Skip to main content

Science and Social Science

  • Chapter
Science for Social Scientists
  • 33 Accesses

Abstract

We have argued that the social sciences cannot be distinguished from the natural sciences in terms of their explanatory structure. They are both properly causal in idiom, just as they avoid the temptation to explain the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ in different idioms. Yet there are few who would disagree that the social sciences look different from the natural sciences. Their credibility is lower, their status less secure and their disputes more public. In this chapter we offer a tentative explanation for these differences that is consistent with the network theory. Not surprisingly it is an explanation in terms of social interests and their distribution. First, however, we want to offer an example of different social science approaches to what is apparently the same phenomenon.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Endnotes

  1. Marx was concerned with civil society’s need for workers to obtain more free time—not only for pure leisure but also for recuperating their strength and applying themselves more vigorously to productive work after reasonable rest and recreation. (James Riordan, Sport in Soviet Society, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1977)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Paul Hoch, Rip Off the Big Game (Doubleday, New York, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jay J. Coakley, Sport in Society (C. V. Mosby Company, St. Louis, 1978),.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rick Barry and Bill Libby, Confessions of a Basketball Gypsy (Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1972), in which Barry refers to himself and other professional basketball players as slaves ‘Slavery is slavery no matter what the slave is paid’.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Harry Edwards, Sociology of Sport (The Dorsey Press, Homewood, Illinois, 1973) p. 90.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Allen Guttman, From Ritual to Record (Columbia University Press, New York, 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  7. For some fascinating hints on the processes by which this takes place in natural science see Andrew Pickering, ‘The Role of Interests in High Energy Physics: the Choice Between Charm and Colour’ pp. 107–38 in Karin Knorr, Roger Krohn and Richard Whitley (eds) The Social Process of Scientific Investigation, Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, Vol. 4 (D. Reidel, Boston and Dordrecht, 1980).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 1984 John Law and Peter Lodge

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Law, J., Lodge, P. (1984). Science and Social Science. In: Science for Social Scientists. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-17536-9_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics