Comparison of the Social Sciences - Research Paper Example

? Comparison of the Social Sciences: Research shows that there are a considerable number of similarities within the social sciences sociology, psychology and anthropology with a few distinguishing factors. There are various ways to examine these similarities. The first plausible approach is to distinguish the areas of study these social sciences cover. Secondly, one can draw similarities from the application of these sciences in society today. Finally, these social sciences emphasize the importance of cultural diversity which encompasses respect and the autonomy of these cultures. Similarities of these sciences are evident right from description. For instance, Anthropology deals with mans groupings and doings in relation to past precedents. Studying the past of man involves studying pre-historic man and linguistics. Psychology examines mental processes to determine the behavior of man. This includes the study of genetics and socio-cultural settings. Sociology focuses on social institutions, social stratification and the resulting relationships of humans. As such, the similarities between psychology, sociology and anthropology emerge, in summary all three disciplines focus on studying human beings in their settings (Shepard, 2009). The main areas of study covered by all the three disciplines include, society and the way society affects human behaviour. This area also includes aspects of society such as religion, culture and social stratification. The environment in which man thrives provides a basis for establishing the various elements and theories of the social sciences. Environment refers to the socio-cultural setting of an individual which is a common area of study for these three disciplines. Cultural anthropology studies the material and non material culture of a people in the past and tries to link the results to the current life of man. In the same way, cross cultural psychology examines the perceived evolution of man through their behaviors such as grieving and expression of joy cutting across cultures in the past and modern times (Leonardo,2004). Religion determines many aspects of the human life. For anthropology, religious study emerges in the socio-cultural organization of a people. Sometimes anthropologists through archeology deduce a religion through physical aspects such as the architecture of a region. When one studies the architecture of Asia for instance, the influence of the Buddhist religion is evident in the structure of the buildings. Sociology deduces social stratification through religion For instance, some religions such as Islam emphasis the dominance of men over women. In light of this, men will take most of the leadership positions in the social settings (Billiet, 2001). These forms of bias play a dominant role in shaping the behavior of individuals. When it comes to deducing behavior, both sociology and psychology may utilize the suicide approach. This approach, suggested by sociologist Emile Durkheim, defines the harm that comes from adopting change in the form of religion. He studied the rates of suicide among Protestants and Catholics. He established that rates of suicide are higher among Protestants than Catholics. He supported his findings by claiming that since Catholicism was a social religion, people who belonged to it felt less distressed than those who conformed to other religions. On the other hand, Protestants were more individualistic, and this went against the social nature of man and hence the higher suicide rates. Psychologists, therefore, draw the conclusion that man is a social being. This study also reflects on the dangers of capitalism and communism. As such, sociologists deduce the negative results of adapting capitalism. All in all the result is that, through religion, these disciplines are able to deduce the behavior of humans from individual and social settings (Edles, 2008). Still on areas of study, there is the study of aspects of human anatomy cutting across these disciplines. Previously, this field belonged to medical sciences such as physiology. However, the human anatomy holds massive impact on the everyday living and actions of human beings. This leads to the need for examining the human anatomy from a social point of view. Physical anthropology deals with human anatomy through reconstruction of the remains of prehistoric man. Through these reconstructions, anthropologists are able to determine the ways of life of man at a certain period. Even more impressive is the fact that anthropologists can determine the brain capacity through this reconstruction. Mental capacities are extremely beneficial in relaying the possible behaviors of an individual which is useful in both sociology and psychology. Psychology through biopsychology takes the anatomical approach from a different angle but still delves into the human anatomy. Biopsychology studies the influence of genes and other internal body processes such as the defense mechanism to determine the behavior of human beings. In modern times, sociology of the body examines the various uses of the human anatomy in everyday life. These human actions in sociology constitute behavior in an individual and social approach (Billiet, 2001). The application of these disciplines to real life situations also bears similarities. For anthropology, application is evident through Social anthropology. Social anthropology, as a sub discipline of anthropology, examines man in his current social situations. Social psychology, for instance, studies the relationship between mans behavior and his environment. Through these aspects, areas such as conformity in regard to the human need to belong arise across the disciplines. A notable aspect for application is the family setting in society. Sociologists view the family as the basic unit for all other social groupings. One of the areas sociology studies, therefore, is families and divorce. Anthropology, on the other hand, may try to establish the legitimacy of nuclear families across cultures. Psychologists may use the family as a basis to establish the causes of issues such as retardation or other mental in capabilities (Barkan, 2012). Application also reflects on the states of anomie that individuals face in society. Psychology, anthropology and sociology all examine states of anomie in society. Anomie occurs mostly because of change of events in life. These states can reflect the different ways in which individuals act (Edles, 2008). Most often, these changes require that the individual make a moral decision. In psychology, these dilemmas may lead to an individual resulting to defense mechanisms such as compromising. In anthropology, studies show that such situations led to a shift in religion, for instance, to meet a certain social need. In sociology, this led to disintegration of certain social aspects in favor of more applicable approaches, for instance the shift from communism to capitalism. Sociology and anthropology establish that traditional societies were more rigid than modern societies. This was in terms if individual adoption to change as most things occurred in group settings. However, with the development of psychology as a new principle in social sciences the ability of the individual to adopt to change and, therefore, beat the negative impacts of anomy is a reality (Edles, 2008). Religion, family and social stratification, are all a product of culture in society. The influences of culture in society today are broad and intertwined in regard to social sciences (Barkan 2012). Culture determines behavior (psychology), social structures (sociology) and past experiences (anthropology). The universal nature of the mind is as valuable as the individual nature. This calls for the need for psychology to embrace the diversity that comes with culture in order to understand the human mind from a universal perspective. Previously, psychology saw the individual as key to understanding behavior. This resulted in psychology having theories that majorly assumed the homogeneity of man (Denner, 1998). However, time has brought on different perspectives to the field of science. As such, culture has taken centre stage in analyzing the diversity of humans in respect to not only their social groupings but also behavior (Denner, 1998). Anthropologists and sociologists also use culture to distinguish modern societies from other societies (Barkan, 2012). Culture encompasses a broad spectrum of things such as actions, languages and materials such as architecture. It is common knowledge that there is no society without communication. Communication relies on language and the relevance of this emerges in the way social sciences examine language in society today. Language not only denotes culture but also describes characters. Another branch of anthropology that examines the characteristics of man is linguistics. Through linguistics, anthropologists not only establish the evolution of languages, but also the subsequent behavior of these evolutions. Psycholinguistics is one such area that tries to understand the psychologically influential factors in the human language. Sociology sums up the equation through sociolinguistics which studies the social aspect of languages. Like culture, linguistics also explores the diversity of humans and the uniqueness of each of the communities (Leonardo, 2004). However, a number of differences may emerge and, therefore, create a distinction among the social sciences. Atkinson (2003) reports that Johnson (1987) does not see any real relationship between the subject of sociology and Anthropology especially in modern times. This is because Anthropologists evolved in regard to their theories of human existence while Sociologists remained intact. This argument brings up the fact that humans in their social settings despite their similarities have a unique aspect that distinguishes them and, therefore, need to cut down on assumptions of homogeneity which are a key feature of human development theories. However, according to Johnson (1987), sociologists hold on to universal human developmental theories for fear of becoming irrelevant or too similar to the principle of history if they abandon them (Atkinson, 2003). Nonetheless, Shepard (2009) claims that Anthropology closely relates to sociology because it studies the culture of humans. He also creates a broad rift between sociology and psychology. He asserts that, in psychology, the individual is essential while sociology and anthropology rely on studying groups. In summary, one cannot study these disciplines without encountering controversies that prove or disprove similarities and differences (Leonardo, 2004). Methods of studying and data collection are unique to the social sciences. For instance, Psychology relies on introspection as a method of data collection. The founding father of studying the subconscious, Freud, relied heavily on this method. However, the shortcomings of this method of study cause it to take a back seat especially in studying sociology. Scientists prefer scientifically approved methods that enable them to proof beyond most reasonable doubt that the information collected has no prejudice. Positivism is the view that it is appropriate to study social behavior by using methods used in natural sciences such as physics. For instance Auguste Comte emphasized on statistical survey. Statistical survey proves worthwhile especially in the study of sociolinguistics and anthropological linguistics (Liveley 2006). Another difference is the fact that Psychology in a broad sense takes on an individualistic approach of humans more than Anthropology and Sociology. Though psychologists acknowledge the influence of society on the individual, their primary focus on mental states alludes to the individualistic perspective they prefer. Anthropology and sociology, on the other hand, emphasis on society and groupings and sometimes tend to ignore individual perspectives. Secondly, Anthropology primarily focuses on the past lives of humans. For instance, Archeological anthropology deals with the social settings of prehistoric man. Much as sociology and psychology utilize past information to make deductions on present times, the present and the future states are more imperative. In view of the discrepancies between anthropology and sociology, some scholars classify anthropology under natural sciences and sociology under social sciences (Leonardo, 2004). As to whether social sciences complement each other, there is no debate. They all study the human nature in relation to societal settings. Also, these disciplines study the discrepancies that arise due to facts such as moral and cultural constraints. The differences that emerge among these disciplines is also necessary in studying the diverse nature of mans behavior and culture. As such, scientist can establish the importance of the different cultures of human beings by focusing on their uniqueness. References: Atkinson, P. (2003). Key Themes in Qualitative Research: Continuities and Changes. New York: Rowman Altamira. Barkan, S. E. (2012). Sociology: Understanding and Changing the Social World. New York: Wiley & Sons. Billiet, J. (2001). Research Assessment of Socio-Cultural Sciences. Netherlands: VSNU. Denner, C. R. (1998). THEORIES LINKING CULTURE AND PSYCHOLOGY: Universal and Community-Specific Processes. Santa Cruz: University of Carlifornia Press. Edles, S. A. (2008). Classical and Contemporary Sociological Theory: Text and Readings. New York: Pine Forge Press. Leonardo, M. d. (2004). HUMAN CULTURAL DIVERSITY. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. Livesey, C. (2006). sociological methods. London. Shepard, J. M. (2009). Sociology. New York: Cengage Learning. Read More