Sociology and Natural sciences

For Daily Sociology Question and Answer
With Brian Maregedze
Call/app +263779210440
Assess the view that sociological research should be based on the methods of the natural sciences. [25]

Natural science refers to the study of the physical body or the natural environment and it refers to subjects such as biology, chemistry and physics. Sociology however is a disciplinary approach to studying human social behaviour. There has been a long and heated debate over whether or not sociological research should be based on the methods of natural sciences.
The Positivists sociologists are among those who believe that sociology should be based on the methods of natural sciences. This is because they believe that human behaviour, just like the subjects under study of natural sciences, can be directly observed and objectively measured. They also believe that human behaviour is based on a cause and effect relationship and that it responds to external stimuli. Natural scientists conduct their research on these four principles, and since sociologists can also use these principles to study human behaviour, then they should adopt the methods of natural science, according to Positivist sociologists.

Popper (1959), though not a positivist, he agrees with them on them matter that sociological research should adopt the methods of natural sciences. He believed that sociological research, just like that of natural science, is deductive rather than inductive. This means that it produces specific statements after a studying a topic generally, rather than producing general statements after studying a subject specifically. He also believes that the more difficult it is to falsify a sociological theory, the closer it comes to being true, which is a method used by natural scientists also.

On the other hand though, Interpretivists sociologists postulate that sociological research cannot be based on the methods of natural sciences. This is because they believe that human behaviour has meanings and purpose, and thus it is not just a reaction to external stimuli. Additionally, humans have a consciousness which comprises of thoughts, feelings and emotions, all of which cannot be directly observed as posited by the Positivists. Thus, Interpretivists sociologists maintain that sociological research cannot be based on the methods of the natural sciences.

Weber believes that in order to conduct sociological research, one must study the subjective states of minds of individuals, rather than the cause and effect relationship of the actions as postulated by the Positivists. Thus, by not looking at the cause and effect relationship, the sociologists cannot or rather does not adopt the method of natural sciences.
Phenominologists sociologists also believe that sociology cannot adopt the methods of natural science.
This is because they believe that humans categorize the world in order to make sense of it. This categorization is subjective, which makes it impossible for the sociologist to directly observe nor objectively measure their subject. Kuhn in The Structure of Scientific Revolution (1962) posits that each sociologist has his or her own paradigm, which they set out to prove via their research. Thus, evidence that does not support their paradigm is disregarded or destroyed. Sociologists, thus, display biasness towards their own research, thus lossing objectivity, which is the very basis for research in the world of natural sciences.

A Kaplan (1964) advocate that distinguishes between reconstructed logics, and logics in use. The latter refers to the evidence presented whilst the former refers to the raw data that does not conceal any facts. Kaplan believes that sociologists use logics in use where by they discard information that does not support the conclusions the researcher would like to find. Thus, Kaplan also maintains that sociology cannot adopt the methods of natural sciences.
The Realists sociologists however do in fact believe that sociological research can adopt the methods of natural science. They advocate such a statement after looking at the many similarities between the natural sciences and sociological research. They claim that basically, they both try to find theories and models that try to objectively explain the world based on sensible evidence.

Sayer (1984) believs that it can since both natural sciences and sociology operate under open as well as closed systems. Open systems refers to uncontrolled settings. For example sociologists cannot control all the variables in the natural environment or individuals under study. Also, meteorologists of the natural sciences, cannot accurately predict the weather either, since they do not control all variables. Keat and Urry (1982) also believe that sociological research can adopt the methods of natural science since both subjects do not restrict their study to the observable. For example, scientists study magnetic fields and Darwins theory of Evolution. Sociologists study suicide, the motive of which cannot truly be observed.
Such statements by both Sayer as well as Keat and Urry are in defence of the criticisms launched by interpretivists as to why sociology cannot be based on the methods of natural science. Thus, whether or not sociological research should, cannot or can be based on methods of natural science, depends on the theoretical approach adopted!