Aug 17, 2023 09:03 PM
https://press.princeton.edu/ideas/will-s...s-ever-end
INTRO: Social scientists observe the social world. They measure and represent it. They advance and test truth claims about it. For these purposes, they classify things, they sort them into classes, they draw distinctions among them. “In this article, we’re going to look at four objects. Objects A, B, and C will be grouped together, but D won’t. It’s not like the others.”
Electricians, physicians, and magicians share this property. They’re similar to one another in this respect. Architects aren’t. There are gay people, straight people, bi people, asexual people, and none of the above. Social scientists constantly need to draw distinctions. How to do this well? What are the criteria to determine if it’s been done well?
Many social science projects, subfields, and literatures have at their core one key word, or a few key words. (Sometimes they get called “concepts.”) Journal articles report findings on “neoliberal policies” and “digitalization” in the twenty-first century. They contrast several types of “colonialism,” and compare cases of “populism” in Europe and South America. They make general claims about “religions” and “ethnic groups” around the world.
What do these key words refer to? How to use them well? What are the criteria to determine if they’re being used well?
Why should empirical researchers care about these issues? It’s not because of philosophical or speculative reasons, but because of their job description and responsibilities. Researchers’ substantive claims about the social world are dependent on their key words and distinctions.
According to the ‘democratic peace theory’ in political science, democratic states don’t go to war with each other. Is this contention true? Evidently, it depends on what “democratic state” and “war” refer to. According to some sociologists, racial and ethnic discrimination is better accounted for by economic than by cultural factors. Is this contention true? Evidently, it depends on…
Social scientists ask if social movement participation is declining in the United States and Western Europe. Whether rates of major depression are growing among young adults. Whether social class and gender predict altruistic behavior, and if so, how.
Their answers will be a function of how data are sorted into categories: social movement (or not), major depression (or not), altruistic behavior (or not). They’ll depend on what participating in a social movement is, what altruism is, and what behavior is. Whether depression and altruism are dichotomous variables, or they come in degrees, such that someone can be three times more depressed than someone else. Whether there are two genders, three, more, or many more. Two social classes, three, more, or many more. What “social class” refers to in the first place… (MORE - details)
INTRO: Social scientists observe the social world. They measure and represent it. They advance and test truth claims about it. For these purposes, they classify things, they sort them into classes, they draw distinctions among them. “In this article, we’re going to look at four objects. Objects A, B, and C will be grouped together, but D won’t. It’s not like the others.”
Electricians, physicians, and magicians share this property. They’re similar to one another in this respect. Architects aren’t. There are gay people, straight people, bi people, asexual people, and none of the above. Social scientists constantly need to draw distinctions. How to do this well? What are the criteria to determine if it’s been done well?
Many social science projects, subfields, and literatures have at their core one key word, or a few key words. (Sometimes they get called “concepts.”) Journal articles report findings on “neoliberal policies” and “digitalization” in the twenty-first century. They contrast several types of “colonialism,” and compare cases of “populism” in Europe and South America. They make general claims about “religions” and “ethnic groups” around the world.
What do these key words refer to? How to use them well? What are the criteria to determine if they’re being used well?
Why should empirical researchers care about these issues? It’s not because of philosophical or speculative reasons, but because of their job description and responsibilities. Researchers’ substantive claims about the social world are dependent on their key words and distinctions.
According to the ‘democratic peace theory’ in political science, democratic states don’t go to war with each other. Is this contention true? Evidently, it depends on what “democratic state” and “war” refer to. According to some sociologists, racial and ethnic discrimination is better accounted for by economic than by cultural factors. Is this contention true? Evidently, it depends on…
Social scientists ask if social movement participation is declining in the United States and Western Europe. Whether rates of major depression are growing among young adults. Whether social class and gender predict altruistic behavior, and if so, how.
Their answers will be a function of how data are sorted into categories: social movement (or not), major depression (or not), altruistic behavior (or not). They’ll depend on what participating in a social movement is, what altruism is, and what behavior is. Whether depression and altruism are dichotomous variables, or they come in degrees, such that someone can be three times more depressed than someone else. Whether there are two genders, three, more, or many more. Two social classes, three, more, or many more. What “social class” refers to in the first place… (MORE - details)