The Origins Of Value Free Sociology: A Perspective

Over the years, many scholars and astute academics have held opposing and contradicting views as to how human behaviour should be studied. Since the Social Sciences, particularly Psychology, Sociology, Economics and Political Science entail the study of human behaviour which develops in a social context and is highly unpredictable, some scholars like Gomm, Becker and Gouldner opined cogently that complete value freedom is highly unattainable. Others like Max Weber, Durkheim and Comte rejected the idea of a value laden social sciences and in a more specific manner Sociology and asserted that value freedom is attainable if social scientists follow the rules and logic of science.

The debate as to whether the social sciences can be value free or value laden became more pronounced in the discipline of Sociology when Max Weber, the German Sociologist formulated his interpretative understanding of social action. In other words, he contended that the social researcher must try and understand meanings ascribed to objects by social actors. He argued that values should not be allow to creep in the research process once the topic has been chosen and findings are ongoing. To Weber, science is empirical by its strict adherence to the treatment of values. Although Max Weber was the one to officially postulate a value free Sociology, other classical Sociologist such as Durkheim and Comte had already, in their scientific epistemological orientation advocated that Sociology should and ought to be value free.

Emile Durkheim famously asserted that Sociology entails the study of social facts, a concept that continues to dominate the discipline of Sociology. To Durkheim, Sociology can be value free if the researcher tries to uncover objective scientific laws independent of the researcher's perception, values and beliefs. In his famous study ‘ Suicide’, Emile Durkheim sought to find out the causes of suicide outside of the individual. He finally contended that suicide was inextricably interwoven within the fabric of the entire social structure of Europe. He found out that Protestants committed suicide often times than Catholics, the unmarried than the married . His study consolidated Comte's idea of positivism as a supreme guide to an objective reality.

C. Wright Mills(1959) in his famous book ‘Sociological Imagination’ sought to explain simple happenings like unemployment by looking at large scale social structures like a collapsed economy and how it renders people unemployed. Mills argued that there is an underlying objective reality to this phenomenon of unemployment when it affected large number of people. To him, unemployment only becomes a social fact when it is encountered by many people and a personal problem when it affected an individual. In a famous statement, he opined ‘ when a society becomes industrialized, a peasant becomes a worker, a feudal lord is liquidated or becomes a businessman’. This assertion by Mills gives credence to the positivist argument that Sociology should and ought to value free since it considers the origins of unemployment as a part of the social structure, hence unemployment becomes a social fact.

Gouldner(1973) argues on a different plane by positing that it is impossible to achieve complete value freedom in the social sciences and a large extent Sociology. He further remarked that Sociologist who claim to be value free are merely gutless academics with few moral scruples who have sold out the discipline in return for a pleasant University lifestyle. He further opined hat the principle of value freedom has dehumanized Sociologist. Gouldner's argument to a large extent forms the basis of the humanist approach to the study of human behaviour. To humanists, reality is constructed and shaped by social actors, hence there is no objective reality as propounded by the positivists. Humanists further said that if objectivity is freedom from social influences, and knowledge is a social product, then objective knowledge is unattainable by man.

Becker also contended that all knowledge is political, serving some interest at the expense of others, the task of the Sociologist is to choose sides; to decide which interests sociological knowledge should serve.

Feminist have also criticized the idea of a value free Sociology by exclaiming that the discipline is bias towards men and that feminist should be concerned with developing a sociological knowledge which concerns women (Abbot & Wallace, 1990).

In conclusion, Sociologists and on a more broader note the social scientists have been completely divided as to the issue of a value free approach to social research. Although both humanists and positivists are diametrically opposed as to whether Sociology should be value free or value laden, what is more important is for the discipline to adjust its methods and principles to the changing conditions of the modern world; as to whether reality should be objectively or subjectively studied, values constitute a major component of knowledge hence nothing can be done to cure that raging dilemma.

References
Gouldner, A. W. (1973). Anti-Minotaur: The Myth of a Value-Free Sociology. In For Sociology: Renewal and Critique in Sociology. Today, 3–26. London: Allen Lane.

Mills, W.C. (1958). The Sociological Imagination. Oxford University Press: New York

Durkheim, E.(1982). The Rules of Sociological Methods. Macmillan Press Limited: New York.

Author: Isaac Abban
B.A Social Sciences(Geography & Sociology)
University of Cape Coast, Ghana.