SOCIOLOGY AS SCIENCE

a) Science, scientific method and critique.

HOW DOES A RESEARCHER ACHIEVE OBJECTIVITY IN INTERPRETATIVE

RESEARCH?
Achieving objectivity in interpretative research can be challenging due to the
subjective nature of human experiences and the influence of the researcher’s own
biases, beliefs, and values1. However, there are strategies that researchers can
employ to enhance objectivity in their research:
1. Reflexivity: This involves being aware of and documenting one’s own
biases and preconceptions throughout the research process 1.
2. Triangulation: This involves using multiple methods, data sources,
researchers, and theoretical perspectives to cross-check and validate
findings.
3. Member Checking: This involves returning the research findings to the
participants to check for accuracy and resonance with their experiences.
4. Audit Trail: This involves keeping a clear record of all research decisions
and activities for others to inspect.
5. Peer Debriefing: This involves discussing one’s findings and process with
colleagues who can provide a fresh perspective.
Remember, objectivity in interpretative research does not mean eliminating
subjectivity, but rather systematically and transparently accounting for it23.
Interpretive research is a research paradigm that is based on the assumption that
social reality is not singular or objective. Rather, it is shaped by human experiences
and social contexts (ontology), and is therefore best studied within its sociohistoric
context by reconciling the subjective interpretations of its various participants
(epistemology) 1. Interpretive researchers view social reality as being embedded
within—and therefore impossible to abstract from—their social settings, they
‘interpret’ the reality though a ‘sense-making’ process rather than a hypothesis
testing process 1.
Therefore, achieving objectivity in interpretative research is a complex task.
However, some researchers suggest that objectivity can be achieved by following
certain guidelines. For instance, researchers should be transparent about their
research methods and data collection techniques. They should also be reflexive
about their own biases and assumptions 2. Additionally, researchers should use
multiple sources of data to triangulate their findings and ensure that their
interpretations are grounded in empirical evidence 2. Finally, researchers should
engage in peer debriefing and member checking to ensure that their interpretations
are valid and reliable 2.
DESCRIBE THE BASIC POSTULATES OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD. HOW FAR ARE
THESE FOLLOWED IN SOCIOLOGY RESEARCH?
The scientific method is based on certain basic postulates1:
1. It relies on empirical evidence: The scientific method depends on
observable and measurable evidence that can be validated and verified by
multiple researchers.
2. It utilizes relevant concepts: It uses theories and hypotheses that
are related to the phenomenon being studied.
3. It is committed to only objective considerations: The scientific
method seeks to eliminate personal bias and subjectivity as much as
possible. It focuses on facts that can be observed and tested1.
In sociology research, these postulates are followed to a great extent 234.
Sociologists use the scientific method to gather information about various aspects
of society and social behavior3. They stress the accurate and unbiased collection and
analysis of social data, use systematic observation, conduct experiments, and exhibit
skepticism3.
For instance, in applied sociology, the scientific method serves as a guide in research
design and in the identification of solutions or interventions. The steps include
identifying a social problem to address, formulating a research question, describing
the level of analysis and theoretical approach, researching interventions, developing
a hypothesis, identifying an intervention, implementing the intervention, and
evaluating and analyzing results4.
Using sociological methods and systematic research within the framework of the
scientific method, sociologists have discovered patterns in workplaces, families, and
education that have led to transformative changes25. Therefore, it can be said that
the basic postulates of the scientific method are indeed followed in sociology
research.
DOES SCIENTIFIC METHOD MAKE SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? ILLUSTRATE YOUR
ANSWER WITH DURKHEIM’S METHOD.
The application of the scientific method in sociology is a topic of debate. Some
sociologists, like Auguste Comte and Emile Durkheim, argue that sociology
can be a science because it is governed by natural laws and uses scientific methods 1.
Others argue that the social world is fundamentally different from the natural
world, and thus cannot be studied in the same way2.
Emile Durkheim, a pioneer of modern sociology, developed a method for studying
social phenomena that he believed was scientific. He argued that social facts, or
manners of acting, thinking, and feeling external to the individual, could be studied
scientifically3. Durkheim’s method involved the systematic collection of statistics to
reveal patterns and correlations in social behavior34.
For example, in his study on suicide, Durkheim used statistical data to identify social
factors that influence suicide rates5. He demonstrated that what is often considered
a deeply personal and individual act is actually influenced by social factors and
follows certain patterns5. This approach is consistent with the scientific method as it
involves systematic observation and seeks to establish cause-and-effect
relationships4.
However, critics argue that sociology cannot be a science because it deals with
subjective experiences and meanings that cannot be objectively measured or
observed2. They also point out that unlike natural sciences, sociology cannot make
accurate predictions due to the complexity and variability of human behavior 2.
In conclusion, whether sociology is considered a science depends largely on one’s
definition of science and the methods used. While Durkheim’s method aligns with
the principles of the scientific method, there are aspects of sociological research
that differentiate it from the natural sciences.
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? GIVE REASONS FOR YOUR ANSWER .

The classification of sociology as a science is a subject of debate. Here

are some reasons for both perspectives:

Sociology as a Science:

1. Use of Scientific Methods: Sociologists use scientific methods

like observation, hypothesis formation, experimentation and
drawing conclusions, similar to natural sciences.
2. Search for Patterns: Sociologists seek to identify general
patterns in the behavior of social groups.
3. Empirical Evidence: Sociological studies are based on
empirical data gathered through reliable and valid methods.

Sociology as not a Science:

1. Subjectivity: Unlike natural sciences, sociology deals with

human behavior which is influenced by personal feelings,
attitudes, and beliefs.
2. Lack of Predictability: Human behaviour is complex and
influenced by multiple factors, making it difficult to predict
with certainty.
3. Value Neutrality: Unlike natural sciences, sociologists often
have to deal with ethical considerations and cannot remain
completely value-neutral.

In conclusion, whether sociology is considered a science depends

largely on one’s definition of science and the methods used in
sociological research.
DISCUSS THE RELEVANCE OF HISTORICAL METHOD IN THE STUDY OF
SOCIETY?

The historical method is highly relevant in the study of society,

and it’s used extensively in sociology. Here’s why:

1. Understanding Societal Development: Historical

sociology focuses on how societies have developed over
time12. It looks at how simple structures in society are
actually a result of complex processes1.
2. Linking Past and Present: The theory of Path
Dependence has established a link between the past and
the happenings which will take place in the future by its
influence1. This helps us understand how discrete
historical events fit into wider societal progress and
ongoing dilemmas2.
3. Testing Theories: The primary method of using pre-
established historical data is used as a means to perform
an analytical analysis. This allows sociologists to test
theories across time and space in search of generalizable
patterns which result in societal change1.
4. Interdisciplinary Approach: Historical sociology
operates within a spectrum between history and
sociology with a ‘sociology of history’ residing at one
end and a ‘history of society’ residing at another2. This
interdisciplinary field works to intertwine these mono-
discipline efforts into an interdisciplinary approach2.

In conclusion, the historical method provides a rich context for

understanding societal structures, changes, and developments.
It allows sociologists to draw connections between past events
and present circumstances, thereby enriching our
understanding of society.
B) M A J O R THE O RE TI C AL S TR AN DS OF RE SE A R CH ME T HOD OL OG Y

M E TH O DO L OG Y I S A S YS TEM O F RU LE S , P RI N CI P L ES A ND P RO C E D U RE S, W H I CH F O RM S
S CI E N TI FI C I N V E S TI G A TI O N. CO M M E N T.

Indeed, methodology in the context of scientific investigation refers to the

system of rules, principles, and procedures that guide how research is
conducted. Here are some key points:

1. Systematic Approach: Methodology provides a systematic,

structured process for conducting research. It offers a step-by-step
guide on how to carry out research, from formulating a hypothesis to
collecting and analyzing data.
2. Reproducibility and Consistency: By following a specific
methodology, other researchers can reproduce the study under the
same conditions and compare their results. This enhances the
reliability and validity of the research.
3. Objectivity: Methodology helps ensure that the research is
conducted objectively. By adhering to a set of rules and procedures,
researchers can minimize bias and subjectivity.
4. Ethical Standards: Methodology also includes ethical guidelines
that researchers must follow to ensure the integrity of their research
and the protection of their subjects.
5. Analysis and Interpretation: Methodology guides the analysis and
interpretation of data, helping researchers draw valid conclusions
from their findings.

In conclusion, methodology is crucial in scientific investigation as it provides

a framework that ensures the research is reliable, valid, reproducible, and
ethically conducted.
ELABORATE THE MAIN TENETS OF INTERPRETATIVE PERSPECTIVE
IN SOCIOLOGY .
The interpretative perspective in sociology, also known as interpretive sociology,
centers on the meaningful understanding of human behavior, social interactions, and
societal trends. Here are its main tenets:
1. Meaningful Understanding: Interpretive sociology focuses on
understanding human behaviour from the standpoint of those involved12. It
seeks to understand the subjective experiences, beliefs, values, actions,
behaviours, and social relationships of people12.
2. Subjective Reality: Unlike positivist sociology which sees an objective
reality “out there”, interpretive sociology sees reality as being constructed
by people2. It acknowledges that people actively formulate the reality of
their everyday lives through the meaning they give to their actions1.
3. Action over Behaviour: In interpretive sociology, the action is
important rather than “inner state” or external behavior2. It emphasizes
behaviour that is related to the behaviour of others and can be explained
based on its subjectively meant meaning2.
4. Qualitative Data: Interpretive sociology relies on qualitative data, such
as unstructured interviews or participant observation23. This approach
allows sociologists to gain a deeper understanding of social phenomena by
exploring individuals’ lived experiences and perspectives2.
5. Verstehen: Rooted in the German word ‘verstehen’, which means “to
understand,” interpretive sociology attempts to see the world through the
eyes of the actors doing the acting2. This empathetic understanding is key
to capturing the nuances of social phenomena3.
6. Influence of Max Weber: Interpretive sociology was developed and
popularized by Max Weber12. Weber recognized that human understanding
and interpretation play a crucial role in social action and the fashioning of
social order1.
In conclusion, interpretive sociology provides a unique lens through which to study
society by focusing on the meanings that individuals attach to their actions and
interactions.
IN WHAT WAY ‘INTERPRETATIVE’ METHOD IS DIFFERENT FROM
‘POSITIVIST’ APPROACH IN THE STUDY IF SOCIAL PHENOMENA?
EXPLAIN WITH EXAMPLES, THE EXPLANATORY AND EXPLORATORY
DESIGNS OF SOCIAL RESEARCH .
The interpretative and positivist approaches are two fundamental methods in
the study of social phenomena, each with its own unique perspective and
methodology1.
Positivism is based on the belief that knowledge can only be gained through
empirical evidence and objective observation1.
Positivists see society as shaping the individual and believe that ‘social facts’ shape
individual action1.
They prefer scientific quantitative methods, such as social surveys, structured
questionnaires, and official statistics because these have good reliability and
representativeness1.
For example, a positivist studying educational achievement might use statistical
methods to identify patterns and trends, such as the relationship between
educational achievement and social class1.
On the other hand, interpretivism focuses on subjective interpretation and
understanding of human behavior1.
Interpretivists argue that individuals are not just puppets who react to external
social forces as Positivists believe1.
They prefer humanistic qualitative methods, such as unstructured interviews or
participant observation1.
For instance, an interpretivist studying educational achievement might conduct in-
depth interviews with students to understand their personal experiences and
perceptions of success1.
In terms of research designs, explanatory and exploratory research serve
different purposes in social research23.
Explanatory research is used to explain why certain phenomena work in the way
that they do23. It attempts to link different ideas to understand the nature of cause-
and-effect relationships23. For example, an explanatory study on student’s addiction
to smartphones would mainly explain the reasons behind students’ addiction or
factors that contribute to the addiction2.
Exploratory research, on the other hand, is used to explore and investigate a
problem that is not clearly defined23. It merely explores the research problem and
does not offer final or conclusive solutions to existing problems 23. For instance, a
researcher conducting exploratory research on student’s addiction to smartphones
might start with general ideas to get an idea about how to best approach the
research subjects, what methods to use, and what type of data to gather2.
C) POSITIVISM AND ITS CRITIQUE

WHAT ARE THE SHORTFALLS OF POSITIVIST PHILOSOPHY THAT

GAVE RISE TO THE NON-POSITIVIST METHODS OF STUDYING
SOCIAL REALITY?

The positivist philosophy in social research, while valuable, has several shortfalls
that have given rise to non-positivist methods of studying social reality:
1. Lack of Subjectivity: Positivism emphasizes objective and empirical
evidence, often neglecting the subjective experiences and interpretations of
individuals1. This can lead to a lack of depth and richness in understanding
social phenomena1.
2. Overemphasis on Quantification: Positivism’s focus on quantifiable
data can overlook the nuances and complexities of social reality that
cannot be easily measured or quantified12.
3. Assumption of a Single Reality: Positivism assumes that there is a
single, objective reality that can be discovered through research3. This
contrasts with non-positivist perspectives, which acknowledge multiple
realities constructed by individuals3.
4. Potential for Bias: The statistics used by positivists might themselves be
biased or invalid due to the way they are collected1.
5. Neglect of Context: Positivism often fails to take into account the
context in which social action takes place3.
6. Passive View of Individuals: Positivism often treats individuals as passive
and unthinking, which is less realistic and predictive than non-positivist
approaches that view individuals as active constructors of their social
world1.
These limitations have led to the development of non-positivist methods such as
interpretivism, phenomenology, and critical theory, which place greater emphasis
on subjectivity, context, and the active role of individuals in shaping their social
reality34.
 PHENOMENOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES IN SOCIOLOGY REJECT MANY
OF THE ASSUMPTION OF POSITIVISM, COMMENT.

Phenomenological perspectives in sociology indeed reject

many of the assumptions of positivism12. Here are some key
points of divergence:

1. Ontological Basis: Phenomenologists attack an

ontological basis which the positivists do not believe
exists2. Phenomenologists claim that acceptance of the
basis of their theories entails rejection of causal
explanation2.
2. Subjectivity vs Objectivity: While positivism
emphasizes objective and empirical evidence,
phenomenology focuses on the subjective experiences
and interpretations of individuals13.
3. Understanding vs Explanation: Positivism aims at
understanding the world as cause-and-effect relations
that can be observed1. On the other hand,
phenomenology is more concerned with understanding
the meanings that individuals attach to their
experiences1.
4. Single Reality vs Multiple Realities: Positivism
assumes that there is a single, objective reality that can
be discovered through research1. In contrast,
phenomenology acknowledges multiple realities
constructed by individuals1.
5. Quantification vs Qualitative Understanding:
Positivism’s focus on quantifiable data can overlook the
nuances and complexities of social reality that cannot be
easily measured or quantified1. Phenomenology,
however, values these nuances and seeks to understand
them through qualitative methods1.

In conclusion, while both positivism and phenomenology aim

to understand social phenomena, they differ significantly in
their assumptions about the nature of reality, the role of the
researcher, and the methods used to study social
phenomena123.
EXAMINE THE BASIC POSTULATES OF POSITIVISM AND POST-
POSITIVISM.

The basic postulates of positivism and post-positivism can be

examined as follows:

Positivism:

1. Knowledge can be gained through experiences and by

observing different elements of the world1.
2. It focuses on objectivity and quantifiability of results1.
3. It emphasizes empiricism, where enquiry relies on
observable and measurable facts1.
4. It is preassumed that knowledge can be obtained
through the senses1.
5. It is related to the deductive approach1.

Post-Positivism:

1. Post-positivism holds that knowledge is conjectural and

open to further inquiry2.
2. By constantly examining and improving existing truths,
an objective truth can be approached2.
3. Post-positivism advocates for acknowledging
knowledge from diverse perspectives and gathering
information from multiple sources2.
4. While positivists emphasize independence between the
researcher and the researched person (or object),
postpositivists argue that theories, hypotheses,
background knowledge, and values of the researcher can
influence what is observed3.
5. Postpositivists pursue objectivity by recognizing the
possible effects of biases3.

In essence, while positivism seeks objective and empirical

truths, post-positivism acknowledges the inherent subjectivity
in human understanding and emphasizes the importance of
multiple perspectives.
EXPLAIN ETHNOMETHODOLOGICAL AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL
PERSPECTIVES AS CRITIQUE OF POSITIVISM.

Ethnomethodology and phenomenology are two perspectives

that critique the positivist approach in sociology12.

Ethnomethodology, founded by American sociologist Harold

Garfinkel, integrates the concern for social order into
phenomenology and examines the means by which actions
make ordinary life possible3. It assumes that social norms are
both uniform and shared, and that violations thereof can unveil
for analysis dynamics of a community as well as the manner of
its members’ reactions to such transgressions4.
Ethnomethodology questions the positivist methodology and
its perception of social reality1.

Phenomenology, on the other hand, places great importance

on Weber’s concept of ‘verstehen’ and thus has an empathetic
approach towards the research sample5. Phenomenologists
focus on meaning and understanding and therefore do not
generate or test hypotheses (deductivism) as positivists do; nor
do they focus on collecting facts that provide laws5.
Phenomenology challenges the model of knowledge by
showing that conscious experience is a dynamic
interrelationship of subject and object6.

Both ethnomethodology and phenomenology reject many of

the assumptions of positivism. They critique positivism’s
emphasis on objectivity, quantifiability, universal testability,
and inter-subjective reliability. They argue for a more nuanced
understanding of social reality that takes into account the
complexities of human behavior and the subjective meanings
individuals attach to their experiences12.
CRITICALLY EXAMINE POSITIVISTIC APPROACH IN SOCIOLOGY
STUDIES.
The positivistic approach in sociology studies has been both influential and
controversial. Here are some critical examinations of this approach:

1. Contextual Nature of Facts: Positivism often fails to take into

account the context in which social action takes place1. It assumes
that social facts exist independently of individuals, which can lead to
a misunderstanding of reality2.
2. Limitations of the Deductive Approach: Positivism relies heavily
on the deductive approach, which starts with a theory and then tests
it through observations2. However, this approach can be less fruitful
in sociology, as it is very difficult to collect facts about abstract
phenomena3.
3. Overemphasis on Universalism: Positivism tends to focus on
discovering universal laws that govern human behavior 3. However,
this overemphasis on universalism can lead to an incomplete analysis
of social life, as it neglects the unique aspects of individual
experiences and cultural contexts2.
4. Limited Applicability of Scientific Methods: While positivism
advocates for the use of scientific methods similar to those used in
natural sciences, these methods may not always be applicable or
appropriate for studying social phenomena2.
5. Difficulty in Testing Explanations: Despite positivism’s emphasis
on testability, it can be challenging to test sociological theories in a
rigorous way due to the complexities of human behavior and social
contexts3.
6. Potential Dangers of Overemphasis: Overemphasis on positivist
sociology could potentially lead to a neglect of other important
aspects of social life, such as subjective experiences and social
constructions2.
7. Reductionist View of Individuals: Positivism often treats
individuals as passive and unthinking, which is less realistic and
predictive than non-positivist approaches that view individuals as
active constructors of their social world1.

In conclusion, while positivism has made significant contributions to

sociology by emphasizing empirical evidence and scientific rigor, it also has
its limitations and has been subject to various critiques321.
D)FACT VALUE AND OBJECTIVITY

IS SOCIOLOGY A VALUE -FREE SCIENCE? DISCUSS.

The question of whether sociology is a value-free science has

been a subject of debate among sociologists. Here are some
perspectives on this issue:

Value-Free Sociology: The principle of being value-free was

proposed by Max Weber, a German sociologist1. He argued
that to establish sociology as a credible scientific discipline,
sociologists must conduct their research free from personal
beliefs, opinions, and values1. This is also known as the
principle of “value neutrality”. According to this view,
sociologists should aim to be as objective as possible when
conducting research1.

Critiques of Value-Free Sociology: However, many

sociologists argue that complete value neutrality is not possible
in sociology234. They point out that values are an integral part
of research and are present in the selection of an object of
analysis, in the way it is approached, in the questions asked, in
the selection of data, in the interpretation of data, and in the
answers that are given2. In this sense, no science is value-free2.

Sociology as a Value-Informed Science: Some sociologists

argue that while sociology should strive for objectivity, it
should not aim to be value-free. Instead, it should be value-
informed. This means that while sociologists should strive to
minimize bias and subjectivity in their research, they should
also acknowledge and critically reflect on their own values and
how these might influence their research2.

In conclusion, while some sociologists advocate for value-free

sociology in line with the scientific method, others argue that
complete value neutrality is neither possible nor desirable.
Instead, they suggest that sociology should aim for value-
informed objectivity234.
WHAT IS ‘VALUE FREE SOCIOLOGY’? CLARIFY.

‘Value-free Sociology’ is a term coined by German sociologist

Max Weber. It refers to the idea that sociology should be
value-neutral, meaning that the researcher’s personal beliefs or
biases should not influence the research process. According to
Weber, sociologists should aim to conduct their research in a
way that is free from personal values, opinions, and prejudices.

This does not mean that sociologists should have no values,

but rather that they should strive to prevent their values from
influencing their observations, interpretations, and
conclusions. The goal is to produce objective, unbiased
knowledge about the social world.

However, it’s important to note that many sociologists argue

that complete value neutrality is not possible in sociology.
They point out that values inevitably influence what questions
are asked, how research is conducted, and how data are
interpreted. Therefore, some sociologists argue for ‘value-
informed’ sociology, where researchers critically reflect on
their own values and how these might influence their
research.
HOW IS OBJECTIVITY DIFFERENT FROM VALUE NEUTRALITY?
DISCUSS WITH REFERENCE TO WEBER’S VIEWS ON METHODOLOGY

Max Weber, a renowned sociologist, put forward a two-tiered

approach to value-free social science. According to him, the
end purpose and its selection in the research may be affected
by the values but once it is decided, the process of research
itself should not be contaminated by the values of the
researcher1.

Objectivity and value neutrality are two key concepts in

Weber’s views on methodology12:

 Objectivity: Weber contends that nature cannot just

hand us over facts, unfiltered by prior ideas. Our set of
concepts clearly shapes the way we see the world 1.
Objectivity is attainable by scientific methodology2. It
involves examining every question with care,
thoroughness, and reason by relating to truth and
welfare3.
 Value Neutrality: On the other hand, Weber believed
that once a value end, purpose or perspective had been
established, then a social scientist could conduct a
value-free investigation1. However, he also believed that
complete value freedom is not possible2. Facts and
values are different but not disengaged from each
other2. Value neutrality is another mindset a researcher
should enshrine. Impartiality and sincerity in
commitment to truth are its features3.

In essence, while objectivity refers to the unbiased approach in

conducting research, value neutrality refers to the idea that
researchers should strive to prevent their personal values from
influencing their observations, interpretations, and
conclusions123.
E) NON-POSITIVIST METHODOLOGIES

DO YOU THINK ETHNOMETHODOLOGY HELPS US IN GETTING

RELIABLE AND VALID DATA? JUSTIFY YOUR ANSWER.
Ethnomethodology, as a research approach, has its unique strengths and challenges
when it comes to reliability and validity12.
Strengths:
1. Rich, Detailed Data: Ethnomethodology often involves in-depth
observations and interactions, which can yield rich, detailed data that
capture the complexities of social life2.
2. Insight into Social Processes: By focusing on the methods people use
to make sense of their world, ethnomethodology can provide unique
insights into social processes2.
Challenges:
1. Subjectivity: The data collected through ethnomethodology is often
subjective and specific to the context in which it was collected. This can
raise questions about the reliability and validity of the findings1.
2. Generalizability: Findings from ethnomethodological studies may not be
easily generalizable to other settings or populations1.
It’s important to note that for ethnomethodologists, the emphasis is not on
questions about the reliability and validity of an investigator’s observation but on
the methods used by scientific investigators and laypersons alike to construct,
maintain, and perhaps alter what each considers and believes to be a valid and
reliable set of statements about order in the world2.
In conclusion, while ethnomethodology may face challenges in terms of traditional
notions of reliability and validity, it offers valuable insights into the everyday
methods people use to navigate their social world. The value of these insights
depends on the research questions being asked and the context in which the
research is being conducted.
HOW FAR ARE SOCIOLOGISTS JUSTIFIED IN USING POSITIVIST
APPROACH TO UNDERSTAND SOCIAL REALITY? EXPLAIN WITH
SUITABLE ILLUSTRATIONS.

The positivist approach in sociology is justified to a certain

extent in understanding social reality. Positivism is an
approach that relies on empirical evidence, such as those found
through experiments and statistics, to reveal information about
how society functions1. It is based on the assumption that
it’s possible to observe social life and establish reliable
knowledge about its inner workings2.

For example, a sociologist using a positivist approach might

use statistical methods to identify patterns and trends in social
behavior, such as the relationship between educational
achievement and social class1. This approach can provide
valuable insights into large-scale social phenomena and can
help identify general patterns and trends1.

However, critics argue that the positivist approach has its

limitations. It tends to focus on surface-level observations
rather than deep, underlying meanings3. It also assumes that
social reality exists independently of individuals’ perceptions
and interpretations, which many argue is not the case3. Critics
also point out that the positivist approach may overlook the
subjective experiences of individuals and may not fully capture
the complexities of social phenomena3.

In conclusion, while the positivist approach can provide

valuable insights into social reality, it is not without its
limitations. Therefore, many sociologists use a combination of
positivist and interpretive methods to gain a more
comprehensive understanding of social reality13.
“NON – POSITIVISTIC METHODOLOGY IS ESSENTIAL FOR
UNDERSTANDING HUMAN BEHAVIOR.” DISCUSS.
Non-positivistic methodologies are indeed essential for understanding human
behavior. They offer a different perspective from positivist methodologies, focusing
on the subjective experiences and interpretations of individuals123.
Here are some reasons why non-positivistic methodologies are crucial:
1. Understanding Internal Processes: Non-positivistic methodologies
study the internal processes represented through emotions, motives,
aspirations, and the individual’s interpretation of social reality123. This
allows for a deeper understanding of human behavior that goes beyond
observable actions.
2. Emphasis on Qualitative Methods: Non-positivists emphasize using
qualitative methods, which can provide rich, detailed data about individuals’
experiences123. These methods can capture nuances and complexities that
quantitative methods might miss.
3. Understanding Social Reality: Non-positivists advocate for
understanding social reality rather than predicting events2. They
acknowledge that social phenomena are complex and often cannot be
reduced to simple cause-and-effect relationships.
4. Accommodating Subjectivity: Non-positivists highlight the
impossibility of total objectivity and hence are accommodative of
subjectivity in research123. This recognition of subjectivity can lead to more
nuanced and authentic understandings of human behavior.
For example, symbolic interactionism, a non-positivist methodology, believes that
people’s actions are governed mainly by interpreting the world and providing
meaning to their lives2. This perspective allows researchers to understand how
individuals construct their social realities, which is essential for understanding
human behavior2.
In conclusion, while positivist methodologies have their strengths, non-positivistic
methodologies provide valuable insights into the subjective experiences and
interpretations of individuals, making them essential for a comprehensive
understanding of human behavior123.
IS NON-POSITIVISM METHODOLOGY SCIENTIFIC? ILLUSTRATE.

Non-positivist methodologies, such as interpretive sociology,

symbolic interactionism, and phenomenology, emphasize
understanding social reality rather than predicting events12.
They study the internal processes represented through
emotions, motives, aspirations, and the individual’s
interpretation of social reality1234.

While these methodologies use qualitative methods and not the

scientific methods similar to the ones used in natural
sciences1234, they are still considered scientific in their own
right. This is because they follow systematic and rigorous
procedures to collect and analyze data, and they contribute
valuable insights to our understanding of social phenomena12.

For example, symbolic interactionists do not deny attempts to

establish causal links. But they believe the statistics don’t tell
us anything about human behavior1. Interactionists believe that
people’s actions are governed mainly by interpreting the world
and providing meaning to their lives1. This view comes from
G. H. Mead’s “Mind, self, and society”1.

In conclusion, while non-positivist methodologies may differ

from traditional scientific methods used in natural sciences,
they are still considered scientific as they provide systematic
and rigorous ways of understanding social reality12.