Is Objectivity Possible?

In Sociology the current view of the last few decades has changed from one of attempting objectivity to now saying that objectivity is impossible. If you really think about it it is impossible to be objective, we are not gods. The current belief of sociologists is that humans are always going to have bias and this is unavoidable. What they now try and do in sociological studies is to inform the reader of their ideas and beliefs. The idea is to tell the reader as much about the researcher(s) as they can and their reasons for doing the study. Then the reader can come to their own conclusion to as what the researchers goals and biases may be. When I speak of History and Sociology being able to help one another this is an example of what I mean. History could use this method of objectivity being impossible to better its research. Can a Historian truly suspend their present bias?

Shown here is my research statement I had to do for my sociology class. In it I had to make note of any bias I might have and tell the reader about myself and reasons for doing what I wanted to research.

Personal Research Statement and Statement of Interest

Most people would be able to tell you what they see wrong with the world around them. Less people however would be able to think of solutions to the problems they perceive exist. Herein lies the basis of my statement of interest. I believe that there are not enough people taking the social sciences seriously today. People today don’t even know enough about the political system to make an informed decision as to their party affiliation. Marx stated that it is our job as sociologists to identify and expose the inequality inherent in capitalism. It is my belief that the situation we find ourselves today in North America is directly related to the decline of the common persons knowledge of sociology. In my questionnaire I plan to gather information on what people know about left and right wing politics. By questioning people I want to see if they understand what it means to vote for the side they do. With my research I hope to enlighten people to the value of sociologists and how they can help with the disappearing middle class, woman’s wage gap, and equity.

When looking at myself objectively there are certain qualities of my character that stand out. I am very stubborn and do not like to be proven wrong. If I can be shown evidence that I am wrong I will usually accept it, but it has to be some pretty convincing evidence. In my research I would have to work to overcome this and to keep an open mind. Just because I see it a certain way doesn’t mean the other person is wrong and vice versa. I do have a belief in some sort of god or something, although I choose to form my own conclusions outside of mainstream religion. I usually describe myself as Agnostic. Religion in itself is only about control. This is another bias I would have to work to overcome when dealing with certain groups of people. I believe in equity and fairness for all people which is very Marxist of me. The rich should have to pay for things to improve the quality of life for all humans. To me there is no other way of doing things. I need to take this knowledge I have of myself and use it to avoid bringing my own biases into my research.

The best sociological theory for my research is quite obvious. I would have to use conflict theory. The very basis of my research is that there is not enough sociologists creating new conflicts and informing the masses of conflicts effecting their daily lives. If we had more people pointing out the inequality of capitalism then much of the economic crisis we face today could be averted. The problems we have today of unemployment are caused by the bourgeois. If they were more willing to share their wealth the world would be a better place. The rich only stay rich because they had the money to begin with. It takes money to make money. They would like to believe that they are either entitled to their wealth or that they earned it themselves. Rarely we have examples of people rising above the stratification of the classes and improve their quality of life. The ruling class are quick to use these rare examples to show that capitalism allows for upwards mobility. In actuality though, the poor increase and the rich make more money. If more people are not informed of their role in the capitalist system then another economic recession is inevitable.

As you can tell from the mood of this writing, advocacy is what I believe in. The rich do not want to make less money. They do not want to give up the things they have become accustomed to. They also have the power at their disposal to make sure the rich remain rich and in control. On the other side of the coin we have the proletariat (worker). The worker does not have the means to fight for a better wage or equal rights. They do not even own their means of employment. They are constantly at the mercy of the bourgeois. If this is the case then how can we not advocate for the workers? We would still be working in early industrial revolution like conditions if no-one had ever advocated for the workers. This amount of conflict and advocacy is necessary in the capitalist system to stop abuses of power from happening. Its my belief that in today’s world there are not enough people that know the importance of conflict in capitalism to promote equality. We need to inform people of the problems in the system so that change may occur for the better.