HND Social Science

Subjectivity, objectivity and value-freedom

Weber, although not a positivist, argued that objective sociological analysis should proceed via the construction of ideal types, logically perfect mental constructs to which reality could be compared. For example, to illustrate his theory of organisations. Weber constructed an ideal type of bureaucracy. Weber argued a bureaucracy that is working well is one that is achieving its goals. Weber suggested that it should not matter to the sociologist whether these goals are immoral or not. Moral problems therefore are not the scientists concern because objectivity excludes moral issues. Social science should not concern itself with value judgements.

It was World War II that functionalist sociologists argued that sociological research should avoid subjectivity, i.e. being influenced by the personal views and political produces of the researcher. They argued that social scientists should not aim to change society. Rather, they should subscribe to ‘objectivity through neutrality’ or value freedom. In this sense, objective social scientists were presented as disinterested and trustworthy pursuers of truth.

In functionalist theory, value-freedom has three dimensions.

• The sociologist should not allow their prejudices or beliefs to influence the research design or process. It is important that the research tool, e.g. the questionnaire or interview, does not in any way lead the respondents towards the researcher’s own beliefs about an issue.
• It is also important that the researcher interprets research data objectively. Selectivity on the basis of prejudice and belief would invalidate the research findings. Sociologists should aim only to see facts as they are, not as they would wish to, see them.
• It is believed that the job of the sociologists is to objectively carry out research and how the research data is used by social policy makers is not the business of the sociologist. It is the functionalist view that it is not the job of the sociologist to solve problems or change society.

It is argued by some sociologists that the influence of values cannot be avoided in the research process. At the beginning of research, at the proposal and funding stage, the choice of research topic depends upon those with power making value judgements about what is interesting and worthwhile. Theses might be university heads of department, government ministers or businesses.

Gomm argues that when academic resources are low (especially when there are government cuts in university spending), sociological research may be monopolised by the state and big businesses. This may mean that it only focuses on issues that these groups see as important. For example corporate business in the USA has funded an enormous amount of research aimed at improving worker productivity.

Some sociologists, notably D Phillips, have argued that data collection is itself a social process so we can expect bias and invalidity to arise out of the effects of interaction. Some members of society when they are faced with a questionnaire or interview may seek social approval and therefore may act in ways they feel the sociologist will expect or agree with.

It is argued that the very nature of sociology means that it is value-laden. Gouldner argues that value-free sociology is a myth because it is impossible to separate sociologists from what they observe – knowledge does not exist outside of people. It is a social product, the result of human actions and values. According to Gouldner, all researchers possess domain assumptions a worldview that is the result of socialisation into a particular culture. As a result, most sociology reflects Western, capitalist and patriarchal values. For example of Rostow and modernisation theory stresses the superiority of US democracy and capitalism. Rostow goes as far as calling communism ‘a disease’.

Similarly, Gomm argues that that sociology is a social activity carried by real people in a world characterised by conflicts of interest between different social groups. Any research therefore must inevitably take one side or another, whether the researcher admits this or not. Sociological research, according to Gomm, reflects ideological beliefs. Some sociologist’s, Functionalists, sub-culturalists, etc believe that society is characterised by a consensus on values. These sociologists tend not to engage in social dissent or criticism. Rather, they support the status quo and thus, unconsciously, the values of the establishment. Examples of such sociological ideas would include:

• Poverty is the fault of the individual
• Crime is a working –class phenomenon
• Working-class culture is inferior to middle-class culture.

Gomm suggests by present facts as ‘truth’ such sociologists are able to deny responsibility for the way their research is used by policy makers. For example , compensatory education introduced in the 1960’s was based on the idea that working-class culture was somehow inferior . Such policy distracted form other causes e.g. the role of the school, structural poverty etc. Gomm suggest the most important aspect of sociological research is what is not investigated. Such sociology is therefore ideological because it helps to maintain social inequality.

Marxist would agree with these arguments. They argue that the major function of scientific knowledge is the maintenance and legitimisation of inequality. In this sense then, science is not objective or value-free. Instead, it supports powerful capitalist interests such as big business or the military.

Some sociologists have rejected the concept of value-freedom because they suggest that it is undesirable to pretend to be value-free. Critical sociologists who feel that they must take sides have taken up this theme. Many Marxists (e.g. Corrigan, Willis) feel they should take the side of the working–class. Feminists obviously take the side of women, whilst many involved in labelling studies such as Becker take the side of the deviant.

Such perspectives acknowledge that values do and should enter sociological research. They argue that sociology should not and cannot be morally neutral or indifferent. Rather, Sociology is value-laden. Moreover sociology should be prescriptive it should suggest ways forward in order to create a better society.