Social scientists make similar assumptions about social behavior. We look for the regularities - the recurring patterns in what people, say, do, and think. Repeated forms of behavior are expressions of the norms and values of a society. Changes in norms of a group are linked to changes in other social conditions of the group. Changes in roles of women, for example, from working only in the home as mothers and wives to assuming employment outside the home, don't just happen. These kinds of changes generally result from changes in the overall economic system of a society followed by changes in views about women working outside the home. Social scientists look for these kinds of relationships and seek to explain why they occur.

Mankind can understand nature, including human behavior. Social scientists also assume that the human mind can comprehend our external world. Although we are part of the world's biological system, we also possess several unique abilities. Only humans, as far as we know, can record what we experience and use these observations to construct a description of our external world. Further, our capacity extends to knowing ourselves and understanding the minds of others. On this basis, social scientists are able to discover regularities of social life and develop explanations for social behavior.

Agreement about reality is possible. For years the scientific community believed it was possible to do objective research. With proper methods and careful research, scientists thought they could provide an objective description of the natural world, devoid of human error. With advances in understanding of how human sensory and intellectual systems work, we now recognize that absolute objectivity is impossible.   Research is conducted by human beings: None of us, no matter how well trained and disciplined in conducting research, can completely overcome basic human limitations in perception and ways of thinking.   We all bring at least traces of our personal interests and our own way of perceiving and thinking to whatever we study. All observation, which includes all data collection, therefore, is subject to error.   This being the case, how do scientists agree on what is believed to be true based on the results of scientific inquiry?

While recognizing that absolute objectivity is impossible, scientists assert that it is possible to construct an approximation of the real conditions we seek to understand. Our nearest approximation to reality is based on the extent of agreement among competent scientists about what is accepted as a true description of some aspect of nature. Scientists in a given field, in effect, agree to accept certain conclusions as true when they are supported by a large amount of verified data. Agreement comes after a rigorous process of criticism and review by fellow scientists. Still, the truth of statement always remains open to question, subject to change based on new discoveries.

Box 1.1 below summarizes the assumptions of science.

Box 1.1. Assumptions of Scientific Inquiry There is an objective reality apart from our perceptions of things. Natural events and processes occur in an orderly, regular manner. The natural events and processes we observe are part of larger, closed, interactive systems. All events have natural causes within these systems. Humans can comprehend how natural systems function. Scientific inquiry provides a basis for reaching agreement of what is true about things we observe — what really exists.

Norms of scientific inquiry

Scientists seek to apply the norms and values listed in Box 1.2 in all their work. These are the ideals. In practice, individual scientists and even scientific organizations do not always live up to these norms. When scientists fail to.

PREV       NEXT

---

1 Our description of the norms of science is based mainly on the work of Merton (1968, pp. 607-615); and Zucherrman (1988, pp. 515-16).