should accept this pluralism and avoid claiming that their view is more valid than others.
• What are the 4 practical benefits GIDDENS argued about studying sociology ?

  • understanding social situations
  • Awareness of cultural differences
  • Awareness of the effects of policies
  • Increase in self knowledge
• (Benefits of studying sociology *Giddens*) understanding social situations

  Refers to how socio helps yo make sense of what’s really going on in society often beyond what we can see on the surface. Identifying hidden patterns in everyday life, helping explain WHY things are happening

  • This can take 2 forms. Factual (providing us with facts to develop a theory) and Theoretical (providing people with an explanation as to why something is happening)
• (Benefits of studying sociology *Giddens*) understanding social situations -/ Townsend + Mack & Lansley example

  • in the late 1960s, poverty was assumed to be eliminated due to the welfare state. However Townsend, Mack + Lansley revealed that poverty was still widespread, their research identified that women and children were most at risk
  • Factual explanation: there were high numbers of people living in poverty despite welfare
  • Theoretical : poverty was redefined using the relative poverty model meaning poverty should be understood in terms of what people expect to have in society not just survival.
  • SO they showed how there were millions in poverty, certain groups were more at risk etc.
  • this changed the way poverty was understood and led to new social policies