Week 2 Sociology 1000 Past Paper PDF

 Levels of analysis include the Micro (behaviours), Meso (community), and Macro (structural) worlds.  Structure and agency are in tension. Sociological  The sociological imagination considers forces beyond our immediate experience/...

 Levels of analysis include the Micro (behaviours), Meso (community), and Macro (structural) worlds.  Structure and agency are in tension. Sociological  The sociological imagination considers forces beyond our immediate experience/perception – Imagination toward context and structure. Review  The broader the pattern, the deeper the structural forces.  The deeper the forces/structures, the more difficult to see and explain. Sociological Questions & Research Week 2 Is sociology a science at all?   Vienna Circle (1920-40’s, Karl Popper), critiqued logical positivism.  Challenged the hypothetico-deductive method – which starts with a hypothesis, then verifies.  Science, unlike other forms of knowledge (e.g., moral, aesthetic), required testing Philosophical against empirical evidence (correspondence theory). Arguments –  But verification is spotty. Rather, any Popper disconfirming information should ‘falsify’ the hypothesis.  Pending falsification, scientific findings are always partial/tentative, and never universal or final.  Hypotheses are merely bold predictions that produce knowledge gains.   Thomas Kuhn (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 1962), examined the history of science.  Scientists are committed to theoretical assumptions, or a paradigm (e.g., Newtonian mechanics) and work to Philosophical prove, propagate, and normalize it. Arguments –  Anomalous findings can be suppressed or explained away to preserve the Kuhn paradigm. Why?  Science is performed by a community with a shared interest, career goals, reputation, and status.  Paradigmatic revolutions (vs. cumulative gains) produce knowledge (e.g., Einstein’s theory of relativity).  Philosophical Arguments  Paul Feyerbend (1975, Against Method) – scientific discoveries include chance, error (by mistake), and the work of non-scientists. So ‘anything goes’ in the interest of knowledge progress.  Roy Bhaskar (1975, A Realist Theory of Science) – argued that reality is divided into three domains, or the real, the actual, and the empirical. Scientific This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA work involves careful orchestration of the actual to make it observable, so we can infer the real. But our knowledge of the ‘real’ is always incomplete.   Sociology is scientific in the sense that it attempts to discover realities beneath the appearance of things through hypothesis, systematic observation, analysis, and the accumulation of knowledge. So…is  But methods will differ from the natural sciences. Why? sociology a  Less control over the variables – no laboratory science?  The human world appears distinct/different  Meanings are involved, beyond objective facts  Intention at play  Social scientific work incorporates a variety of methods in pursuit of knowledge. Challenges & Social Research  Common sense can be misleading or concealing – rarely evidence based.  Stagecraft is prevalent and the mind is concealed and complex.  Many behaviours are hidden from plain view, providing a barrier to knowledge and understanding.  Laud Humphreys’ (1970, USA) – Tearoom Trade  Shang & Zhang, Li (2015, 2010, China)  Any phenomena that involves stigma, illegality, or marginalized behaviour will appear in the backstage and increasingly inaccessible.   Researcher bias/passion – advocacy, economic, values, personal, political. Managing vs. eliminating bias.  Ethical challenges:  Consent?  Deceit, covert observation? Challenges &  Vulnerable groups?  Privacy? Data storage and retention? Social Research  Hawthorne Effect (Elton Mayo) – looking (when perceived) can change behaviour, negatively affect subjects, and skews data.  Reliability problems – researchers arriving at the same result under the same conditions.  Validity problems – am I measuring what I am supposed to be measuring?   Can social research establish causation? A causal relationship refers to an association in which one event or situation produces another.  Social scientific work assumes that social life is not random, but that events have causes.  Independent variables produce an effect (e.g., Challenges & unemployment), while the affected variable is dependent (e.g., health). Social  Correlation is the existence of a regular association Research between two variables. But Correlation ≠ Causation!  Indirect relationships and intervening variables are often present.  Causal mechanisms also fall short of explaining what something means to an actor.   Control means holding some variables constant to isolate the effects of another. A correlation can become a causal connection by using controls.  The presence of unknown causal mechanisms means that Challenges researcher may not know what to test or control for. & Social  Sampling problems:  A sample is a strategic selection of subjects from a Research population at large – findings are later generalized to that population.  Samples must be ‘typical’ and random, if not…  Convenience sampling – whoever is available, or…  Snowball sampling – subjects as recruiters.   Triangulation combines methods to supplement and check on the others to produce more reliable, valid, and comprehensive findings. This can involve investigator, theoretical, and methodological triangulation. E.g., using primary/secondary sources, Managing fieldwork and documents, etc.  Multiple sources can be used to ‘piece together’ a Challenges fulsome description (Anthony Ashworth, 1980, WW1 trench warfare)  Reflexivity – when a researcher ‘turns back’ on themselves to explore bias and expose/acknowledge shortcomings.  1. What is the problem or question? 2. Review existing literature 3. Clearly re-formulate the problem Research 4. Design – how? Process 5. Research 6. Interpretation and reporting  Stages can be muddled.  Quantitative methods measure phenomena using mathematical and statistical models (facts). Qualitative methods gather ‘rich’ Different data, or in depth understanding of Methods action in social context (meanings). Mixed methods blend both, subject to the research question.  Fieldwork – richer, in-depth, but small-scale, harder to generalize. E.g., ethnography, participant/observation. Surveys – efficient, large-scale, but superficial, has validity concerns, and vulnerable to selection/sampling bias. Experiments – controlled, valid/reliable, but vulnerable to the Hawthorne Effect, artificiality, and limited scope. Different Documentary – wide range, historical, but source dependent with interpretative challenges. Are documents reliable, reflective? Includes Visual Methods sources, like film and photos (e.g., Goffman, Gender Advertisement). Biographical – examines social change through biographies or life history, e.g., experience of migration. In depth, but narrow scope, potentially biased. Comparative/Historical – examines difference across regions and time to establish patterns, trends, and change, but can be vulnerable to an overload of variables. Digital – internet sources, social media, etc. Detailed and accessible information, but subject to inaccuracies, overload, and privacy issues.   Factual questions (what happened?) are important, but facts may not be readily available, accessible, or ‘real’. ‘Facts’ do not speak for Research themselves.  E.g., how many students at the UofM regularly Questions – engage in binge drinking? imagination  Comparative questions (is this happening in practice everywhere?) attempt to relate the findings in one context with another. If they vary, why?  E.g., is the rate of binge drinking the same/different across college/university campuses?   Developmental questions (is this happening over time?) try to determine how conditions change over time.  E.g., how has binge drinking developed over time? Is it changing? Research  Theoretical questions (what underlies the Questions – phenomenon?) ask ‘why’ – interpretation is imagination needed.  E.g., why is the binge drinking rate higher/lower in practice over time or not, or higher/lower at the UofM now/before?  Theoretical questions are coupled with empirical ones to illuminate. Reliable sociological knowledge is theoretical-empirical in character.   Philip Zimbardo (1971), Stanford Prison Experiment  Are conflicts between prisoners and guards the result of personality, or differences in character? (dispositional hypothesis)  24 middle-class students, randomly assigned as guards or prisoners.  Prisoners detained 24/7, guards worked shifts, Examples… uniforms issued, etc.  Findings: guards became authoritarian, hostile, directive, and abusive. Prisoners became apathetic and/or rebellious.  Conclusion: The situation, not disposition, accounts for the behaviour (e.g., total institutions, Goffman). It’s the barrel, not the apple.   Theda Skocpol, 1979, States and Social Revolutions  Are state revolutions the intended or unintended consequence of intentional human action?  Studied the origins and nature of state revolutions. Used comparative and primary/secondary sources to uncover structural causes. Examples…  Findings: Sets of conditions are needed for revolution. Agrarian societies with unstable state structures and under competitive pressure (vacuum) = peasant revolt (France, China, and Russia).  Conclusion: Revolutions come; they are not made. Social Theory Theory attempts to bring seemingly random phenomena under a singular description or explanation. Theory will guide the collection and interpretation of facts. Good theory is accompanied by factual research, not speculation. Why Theory? Theory underlies perception – imparts sight and blindness. Facts do not speak for themselves, but are interpreted, based on theoretical assumptions. E.g., people work for money.   Middle/Dark Ages (476-1450) – human expansion (‘calamities’), political/financial unrest, violence, scholasticism.  Scientific Revolution (1400-1690) – science as autonomous discipline in Europe that systematized observation – folkways were still prevalent.  Protestant Reformation (early 1500’s) – rationalization, personalization/separation of belief. Foundations  Enlightenment (1600-1800) – European intellectual movement that celebrated reason, leading to revolutions in philosophy, art, politics, etc.  Industrial Revolution (1760-1840) – rapid scientific/technological and industrial development. Brought disease, pollution, and crowding.  French Revolution (1789) – end of European agrarian society, absolute monarchies, and tradition – freedom, rights, reason, etc.   The social world as ‘nature’s highest expression’ and discoverable through natural methods, e.g., observation, data collection, pattern identification, theorizing explanations, etc.  Naturalism (materialism, physicalism, scientism) Foundations dominated early social theory (19th century) – the world is comprised of matter differently modified.  Classical theorists held that scientific knowledge was the only path to truth, progressive, and the key to our advancement as a species.  Structure and agency, conflict and consensus. Positivism  Auguste Comte, France (1798-1857) – ‘invented’ sociology, or social physics. Believed that sociology would be the repository for all scientific knowledge.  Positivism (imposed on the mind by experience) – doctrine that science should only be concerned with observables/experience (empirical), from which laws are inferred.  The goal was to discovery of laws (causal relationships) for the social world like other natural phenomena → dominion.  Three phases – theological, metaphysical (abstractions), and the positive or scientific. A new ‘religion of humanity’ would follow.   The natural science had success, why not apply this to the social?  Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) – social evolution was Social in process of functional adaptation – when Evolution societies increasingly adapt to the natural world, becoming more complex.  Social-evolutionary ideas persist through most classical theorists but diminish in the 20th century. This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND   Karl Marx, Germany (1818-1883), focused on the changes associated with the industrial revolution and growing inequality between capitalist and industrial classes.  The goal of this grand theory was to develop a scientific understanding of society and change. Conflict  Historical Materialism – as a departure form philosophy and abstract ideas to a materialist conception of history (vs idealism, abstract ideals).  Why? Because the dominant ideas reflect the dominant way of life, or mode of production. Dominant ideas = ruling ideas.   As production increases, private property emerges in societies like Greece and Rome.  Agriculture and feudal property relations developed, entrenching class division.  Feudalism reached its productive limits, leading to capitalist society and industry, producing two camps: proletariat (workers) and the bourgeoisie (owners). Conflict  Capital becomes concentrated – assets like money, machines, and factories accumulate in conjunction with wage-labour, who do not own the means of production but are compelled to work for those who do (competitive struggle). = Capitalists (bourgeois) in conflict (not consensus) with the working class (proletariat) based on an exploitative relationship, or interest-based arrangement. The ‘motor of history’ is class conflict.   Capitalism requires discipline, defined work hours, etc. to ensure that profit could be extracted.  Capitalist production requires a large workforce, but this also brings workers together – leading to class consciousness and eventual revolt.  Communal relations, no private property Conflict  High levels of centralized production  Humane – “from each, according to his ability, to each, according to his need’  Capitalism appears within an historical telos that eventually leads back to communalism (primitive) – without ownership or class division.   Failed as an economic theory (1989-1991) – Polish Revolution, Eastern Europe, then Soviet collapse. Very few ‘pure’ communist economies remain – capitalist or hybrid economic development now prevalent. Conflict -  Simplistic vision of class structures and critique behaviour.  Equity and violence – forcing outcomes.  The legacy of Marxism is critique (critical) of exploitation in non-economic forms – which may no longer be ‘Marxist’.