1932

Abstract

A fortiori
()

(, )

The standard for what passes as scientific sociology is derived from classical physics, a model of natural science that is totally inappropriate for sociology. As a consequence, we pursue goals and use criteria for success that are harmful and counterproductive. Even those dismissing such efforts use the standards of physics as grounds for their objection. Although recognizing that no natural science can serve as an automatic template for our work, we suggest that Darwin's work on evolution provides a far more applicable model for linking theory and research since he dealt with obstacles far more similar to our own. This includes drawing rigorous conclusions based on observational data rather than true experiments; an ability to absorb enormous amounts of diverse data into a relatively simple system that did not include a large number of what we think of as independent variables; the absence of prediction as a standard for evaluating the adequacy of a theory; and the ability to use a theory that is incomplete in both the evidence that supports it and in its development. Other sciences are briefly cited as well, but the main emphasis is on the lessons that Darwin provides for social sciences such as sociology that obtain their evidence primarily from non-experimental sources.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141122
2002-08-01
2024-06-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/soc/28/1/annurev.soc.28.110601.141122.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141122&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Antonio RJ. 2000. Materialism. In Encyclopedia of Sociology, ed. E. Borgatta, R. Montgomery 31780–84 New York: Macmillan Ref. USA [Google Scholar]
  2. Bonner JT, May RM. 1981. Introduction. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, by Charles Darwin vii–xli Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  3. Cohen IB. 1994. Interactions: Some Contacts Between the Natural Sciences and the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
  4. Duncan OD. 1984. Notes on Social Measurement: Historical and Critical. New York: Russell Sage Found [Google Scholar]
  5. Flyvbjerg B. 2001. Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  6. Gould SJ. 1977. Ever Since Darwin: Reflections in Natural History. New York: Norton [Google Scholar]
  7. Gould SJ. 1982. In praise of Charles Darwin. In Darwin's Legacy, ed. CL Hamrum 1–10 San Francisco: Harper & Row [Google Scholar]
  8. Gould SJ. 2000. Linnaeus's luck?. Nat. Hist. 109:18–25 [Google Scholar]
  9. Gruber HE. 1981. Darwin on Man: A Psychological Study of Scientific Creativity. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
  10. Hodge MJS. 1987. Natural selection as a causal, empirical, and probabilistic theory. In The Probabilistic Revolution, Vol. 2: Ideas in the Sciences, ed. L Kruger, G Gigerenzer, MS Morgan 233–70 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
  11. Jones S. 2000. Darwin's Ghost: The Origin of Species. New York: Random House. Rev. ed [Google Scholar]
  12. Keen MF. 1999. Stalking the Sociological Imagination: J. Edgar Hoover's FBI Surveillance of American Sociology. Westport, CT: Greenwood [Google Scholar]
  13. Lasker GW, Tyzzer RN. 1982. Physical Anthropology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston [Google Scholar]
  14. Lieberson S. 1985. Making it Count: The Improvement of Social Research and Theory. Berkeley/Los Angeles: Univ. Calif. Press [Google Scholar]
  15. Lieberson S. 1997a. Modeling social processes: some lessons from sports.. Sociol. For. 12:11–35 [Google Scholar]
  16. Lieberson S. 1997b. The big issues in society and social history: a probabilistic perspective. In Causality in Crisis? Statistical Methods and the Search for Causal Knowledge in the Social Sciences, ed. VR McKim, SP Turner 359–85 Notre Dame, IN: Univ. Notre Dame Press [Google Scholar]
  17. Lieberson S, Silverman A. 1965. The precipitants and underlying conditions of race riots.. Am. Sociol. Rev. 30:887–98 [Google Scholar]
  18. Link BG, Phelan J. 1995. Social conditions as fundamental causes of disease.. J. Health Soc. Behav. (Suppl.):80–94 [Google Scholar]
  19. Mayr E. 1961. Cause and effect in biology.. Science 134:1501–6 [Google Scholar]
  20. Mayr E. 1967. Introduction. On the Origin of Species. By C. Darwin vii–xxvii New York: Antheneum [Google Scholar]
  21. Rain M, Winship C. 1999. The dangers of “strong” causal reasoning in social policy.. Society 36(5):38–46 [Google Scholar]
  22. Richter MN. 2000. Evolution: biological, social cultural. In Encyclopedia of Sociology, ed. E. Borgatta, R. Montgomery 2875–80 New York: Macmillan Ref. USA [Google Scholar]
  23. Scriven M. 1959. Explanation and prediction in evolutionary theory.. Science 130:477–82 [Google Scholar]
  24. Schopf JW. 2000. Solution to Darwin's dilemma: discovery of the missing Precambrian record of life. In Variation and Evolution in Plants and Microorganisms: Toward a New Synthesis 50 Years After Stebbins, ed. FJ Ayala, WM Finch, MT Clegg 6–20 Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press [Google Scholar]
  25. Simpson GG. 1950. Evolutionary determinism and the fossil record.. Sci. Monthly October 1950:262–67 [Google Scholar]
  26. von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. 1944. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141122
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error