The contemporary concept of the nation-state came into being as a result of the Treaty of Westphalia1, and it 's rise to become the dominant form of social organisation can arguably be viewed as a direct consequence of decolonisation.2 The focus of the social sciences on the nation-state as a primary unit or level of analysis can be seen to be drawn from the sociological perspective of positivism, which sought to base the social sciences on the quantifiable methodologies of the natural sciences3, and in the subsequent macrosociological developments.4 However, whilst it provides a useful unit of categorisation and compartmentalisation, in the modern era the focus on the nation-state “...has proved taxing for the social sciences in general and for social theory in particular”.5 As the processes of globalisation have gained traction, it has increasingly appeared likely that “...the nation-state is eroding as the basic unit of world politics”,6 and numerous theorists have posited alternative formulations, such as the 'risk society ' of Ulrich Beck, the 'network society ' of Manuel Castells, or Samuel P. Huntington 's 'clash of civilisations '. The positivist school of thought can be traced to the philosophical work of Auguste Compte, who theorised the movement as a scientific and empirical “...theory of knowledge...a scheme of history and a programme of social reform”.7 The methodologies of positivism were later employed by Emile Durkheim, who utilised them when studying suicide trends to argue for the existence of 'social facts ', which constitute the reality of a society, “...exist independently of each individual, and exert what he calls a 'coercive power ' over us”.8 This type of methodology which takes a wide view of social... ... middle of paper ... ...rst instance. However, whilst it is clear that the effects of globalisation have produced a world with myriad global flows and interconnections, the argument that the nation-state is redundant as a unit of analysis can be viewed as fallacious. As Keith Suter notes, “[i]t is not possible suddenly to declare that the Westphalian System has ended and that a new global system has taken its place”.38 Nation-states still play a relevant role globally, albeit in many cases in a somewhat reduced capacity. As such they are unquestionably still of note in terms of social theory, although as many theorists have suggested, it may be prudent to shift the focus of enquiry to a global perspective. Despite these considerations, it is nevertheless evident, as Weiss contends, that “[s]tates are, and for the foreseeable future will likely remain, the primary actors in world affairs”.39
Durkheim's Work in Sociology "Some studies maybe more recent, but Durkheim's work remains the most significant Sociological analysis of Suicide in modern societies" Assess the extent to which Sociological arguments and evidence support this claim. In regards to Suicide it would seem perhaps more realistic to consider the subject as an individual and personal act, a job which might seem more suitable for Psychologists to explain, it may not seem an obvious subject for a Sociologist to study. In the past it has been more commonly thought that Suicide was a result of a person's mental state, however suicide was given an all new perspective once Durkheim in 1897 used Positivist methods to study the subject. Durkheim chose this subject in attempts to illustrate the potential of society to help understand complex social processes. Since this time other Socioligists have followed in Durkheim's footsteps in the study of suicide but it is questionable whether or not other Socioligists have made quite an impact as he did.
Contrarily, Positivisms main principle is determinacy; that all behaviour is a result of circumstances. Therefore, the degree of socialisation an individual has in societal values, leads them to be categorised into conformist or criminal on the continuum. However, this is a problem as it denies the freedom individuals have in making choices. The same tension between instinct and the social self exists in Conse...
In 1897, Emile Durkheim (1997) showed that the suicide – perhaps the most personal of all decisions – could be analysed through the conceptual lenses of sociology.
Auguste Comte, the father of positivism, called for a purely scientific approach to history and society: only through a proper understanding of the laws governing human affairs could society, which was in a state of intellectual anarchy, be rationally reorganized. Like others of his generation, he believed that scientific laws underlay human affairs and could be discovered through the methods of the empirical scientist.
Globalisation can be construed in many ways. Many sociologists describe it as an era in which national sovereignty is disappearing as a result of a technological revolution, causing space and time to be virtually irrelevant. It is an economic revolution, which Roland Robertson refers to in his book ‘Globalisation’ 1992 pg 8, as “the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole”. It is argued that globalisation allows the world to become increasingly more united, with people more conscious of ethnic, societal, civilizational and individual aspects of their lives.
Positivism is the studying and recording of social life based on observations. Positivism is important in advancing knowledge due to the idea that this newly observed and obtained information can be used to reform society.
Positivists believe that as a science, sociology can be objective and value-free. Disinterested scientific observers shouldn't and don't necessarily introduce bias into the research process. ... ... middle of paper ... ... our different types of suicide, and that most suicides can fall into one of those categories.
“The process of globalization and the increasing role of non-state actors in global governance are undermining the role of the state as the principal actor in global policymaking.”
Many sociologists come to a disagreement and different approaches to the Sociological concept of positivism and antipositivism. Positivism is the scientific study of social patterns. This pertains to the use of scientific methods to get a more clear understanding of the natural world. Auguste Comte was the founder of this concept. Comte believed the way that society interacts with individuals using positivism would usher in a new “positivist” age of history. Comte concept of positivism is still relevant today. Since then positivism has been expanded and became the foundation for quantitative sociology. Quantitative sociology is the use of empirical evidence to gain an understanding of human patterns and behavior.
While some may argue that a state-centric international system is apt for non-state actors, since to attain a foreseeable future, they need to comprehend the state system and how to operate within it. This structure is weakening as non-state actors are increasing their influence in conflicts and challenging the international order founded upon the power of states. The openness of commercial markets and the weakening territorial sovereignty has limited the state’s monopoly of power asserted by structural realists. In Structural Realism After the Cold War, Kenneth Waltz alleges that, “If the conditions that a theory contemplated have changed, the theory no longer applies.” Theories and traditions in international relations must become more comprehensive if society intends to tackle the conflicts of the 21st century more effectively in the future.
The positivist school was created in the 1800's and was based on the principle that the only way to truly understand something in society was by looking at it from a scientific point of view (Adler, Mueller, and Laufer 2012). There were many people who contributed to the positivist school, however the person who first placed an emphasis on a scientific approach was Auguste Comte (Adler et al 2012). By approaching criminology in a more scientific way, a lot more progress was made, as people began to consider the reasons for criminal behavior from a different perspective. Another key figure in the positive school was Charles Darwin (Adler et al 2012). When he proposed the theory of evolution it caused society to become more open-minded in regards to their views about the world, as people started to rely more on science (Adler et al 2012). Due to the contributions from Comte and Darwin, the positive school of thought was able to gain traction and in turn was able to help develop the field of criminology.
In order to answer the question concerning the formation of states, it is necessary to clarify what constitutes a state; the Oxford English Dictionary defines a state as ‘a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government’. There are a number of ways and processes in which to analyse what state formation is, why they have formed and the way in which this has occurred. State emergence can be traced back to the creation of territorial boundaries in medieval Europe, such as the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, and its transition to a modern state can be attributed to the introduction of gunpowder in war (Hague & Harrop, 2010: 64). The formations of states have also been influenced by the growth of bureaucracy, administration and organisations. There are different theories as to the reason why states form, a certain few of which can be divided into the categories of rationalist, culturalist and structuralist perspectives. In this essay, these perspectives shall enter the debate in trying to justify the reason for state formation and the way in which it occurs. The most prominent feature in the formation of states appears to be the prevention and engagement of a state in war and its following consequences.
There is an undeniable fact that there has been a rise in globalization. It has become a hot topic amongst the field of international politics. With the rise of globalization, the sovereignty of the state is now being undermined. It has become an undisputed fact that the world has evolved to a new level of globalization, the transferring goods, information, ideas and services around the globe has changed at an unimaginable rate. With all that is going on, one would question how globalization has changed the system that is typically a collection of sovereign states. Do states still have the main source of power? What gives a state the right to rule a geographically defined region? It is believed by many that due to the introduction of international systems and increasing rate of globalization, the sovereignty of the state has been slowly eroded over time. My paper has two parts: First, it aims to take a close look at how globalization has changed the way the economy worked, specifically how it opened doors for multinational corporations to rise in power. Second, to answer the question, is it possible for it to exist today? And even so, should it?
Positivism is a research method that developed from the behavioral revolution, which sought to combine positivism and empiricism to politics (Halperin and Heath, 2012: 27). That is to say, this research approach is governed by natural law to observe, understand and to find meaning in the empirical world. This type of research seeks to answer two empirical questions, such as ‘what is out there’ and ‘what do we call it’ (Gerring, 2001: 156). Positivism is only interested in phenomenons that can be observed through our senses. Thus, positivism is interested in social realities that can be observed and measured by the scientific method (Halperin and Heath, 2012: 29). Furthermore, positivism believes that the gathering of evidence through scientific method can create knowledge and laws, known as induction (Halperin and Heath, 2012: 27). That is to say, evidence can be verified and later generalized then applied to multiple contexts. A positivist would investigate empirical questions that assume how the world works through the accuracy of a probable truth (Gerring, 2001: 155).
The social sciences have and will continue to be in the future will play an important role in studying and solving problems for both society and its individuals. The disciplines that it encompass vary widely but often need to come together to solve issues and study certain facets of humanity. For my personal use social science is a tool to better understand others, be more sensitive to issues that people may face and to anticipate the way people and society may act in certain situations. A social science lens can be productive in that it helps people be more indiscriminate though understanding people and their behavior. I hope to use the socials sciences to impact other people’s lives in a positive manner. The social sciences to me when used in a well-intended manner are able to not only explain phenomena but also be a solution and or make a situation better. The intent of this essay is to better understand and define the social sciences, touch on the many disciplines of the science in addition to its relationships with other scientific areas.