Is sociology a real science?

gailforecast

My other half studied sociology up to a masters level, and maintains that it isn’t.

biko

I studied it for years, and yes it is.
It has been taken over by politics (even when I studied the subject it was extremely leftist).

jimgoose

It's a proper, respectable discipline alright, but as Biko points out it's been largely railroaded by American-style "identity politics" buffa-biscuit.

It's a social science, based on surveys and observations. Is it in the same league as astrophysics. No.

gailforecast

biko wrote: »

I studied it for years, and yes it is.
It has been taken over by politics (even when I studied the subject it was extremely leftist).

She did use a lack of objectivity as her main argument, so I’m assuming that’s what she meant.

KaneToad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's a social science, based on surveys and observations. Is it in the same league as astrophysics. No.

There is a league of sciences?
What is top of these rankings?

KaneToad

KaneToad wrote: »

There is a league of sciences?
What is top of these rankings?

The Science of Literalism. Literally.

A graduate yourself, I imagine.

EmmetSpiceland

Was always seen as an “easy” subject to take on for first year for anyone doing a “wishy-washy” Arts degree in UCD back in my day.

Has that changed at all?

El Tarangu

KaneToad wrote: »

There is a league of sciences?
What is top of these rankings?

Yes.

Maths -> Physics -> the other phyiscal ones -> the social ones -> economics -> psychology

One eyed Jack

gailforecast wrote: »

She did use a lack of objectivity as her main argument, so I’m assuming that’s what she meant.

Your girlfriends opinion on whether it is or it isn’t science is hardly objective either, is it?

It’s one of the sciences alright, but like any discipline or subject, it’s corrupted by human influence.

It’s a well observed phenomenon btw since the inception of the social sciences. It’s only in recent decades however, ironically due to the rising popularity of the social sciences, that it’s become more noticeable -


The over-sampling of American college students may be skewing our understanding of human behavior, finds an analysis by researchers from the University of British Columbia. In a forthcoming issue of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, anthropologist Joe Henrich, PhD, and psychologists Steven Heine, PhD, and Ara Norenzayan, PhD, review the available database of comparative social and behavioral science studies. They found that people from Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic (WEIRD) societies — who represent as much as 80 percent of study participants, but only 12 percent of the world’s population — are not only unrepresentative of humans as a species, but on many measures they’re outliers.


Are your findings ‘WEIRD’?

Samuel T. Cogley

In some parts of the world yes. In Ireland with our class of academics, not so much. I'm sure we have one or two standouts in the field but we've some real time wasters too.

s1ippy

KaneToad wrote: »

There is a league of sciences?
What is top of these rankings?

Obviously maths.

s1ippy

KaneToad wrote: »

There is a league of sciences?
What is top of these rankings?

Obviously maths.

endacl

Well, it's an 'ology', innit?

wench

KaneToad wrote: »

There is a league of sciences?
What is top of these rankings?

https://xkcd.com/435/

riffmongous

Maths isn't a science

gailforecast

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Your girlfriends opinion on whether it is or it isn’t science is hardly objective either, is it?

It’s one of the sciences alright, but like any discipline or subject, it’s corrupted by human influence.

It’s a well observed phenomenon btw since the inception of the social sciences. It’s only in recent decades however, ironically due to the rising popularity of the social sciences, that it’s become more noticeable -


The over-sampling of American college students may be skewing our understanding of human behavior, finds an analysis by researchers from the University of British Columbia. In a forthcoming issue of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, anthropologist Joe Henrich, PhD, and psychologists Steven Heine, PhD, and Ara Norenzayan, PhD, review the available database of comparative social and behavioral science studies. They found that people from Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic (WEIRD) societies — who represent as much as 80 percent of study participants, but only 12 percent of the world’s population — are not only unrepresentative of humans as a species, but on many measures they’re outliers.


Are your findings ‘WEIRD’?

How can an individuals opinion be anything other than subjective? However I dare say having studied the subject to a masters level, her opinion is fairly valid.

gailforecast

riffmongous wrote: »

Maths isn't a science

Maths follows a rigorous structure of events leading to a tentative conclusion, so I would say it’s certainly more of a science than sociology.

If a area of study is longer (much longer) on soft theory than it is on evidence - as is the case with sociology, I don't consider it science as I define the term. Same with subjects like psychology.

That doesn't mean I don't consider them worthwhile academic pursuits, they clearly are.

One eyed Jack

gailforecast wrote: »

How can an individuals opinion be anything other than subjective? However I dare say having studied the subject to a masters level, her opinion is fairly valid.

That’s exactly my point. Your girlfriends opinions are subjective, but that being true says nothing about whether sociology itself is objective. Having studied the subject to Masters level doesn’t make her opinions on whether sociology is a science or not any more or less valid than anyone else’s - opinions are still subjective.

The science of sociology itself, is objective, however it’s influenced by humans subjective opinions based upon their own observations. I wouldn’t agree with you that because a person has a Masters in sociology they’re qualified to determine whether the discipline is a science or not. It’s simply the case that it is objective, no matter how your girlfriend feels about it.

WesternZulu

I have an undergraduate degree in physics, a masters in economics, and a PhD that had elements of social science and sociology.

Those of you who think of sociology as not being a science are completely wrong. Ok, it's very different than physics but the social sciences simply cannot use the same approaches as the hard sciences - just because this is the case it does not make them any less valid.

The OP suggests that the hard sciences are free from subjectivity. Many academics carrying out statistical analysis don't have statistical training and often time results may be misinterpreted, or worse manipulated or p-hacked.

gailforecast

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That’s exactly my point. Your girlfriends opinions are subjective, but that being true says nothing about whether sociology itself is objective. Having studied the subject to Masters level doesn’t make her opinions on whether sociology is a science or not any more or less valid than anyone else’s - opinions are still subjective.

The science of sociology itself, is objective, however it’s influenced by humans subjective opinions based upon their own observations. I wouldn’t agree with you that because a person has a Masters in sociology they’re qualified to determine whether the discipline is a science or not. It’s simply the case that it is objective, no matter how your girlfriend feels about it.

But this isn’t about someone’s opinion, the thread wasn’t called “Is my partner right?”. I’ve no idea why your chasing this line.

One eyed Jack

gailforecast wrote: »

But this isn’t about someone’s opinion, the thread wasn’t called “Is my partner right?”. I’ve no idea why your chasing this line.

I’m chasing it precisely because the question you asked was “Is sociology a real science?” and gave your girlfriends opinion that it isn’t, as though she is in a position to make that determination based upon the fact that she has a Masters in sociology.

Your question relates closer to philosophy than sociology, but that’s a whole other discussion.

Ficheall

endacl wrote: »

Well, it's an 'ology', innit?

Like astrology?

TheBlackPill

TCD Business Economics and Social studies.. not even they have the Chutzpah to call is social "science"

gailforecast

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m chasing it precisely because the question you asked was “Is sociology a real science?” and gave your girlfriends opinion that it isn’t, as though she is in a position to make that determination based upon the fact that she has a Masters in sociology.

Your question relates closer to philosophy than sociology, but that’s a whole other discussion.

No I don’t think you understood the question correctly, nor have you answered it effectively.

One eyed Jack

gailforecast wrote: »

No I don’t think you understood the question correctly, nor have you answered it effectively.

Ok then, cheers, I’ll leave you to it so.

gailforecast

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Ok then, cheers, I’ll leave you to it so.

Good, that’s for the best.

riffmongous

gailforecast wrote: »

Maths follows a rigorous structure of events leading to a tentative conclusion, so I would say it’s certainly more of a science than sociology.

And that's what makes it a science? What's your understanding of a real science then?

Samuel T. Cogley

endacl wrote: »

Well, it's an 'ology', innit?

Jesus that's an obscure one!

jimgoose

riffmongous wrote: »

And that's what makes it a science? What's your understanding of a real science then?

Some say that mathematics isn't a science because it doesn't rely on empirical evidence. Others, like Gauss, would have it quite the contrary, that mathematics is queen, mother, grandmother and dotty Auntie Mildred who has way too many cats of the sciences. I suspect we won't solve it satisfactorily here. :pac:

Upforthematch

I consider sociology as much of a science as economics or theology is... i.e. not a science. Sure there are surveys statistics and reasoned discussion but to claim that these follow the same quantitative principles as the 'hard' sciences is simply an enlightenment era wet dream.

Psychology is an interesting one. Parts are pure fluff but the parts about cognition or the links with neuroscience arguably could be seen as a part of biology.

Upforthematch

jimgoose wrote: »

Some say that mathematics isn't a science because it doesn't rely on empirical evidence. Others, like Gauss, would have it quite the contrary, that mathematics is queen, mother, grandmother and dotty Auntie Mildred who has way too many cats of the sciences. I suspect we won't solve it satisfactorily here. :pac:

I thought mathematics was considered a branch of logic because of those non emperical qualities. It underpins science instead of being a science itself.

c.p.w.g.w

If it was a real science, it would be open to opposing views like those of Jordan Peterson and engage with them...but instead he is cancelled and shouted down by the folks who declare sociology is a real science

Ficheall

Ficheall wrote: »

Like astrology?

Often confused with bolloxology.

EmmetSpiceland

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Often confused with bolloxology.

Another branch of codology?

Snickers Man

Deleted User wrote: »

It's a social science, based on surveys and observations. Is it in the same league as astrophysics. No.

Social sciences are to science as the Women's Mini Marathon is to Marathon running. Some superficial similarities but essentially very different.

jimgoose

Upforthematch wrote: »

I thought mathematics was considered a branch of logic because of those non emperical qualities. It underpins science instead of being a science itself.

Yes, I think that's what Gauss was coming at.

Mad_maxx

What percentage of sociology graduates in the past few years in America are trump voter's ?

Be amazed if its higher than 5%

Arghus

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

If it was a real science, it would be open to opposing views like those of Jordan Peterson and engage with them...but instead he is cancelled and shouted down by the folks who declare sociology is a real science

Cancelled? He's probably the most famous academic in the world.

gailforecast

Arghus wrote: »

Cancelled? He's probably the most famous academic in the world.

I’d say famous and infamous are 2 very different things. He was definitely a target of cancel culture, whether that was successful or not, depends on what you define as cancelled I guess.

His name was certainly dragged through the mud.

Gregor Samsa

riffmongous wrote: »

And that's what makes it a science? What's your understanding of a real science then?

A science is a systematic enterprise that organises and advances knowledge via testable explanations and predictions.

Mathematics is certainly a science. I can’t imagine how anyone would say otherwise. It’s the most sciency of all the sciences. Sociology may be, depending on how rigorously it employs testable explanations and predictions.

spring lane jack

Its absolute waffle that goes off in tangents. I currently study it and my god its complete garbage. The Chicago School sociology is extremely good and very interesting so is Marx, Weber, Stuart Hall etc but the rest of it it just a bunch of sociologists writing about other sociologists work and patting each other on the back. My son is an Astrophysicist, now that is science, most Sociology is just made up as they go along not saying there is not great people teaching or doing Sociology work but the reality is that most of it is absolute garbage and shouldn't even be a separate subject in University. Its a subject that bluffers can use to act like they are experts by using lots of words nobody in real life uses.

c.p.w.g.w

Arghus wrote: »

Cancelled? He's probably the most famous academic in the world.

His had many events cancelled, due to pressure for folks who disagree with him...

I will say i disagree with a lot of what he says, but agree with some, so i'm no fan boy...

But if you want a field to be deemed a science you need to defend your position, but not by shutting down points of view that contravene your position...

Mad_maxx

Political science

Samuel T. Cogley

spring lane jack wrote: »

Its absolute waffle that goes off in tangents. I currently study it and my god its complete garbage. The Chicago School sociology is extremely good and very interesting so is Marx, Weber, Stuart Hall etc but the rest of it it just a bunch of sociologists writing about other sociologists work and patting each other on the back. My son is an Astrophysicist, now that is science, most Sociology is just made up as they go along not saying there is not great people teaching or doing Sociology work but the reality is that most of it is absolute garbage and shouldn't even be a separate subject in University. Its a subject that bluffers can use to act like they are experts by using lots of words nobody in real life uses.

Phenomenology.

Is the Chicago School similar to the Law version? Basically the enrichment of the largest number. That's a fúcking scary philosophy when you think about it.

cj maxx

It's an 'ology'.
Which in some people's minds =science

Tired Gardener

My background is in the Natural Sciences, so I have a bit of difficulty in accepting Sociology as a science. That isn't to say that I think it is a fools errand, but that it is more geared towards subjective truths based upon different social structures... the sciences that ai have studied are about empirical evidence.

Sociology can raise some interesting ideas and theories, but it doesn't have the same application.

I can apply the knowledge that soil is the coming together of the four spheres (Aerosphere, Biosphere, Hydrosphere, and Lithosphere) globally to understand how, when, and why soil is formed. Any sociology finding is going to be very unique to that area.

gailforecast

Tired Gardener wrote: »

My background is in the Natural Sciences, so I have a bit of difficulty in accepting Sociology as a science. That isn't to say that I think it is a fools errand, but that it is more geared towards subjective truths based upon different social structures... the sciences that ai have studied are about empirical evidence.

Sociology can raise some interesting ideas and theories, but it doesn't have the same application.

I can apply the knowledge that soil is the coming together of the four spheres (Aerosphere, Biosphere, Hydrosphere, and Lithosphere) globally to understand how, when, and why soil is formed. Any sociology finding is going to be very unique to that area.

Likewise. I’m not in anyway, shape or form trying to denigrate the subject, however I’d consider it more akin to let’s say critical theory in literature, than an actual science.

Montage of Feck

KaneToad wrote: »

There is a league of sciences?
What is top of these rankings?

Physics is the big daddy of science.

Quantum Erasure

KaneToad wrote: »

There is a league of sciences?
What is top of these rankings?