Positivism v Interpretivism Flashcards
Overview of positivism
Positivists believe that it is possible and desirable to apply the logic and methods of the natural sciences to the study of society. Doing so will bring us true, objective knowledge of the same type as that found in the natural sciences.
This will provide the basis for solving social problems and achieving progress.
A key feature of the positivist approach is the belief that reality exists outside and independently of the human mind
Positivism factors
Patterns, law and inductive reasoning
Verificationism
Objective quantitate research
Positivism and suicide
Patterns laws and inductive reasoning
For positivists, reality is not random or chaotic but patterned, and we can observe these empirical (factual) patterns or regularities - for example, that water boils at 100 degrees Celsius. It is the job of science to observe, identify, measure and record these patterns systematically - preferably through laboratory experiments - and then to explain them. Positivists believe, in Durkheim’s words, that ‘real laws are discoverable that will explain these patterns. Just as physicists have discovered laws that govern the workings of nature, such as the law of gravity, sociologists can discover laws that determine how society works. The method for doing so is known as induction, or inductive reasoning.
Induction involves accumulating data about the world through careful observation and measurement. As our knowledge grows, we begin to see general patterns.
Verificationism
From this, we can develop a theory that explains all our observations so far. After many more observations have confirmed or verified the theory, we can claim to have discovered the truth in the form of a general law. Because inductive reasoning claims to verify a theory - that is, prove it true - this approach is also known as verificationism.
For positivists, the patterns we observe, whether in nature or in society, can all be explained in the same way - by finding the facts that cause them. in sociology we might explain the social fact of educational failure in terms of another social fact such as material deprivation.
Positivist sociologists thus seek to discover the causes of the patterns they observe. Like natural scientists, they aim to produce general statements or scientific laws about how society works. These can then be used to predict future events and to guide social policies. For example, if we Know that material deprivation causes educational failure, we can use this knowledge to develop policies to tackle it.
Objective quantitative research
Positivists believe that as far as possible sociology should take the experimental method used in the natural sciences as the model for research, since this allows the investigator to test a hypothesis in the most systematic and controlled way.
Like natural scientists, positivists use quantitative data to uncover and measure patterns of behaviour. This allows them to produce mathematically precise statements about the relationship between the facts they are investigating. By analysing quantitative data, positivists seek to discover the laws of cause and effect that determine behaviour.
Positivism and suicide
Emile Durkheim (1897) chose to study suicide to show that sociology was a science with its own distinct subject matter. Using quantitative data from official statistics, Durkheim observed that there were patterns in the suicide rate. For example, rates for Protestants were higher than for Catholics. He concluded that these patterns could not be the product of the motives of individuals, but were social facts.
According to Durkheim, the social facts responsible for determining the suicide rate were the levels of integration. Thus, for example, Catholics were less likely than Protestants to commit suicide because Catholicism was more successful in integrating individuals.
Thus Durkheim claimed to have discovered a ‘real law’ that different levels of integration and regulation produce different rates of suicide. He claimed to have demonstrated that sociology had its own unique subject matter - social facts - and that these could be explained scientifically.
Interpretivism overview
Interpretivist sociologists do not believe that sociology should model itself on the natural sciences. Interpretivists criticise positivism’s ‘scientific’ approach as inadequate or even as completely unsuited to the study of human beings.
Int factors
The subject matter of socio
Verstehen and quantitative research
Types of interpretivism
Interactionism
Interactionists believe that we can have causal explanations. However, they reject the positivist view that we should have a definite hypothesis before we start our research. For example, Glaser and Strauss (1968) argue that this risks imposing our own view of what is important, rather than taking the actors’ viewpoint, so we end up distorting the reality we are seeking to capture.
Instead, Glaser and Strauss favour a ‘bottom-up’ approach, or grounded theory. Rather than entering the research with a fixed hypothesis from the start our ideas emerge gradually from the observations we make during the course of the research itself. These ideas can then be used later to produce testable hypotheses of the sort favoured by positivists.
Phenomenologists and ethnomethodologists
Phenomenologists and ethnomethodologists such as Garfinkel completely reject the possibility of causal explanations of human behaviour. They take a radically anti-structuralist view, arguing that society is not a real thing ‘out there’ determining our actions. In this view, social reality is simply the shared meanings or knowledge of its members. As such, society is not an external force - it exists only in people’s consciousness. Therefore, in this view, the subject matter of sociology can only consist of the interpretive procedures that people use to make sense of the world. Because people’s actions are not governed by external causes, there is no possibility of cause-and-effect explanations of the kind sought by positivists.
Int and suicide
The interactionist Jack Douglas (1967) rejects the positivist idea of external social facts determining our behaviour.
Individuals have free will and they choose how to act on the basis of meanings. To understand suicide, therefore, we must uncover its meanings for those involved, instead of imposing our own meanings onto the situation.
Douglas also rejects Durkheim’s use of quantitative data from official statistics. These are not objective facts, but simply social constructions resulting from the way coroners label certain deaths as suicides.
Like Douglas, the ethnomethodologist J. Atkinson rejects the idea that external social facts determine behaviour, and agrees that statistics are socially constructed.
Unlike Douglas, however, Atkinson argues that we can never know the ‘real rate’ of suicide, even using qualitative methods, since we can never know for sure what meanings the deceased held.
For Atkinson, the only thing we can study about suicide is the way that the living make sense of deaths. For ethnomethodologists, The sociologist’s role is to uncover what this knowledge is and how coroners use it to arrive at a verdict.
Positivism and researchers
Positivists believe that researchers should be detached and objective. They should not let their own subjective feelings, values or prejudices influence how they conduct their research or analyse their findings.
However, in sociology we are dealing with people, and there is a danger that the researcher may ‘contaminate’ the research - for example, by influencing interviewees to answer in ways that reflect the researcher’s opinions rather than their own. Positivists therefore employ methods that allow for maximum objectivity and detachment, and so they use quantitative methods such as questionnaires. These methods also produce reliable data that can be checked by others.
The subject matter of socio
Interpretivists argue that the subject matter of sociology is meaningful social action, and that we can only understand it by successfully interpreting the meanings and motives of the actors involved. In their view, sociology is not a science, because science only deals with laws of cause and effect, and not human meanings. Because of this, many interpretivists completely reject the use of natural science methods and explanations as a model for sociology.
• Natural science studies matter, which has no consciousness. As such, its behaviour can be explained as a straightforward reaction to an external stimulus.
• Sociology studies people, who do have consciousness.
People make sense of and construct their world by attaching meanings to it. Their actions can only be understood in terms of these meanings, and meanings are internal to people’s consciousness, not external stimuli - they are ideas or constructs, not things.
Unlike matter, people have free will and can exercise choice.
As G.H. Mead argued, rather than responding automatically to external stimuli, human beings interpret the meaning of a stimulus and then choose how to respond to it.
Verstehen and quantitative research
Interpretivists therefore reject the logic and methods of the natural sciences. They argue that to discover the meanings people give to their actions, we need to see the world from their viewpoint. For interpretivists, this involves abandoning the detachment and objectivity favoured by positivists. Instead, we must put ourselves in the place of the actor, using what Weber calls verstehen.
For this reason, interpretivists favour the use of qualitative methods and data such as participant observation. These methods produce richer, more personal data high in validity and give the sociologist a subjective understanding of the actor’s meanings and life-world.
