Here’s a Notion-friendly, structured explanation of the objectivity vs subjectivity debate in sociology, along with the main thinkers, arguments, and implications for research.

Objectivity vs Subjectivity Debate in Sociology

1. Core Question

Can sociology be as objective as the natural sciences, or is it inevitably influenced by the researcher’s values, perspectives, and social position?

2. Objectivity View

Main Idea:

Social facts can be studied independently of the researcher’s personal beliefs or biases, using scientific methods.

Key Thinkers:

• Auguste Comte → Sociology as a “positive science” using observation & experimentation.
• Émile Durkheim → “Social facts must be treated as things” — external, measurable, and observable.
• Positivists (19th–20th century) → Favoured quantitative methods, hypothesis testing, and value-neutrality.

Arguments for Objectivity:

• Social phenomena have patterns/laws like natural sciences.
• Researcher detachment ensures replicable and verifiable results.
• Empirical data reduces bias.

Criticisms:

• Human behaviour is shaped by meanings, which numbers alone can’t capture.
• Complete detachment is unrealistic — researcher’s culture, history, and ideology influence their questions and interpretations.