Introduction to Sociology – Frank van Tubergen
Part 1
Chapter 1 – Questions
Individual perspective focuses on human behavior on individual causes.
Contrary to sociological imagination/perspective: focuses on social causes.
Social context is social environment in which people are embedded, unique perspective for
sociologists. E.g. country, family, neighborhood. Does change, sociology studies human
consequences.
Sociology focuses on social causes (vs. individual) and collective outcome (vs. personal/few people).
Examines social phenomena: collective human behavior.
Sociological perspective focuses on role of social contexts in shaping behavior and collective human
behavior.
Individual + sociological perspective -> supplement, alternative and different causes
Proximate causes: factors close to the phenomena (causing individual behavior)
Ultimate causes: factors that underlie proximate causes
Micro-level: lowest; on individual level
Meso-level: social conditions shared in immediate environment; family, school, social network
Macro-level: highest; country, continent
Social context can be meso-/macro-level, at both ultimate causes for behavior can be found
Social problem/public issue:
Goes beyond individual
Many people are concerned with it, in conflict with certain values
What people consider social problem depends on their values
Contrary to personal problem: related to personal life
Social problem from normative dimension
Social phenomena is social problem studies as scientific phenomenon
Social problem -> describe -> explain -> apply -> solve social problem
1. Description
Must be accurate
2. Explanation
Empirical data
3. Application
Returns to normative domain
Social interventions: social policy measure
Societal relevance: scientific knowledge they produce on social problems
,Normative questions entails value judgements, e.g. ‘should we…’
Scientific questions doesn’t entail value judgements. Can have different aims:
Descriptive (Qd)
How much? How many? What is happening?
Observation (O)
Theoretical (Qt)
Why is this happening?
Theories (T)
Application (Qa)
What will happen in the future? What will the consequences be for…?
Predictions/interventions
Make ill-defined questions (vague, ambiguous) into precise questions (clear interpretation)
4 aspects when reformulating a question:
1. Human behavior of interest
2. Social context
3. Period
4. Population (can be subpopulation)
Question must be relevant, more relevant when you can relate it to social problems in society.
Scientific relevance: relevance of sociological work for accumulation of sociological knowledge.
2 types of background for scientific questions (Q)
Scientific knowledge (B(k)) with scientific relevance
Social problems (B(sp)) with societal relevance
Do a literature review before starting your own study, irrelevant to study same thing again. Is a
summary of existing knowledge about specialized topic.
Question can have an false assumption; a false theoretical question, which aims to explain something
that doesn’t exist. Description of social phenomena must be correct.
Don’t ask a single question, but compare. Comparative-case questions to see under different social
conditions different behavior. Comparison can be social contexts, time, populations. Can be within
social contexts to discover societal trends.
Most relevant questions are directly important to society (address social problem) and contribute to
scientific knowledge.
All human beings are private sociologists. Common-sense is accurate for daily situations, not for
science. Intuitive and story thinking, incoherent and vague ideas.
Academic sociology is the way academic insitutions describe and explain the social world.
Characteristics: systhematic way of gathering knowledge, explanations public with criticism,
development of theories and rigorous testing. Tries to filter out inaccurate descriptions of reality and
wrong theories. Knowledge of private sociologists mustn’t be private for this, public knowledge.
Systematic and rational discussion, coherent and precise ideas.
Hindsight bias: after being presented with facts/explanations, people think it makes sense and is
obvious.
, Confirmation bias: people search for observations that conform their ideas and disregard
undermining facts. In academic sociology theories are open to criticism and counterevidence.
Sociology is a cumulative science, earlier studies are incorporated in work.
Background knowledge is all knowledge at the time of study. Other studies contribute to background
knowledge. New explanations compete with older explanations, better explanations will survive.
Sociologists work together in academic communities to share ideas and collaborate.
Chapter 2 – Theories
Theories are developed to answer ‘why questions’, theoretical questions (Q(t)) to explain certain
phenomena.
Propositions are universal statements, statement about causal relations between 2 or more concepts.
Has a general character.
Condition is assumption about specific setting which relates proposition to observations and
hypotheses.
Theory schema (bottom-up): propositions, conditions, hypotheses, observations written out as
coherent set leading to explanation. On the bottom O/explanandum (= phenomenon) you wish to
explain. Beyond horizontal line explanation, explained by propositions (P) and
conditions/assumptions (C); together explanans. This type of explanation deductive-nomological
explanation (O -> C -> P).
Syllogism: observation can be logically deduced from P and C.
Always a potential explanation, other explanations are possible as well. Scientists aim to deduce new
hypothesis (testable prediction, derived from theory) and study whether H is in line with O or not.
Phenomenon is purely hypothetical case. Deriving a H works in opposite direction of explaining a
phenomenon, works top-down in theory schema (P -> C -> H) with same P. If H is not correct, it
challenges P and/or C: modus tollens of classic logic.
P and H part of sociological theory. There must be coherence between P and C (logically connected),
can’t be conflicting. Theory explains phenomena and predicts new phenomena, not all equally useful.
Theory must be true, correspond to reality as much as possible; more realistic, more useful. Empirical
success of theory: the degree of empirical confirmation; higher, more useful. Truth is a regulative
idea: a principle by which we can evaluation the value of theories (matter of degree).
Theory must be informative. Degree of information content of a theory: the degree of theoretical
precision and theoretical scope; the higher the information content, more useful; second regulative
idea. Tautology: statement which is logically true, doesn’t exclude any possible phenomenon,
impossible to falsify.
To increase information content theory must be more precise (theoretical precision: degree to which
theory excludes possibilities). The higher, the more falsifiable.
To increase information content theory must be applicable to wider range of cases, e.g. phenomena,
populations, settings (theoretical scope). Add another prediction, which excludes more possibilities.
Truth and information conflicting, more true less information and vice versa. Only powerful theory
when both high degree.
Part 1
Chapter 1 – Questions
Individual perspective focuses on human behavior on individual causes.
Contrary to sociological imagination/perspective: focuses on social causes.
Social context is social environment in which people are embedded, unique perspective for
sociologists. E.g. country, family, neighborhood. Does change, sociology studies human
consequences.
Sociology focuses on social causes (vs. individual) and collective outcome (vs. personal/few people).
Examines social phenomena: collective human behavior.
Sociological perspective focuses on role of social contexts in shaping behavior and collective human
behavior.
Individual + sociological perspective -> supplement, alternative and different causes
Proximate causes: factors close to the phenomena (causing individual behavior)
Ultimate causes: factors that underlie proximate causes
Micro-level: lowest; on individual level
Meso-level: social conditions shared in immediate environment; family, school, social network
Macro-level: highest; country, continent
Social context can be meso-/macro-level, at both ultimate causes for behavior can be found
Social problem/public issue:
Goes beyond individual
Many people are concerned with it, in conflict with certain values
What people consider social problem depends on their values
Contrary to personal problem: related to personal life
Social problem from normative dimension
Social phenomena is social problem studies as scientific phenomenon
Social problem -> describe -> explain -> apply -> solve social problem
1. Description
Must be accurate
2. Explanation
Empirical data
3. Application
Returns to normative domain
Social interventions: social policy measure
Societal relevance: scientific knowledge they produce on social problems
,Normative questions entails value judgements, e.g. ‘should we…’
Scientific questions doesn’t entail value judgements. Can have different aims:
Descriptive (Qd)
How much? How many? What is happening?
Observation (O)
Theoretical (Qt)
Why is this happening?
Theories (T)
Application (Qa)
What will happen in the future? What will the consequences be for…?
Predictions/interventions
Make ill-defined questions (vague, ambiguous) into precise questions (clear interpretation)
4 aspects when reformulating a question:
1. Human behavior of interest
2. Social context
3. Period
4. Population (can be subpopulation)
Question must be relevant, more relevant when you can relate it to social problems in society.
Scientific relevance: relevance of sociological work for accumulation of sociological knowledge.
2 types of background for scientific questions (Q)
Scientific knowledge (B(k)) with scientific relevance
Social problems (B(sp)) with societal relevance
Do a literature review before starting your own study, irrelevant to study same thing again. Is a
summary of existing knowledge about specialized topic.
Question can have an false assumption; a false theoretical question, which aims to explain something
that doesn’t exist. Description of social phenomena must be correct.
Don’t ask a single question, but compare. Comparative-case questions to see under different social
conditions different behavior. Comparison can be social contexts, time, populations. Can be within
social contexts to discover societal trends.
Most relevant questions are directly important to society (address social problem) and contribute to
scientific knowledge.
All human beings are private sociologists. Common-sense is accurate for daily situations, not for
science. Intuitive and story thinking, incoherent and vague ideas.
Academic sociology is the way academic insitutions describe and explain the social world.
Characteristics: systhematic way of gathering knowledge, explanations public with criticism,
development of theories and rigorous testing. Tries to filter out inaccurate descriptions of reality and
wrong theories. Knowledge of private sociologists mustn’t be private for this, public knowledge.
Systematic and rational discussion, coherent and precise ideas.
Hindsight bias: after being presented with facts/explanations, people think it makes sense and is
obvious.
, Confirmation bias: people search for observations that conform their ideas and disregard
undermining facts. In academic sociology theories are open to criticism and counterevidence.
Sociology is a cumulative science, earlier studies are incorporated in work.
Background knowledge is all knowledge at the time of study. Other studies contribute to background
knowledge. New explanations compete with older explanations, better explanations will survive.
Sociologists work together in academic communities to share ideas and collaborate.
Chapter 2 – Theories
Theories are developed to answer ‘why questions’, theoretical questions (Q(t)) to explain certain
phenomena.
Propositions are universal statements, statement about causal relations between 2 or more concepts.
Has a general character.
Condition is assumption about specific setting which relates proposition to observations and
hypotheses.
Theory schema (bottom-up): propositions, conditions, hypotheses, observations written out as
coherent set leading to explanation. On the bottom O/explanandum (= phenomenon) you wish to
explain. Beyond horizontal line explanation, explained by propositions (P) and
conditions/assumptions (C); together explanans. This type of explanation deductive-nomological
explanation (O -> C -> P).
Syllogism: observation can be logically deduced from P and C.
Always a potential explanation, other explanations are possible as well. Scientists aim to deduce new
hypothesis (testable prediction, derived from theory) and study whether H is in line with O or not.
Phenomenon is purely hypothetical case. Deriving a H works in opposite direction of explaining a
phenomenon, works top-down in theory schema (P -> C -> H) with same P. If H is not correct, it
challenges P and/or C: modus tollens of classic logic.
P and H part of sociological theory. There must be coherence between P and C (logically connected),
can’t be conflicting. Theory explains phenomena and predicts new phenomena, not all equally useful.
Theory must be true, correspond to reality as much as possible; more realistic, more useful. Empirical
success of theory: the degree of empirical confirmation; higher, more useful. Truth is a regulative
idea: a principle by which we can evaluation the value of theories (matter of degree).
Theory must be informative. Degree of information content of a theory: the degree of theoretical
precision and theoretical scope; the higher the information content, more useful; second regulative
idea. Tautology: statement which is logically true, doesn’t exclude any possible phenomenon,
impossible to falsify.
To increase information content theory must be more precise (theoretical precision: degree to which
theory excludes possibilities). The higher, the more falsifiable.
To increase information content theory must be applicable to wider range of cases, e.g. phenomena,
populations, settings (theoretical scope). Add another prediction, which excludes more possibilities.
Truth and information conflicting, more true less information and vice versa. Only powerful theory
when both high degree.
