The Father of Positivism

For today's discussion we were asked to reflect on postivism and our text on Foundations of Social Research (see here). Specificaly we were asked to take two passages and reflect on them and discuss what they might mean to us. 

"The kind of social reorganization Comte envisages requires the human mind to function at it's very best. This, he feels can happen only when all have embraced one scientific method. 

True enough, there is no one general law obtaining in all the sciences to give them substantive unity. Comte is no reductionist. Nevertheless, there is universality of method that can unify the practice of science. The scientific method he has in mind is the method emanation from positivism. Not that it is a uniform method to be woodenly applied. Rather, it is a flexible method that succeeds in remaining homogenous in a multitude of contexts" (Crotty, 1998, p. 21).

It's that last sentence that really grabs me. I like the idea of a fluid, and dynamic method that adapts and changes to the needs of the society. The problem is htat the paragraph starts with a sentence that states "he feels can happen only when all have embraced one scientific method." Either he's giving himself an out by front-loading the fact that this ubiquitousness is impossible since not one method can be embraced by all, or it's flexible enough a method where it can always be applied and never not be accepted by all because of it's flexibility.

"There is a chasm between what science purports to do and what it actually does. For all the positivist concern that statements be verified by observation before being accepted as meaningful, a host of elaborate scientific theories have emerged whose development clearly requires the acceptance of much more than direct conclusions from sense-data. Many of the so-called facts that serve as elements of these theories are not directly observed at all. Instead they have been quite purposefully contrived and introduced as mere heuristics and explanatory devices" (Crotty, 1998, p. 30).

This is inline with the first paragraph I quoted that discussed flexibility.  Although there are "woodenly accepted" aspects of positivism, there is still enough flexibility to allow for others who have not had, or do not accept the direct conclusions from sense-data to incorporate them as well.

References

Crotty, M. (1998). Foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Allen & Unwin.