Summary
It is a common method of research used in sociology. It explains how sociologists are out of common sense in trying to explain or understand social phenomena.They don't look at the world as we usually see, question and analyze why things happen and how there is a way to stop them before they happen.
The issue in this chapter is the way that sociologists use to assert authority over social life. There are dozens of different ways that humans claim to acquire knowledge. Here are some common examples: Logic, Tradition, Johanskishirok, Science
Interesting
The characterization of sociology was really interesting. Systematic and prudent measurements, coefficients, or categorical distinctions of relevant quantities or quality are often important differences between science such as pseudoscience and chemistry. Scientific measurements are usually tabulated, graphed, or mapped, where statistical manipulation, such as correlation and regression, is performed. Measurements are made in controlled environments, such as laboratories, and in difficult situations to access, such as human populations. I was surprised to see how it was done in such a systematic way and pay attention to each and every one.
Disscusion
Durkem, who wrote sociological methods, is a great model for those who want to find out what sociology should provide. Durkem correctly assessed social heritage from the past, was sensitive to the social needs of his time, and engaged in presenting order for the future society. What would happen to Durkheim if he survived the war? I wonder what you're thinking.
I think the the step of characterization of sociology is also important but not as much as testing. If there is a perfect characterization it is impossible to be a theory without testing. I agree with your idea that characterization is interesting but not as much as testing :0!
ReplyDelete