Q: Examine ethnomethodological and phenomenological perspectives as critique of positivism

Model Answer:

Ethnomethodology and Phenomenology

Ethnomethodology and phenomenology are two sociological perspectives that emerged as a critique of positivism, a dominant approach in social sciences during the early 20th century. Positivism is based on the belief that the methods of natural sciences can be applied to the study of social phenomena, and that objective, value-free knowledge can be obtained through empirical observation and quantitative analysis. However, ethnomethodology and phenomenology challenge these assumptions, arguing that social reality is constructed through human interactions and subjective experiences.

Ethnomethodology, developed by Harold Garfinkel in the 1960s, focuses on the everyday practices and methods people use to make sense of their social world. It argues that social order is not a pre-existing structure, but rather an ongoing accomplishment of individuals who constantly interpret and negotiate their actions and meanings. Ethnomethodologists criticize positivism for its reductionist approach, which ignores the complexity and contextuality of human behavior. They claim that social phenomena cannot be studied in isolation, as they are embedded in the intricate web of social relationships and cultural norms.

Phenomenology, on the other hand, is a philosophical perspective that originated from the works of Edmund Husserl and was later adopted by sociologists like Alfred Schutz. It emphasizes the importance of understanding the subjective experiences and meanings that individuals attach to their actions and interactions. Phenomenologists argue that social reality is not an objective entity, but a product of human consciousness and intentionality. They criticize positivism for its assumption that social phenomena can be measured and explained through objective, external variables, without considering the subjective meanings and interpretations of the actors involved.

Ethnomethodology and phenomenology share a common critique of positivism in the following ways:

1. Rejection of objectivity: Both perspectives challenge the positivist assumption that social reality can be studied objectively, without the influence of the researcher’s values and beliefs. They argue that social phenomena are inherently subjective, as they are shaped by the meanings and interpretations of the individuals involved.
2. Focus on meaning and interpretation: Ethnomethodology and phenomenology emphasize the importance of understanding the subjective meanings that people attach to their actions and interactions. They argue that social phenomena cannot be reduced to objective variables, as they are embedded in the complex web of human experiences and cultural norms.
3. Emphasis on context and process: Both perspectives criticize the positivist tendency to study social phenomena in isolation, without considering the broader social and cultural context in which they occur. They argue that social reality is an ongoing process, constantly constructed and reconstructed through human interactions and negotiations.
4. Critique of quantitative methods: Ethnomethodology and phenomenology question the positivist reliance on quantitative methods, arguing that they are inadequate for capturing the complexity and richness of human experiences. Instead, they advocate for qualitative methods, such as participant observation and in-depth interviews, which allow researchers to explore the subjective meanings and interpretations of social phenomena.

In conclusion, ethnomethodology and phenomenology offer valuable critiques of positivism by highlighting the importance of subjective meanings, interpretations, and context in the study of social phenomena. They challenge the positivist assumptions of objectivity and reductionism, arguing that social reality is a complex and dynamic process that cannot be fully understood through quantitative methods alone.