Fact, Value and Objectivity
Table of Contents
What is Fact?
It is defined as empirically verifiable observations.
They are thought to be definite, certain, without question, and their meaning to be self-evident. It is considered objective.
Example: The statement “Water boils at 100°C at sea level” is a fact because it can be consistently observed and verified through experiment under specific conditions, making it an objective truth.
What is Value?
Value is defined as moral judgments which speaks or “what ought to be”. They are subjective, emotional feelings, personal, value judgmental.
Example: The belief that “helping those in need is essential” is a value, as it represents a moral standpoint rather than an objective fact, varying from person to person or culture to culture.
What is Objectivity?
Robert Bierstedt defines it as – the conclusion arrived at as a result of inquiry and investigation is independent of the race, color, creed, occupation, nationality, religion, political predisposition of the investigator.
Example: In a study on voting patterns, objectivity would mean analysing the data purely based on numbers and trends without allowing the researcher’s political beliefs to influence their interpretation of the results.
Thinker’s View
- The fact value distinction emerged in philosophy during the Enlightenment, David Hume argued that human beings are unable to ground normative arguments in positive arguments, that is, to derive ‘ought’ from ‘is’.
- Nietzsche asserts that what made a people great was not the content of their beliefs, but the act of valuing.
- Max weber maintained two-tiered approach to value-free social science.
- He believed that ultimate values couldn’t be justified “scientifically”. Thus, in comparing different religious, political or social systems, one system couldn’t be chosen over another without taking a value or end into consideration, the choice would necessarily be dictated by the analyst’s values.
- Weber believed that once a value, end, purpose, or perspective had been established, then a social scientist could conduct a value-free investigation into the most effective means within a system of bringing about the established end.
Thus, even though Weber maintained ultimate values couldn’t be evaluated objectively, this belief didn’t keep him from believing that social problems could be scientifically resolved.
The Fact-Value Dichotomy
A group of scientists known as the logical positivists were troubled by the continued talk about God and religion and morality in the midst of our “scientific world”. They wanted to define out of existence ideas that opposed their ideas. They developed a philosophy that not only emphasized the dichotomy but that held only the “fact” disjunction to be of any worth.
As Ernest R House notes, the logical positivists thought that facts could be ascertained and that only facts were the fit subject of science. Whereas Values might be feelings, emotions, or any metaphysical entities. They were not subject to scientific analysis. Values were thus depreciated as mere matters of taste and as not subject to rational or objective discussion.
Observations
- Theory selection always presupposes values.
- Values also came into play in the choice of theories.
- Values are involved in the ordering and structuring of facts to give understanding or meaning to data.
- Values are involved in identification or determination of what is a fact.
- Some values are objective.
Conclusion
- Facts and values are often entangled and inseparable.
- Values are integral to the process of knowing. Michael Polanyi notes that “science itself can be pursued and transmitted to succeeding generations only within an elaborate system of traditional, beliefs and values, just as traditional beliefs have proved indispensable throughout the life of society.”
- Both facts end and values can be discussed and handled rationally.
- Value statements can be objective.
- It is incorrect to assign all non-empirical truth claims to the realm of values.
Value Neutrality: Can Sociology be Value Free?
Weber uses the term ‘value neutrality’ to refer to the objectivity which researchers need while investigating problems in social sciences.
Though Weber says that value neutrality is the desired goal of social science, he also recognizes that no science can be completely neutral, because there is link between the researcher’s values and the methods – he adopts or the questions he asks.
The concept of value-free sociology has its roots in the rise of positivism and the scientific methods of the mid-19th century.
Positivists believed that discovering laws of social development could create better society and advocated complete separation of facts and values.
Weber asserted that there cannot be any such thing as absolutely ‘objective scientific analysis’. Weber is trying to say that FACTS DO NOT SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
What counts as social facts is determined by the ‘moral spectacles’ through which we view the world.
Weber was of the view that a sociologist could distinguish between empirical knowledge and value judgments.
Criticisms
- Despite personal declarations of neutrality value may unwittingly intrude in research.
- It is not clear that neutrality, even in principle, is possible.
- It is not always evident that value neutrality is desirable.
How to Achieve Objectivity and Value Neutrality?
Achieving objectivity and value neutrality in social research requires a systematic approach to minimize personal biases and maintain a neutral stance. Here are some key strategies:
Clear Research Design: Design the study with clearly defined objectives and standardized methods, which helps minimize the influence of subjective views.
- Example: Using structured surveys with carefully worded, neutral questions reduces the risk of guiding respondents toward a particular response.
Standardized Data Collection: Using standardized methods for gathering data ensures that all participants are approached uniformly, minimizing variations in data due to researcher influence.
- Example: Conducting structured interviews with identical questions across participants helps maintain consistency and limits the interviewer’s influence on responses.
Use of Quantitative Methods: Quantitative methods rely on measurable, numeric data, which can help limit subjective interpretation.
- Example: In studying social inequality, gathering statistics on income distribution provides objective data, minimizing the need for personal judgment.
Replication of Studies: When a study can be replicated by other researchers with similar results, it adds credibility and shows that findings are not dependent on individual biases.
- Example: Researchers studying educational outcomes can use the same survey with different groups to verify whether findings remain consistent.
Peer Review and Collaboration: Peer review by other experts helps identify and correct any unintentional biases or assumptions in the study design or analysis.
- Example: Sharing research methodology with colleagues before data collection can help ensure that personal biases are minimized.
Reflexivity: Reflexivity involves researchers examining their own biases, values, and assumptions, making them aware of potential influences on their work.
- Example: A researcher studying poverty may acknowledge any preconceptions they hold about wealth and poverty to actively prevent these from influencing their analysis.
Triangulation: Using multiple methods or sources of data can provide a more comprehensive view and offset the limitations of any single method, reducing bias.
- Example: In a study on workplace dynamics, using both surveys and observational data can provide a more rounded view than relying on only one method.
By implementing these strategies, researchers can improve objectivity and ensure that findings are as neutral and unbiased as possible, enhancing the validity and reliability of social research.
Previous Year Questions
- Examine the problems of maintaining objectivity and value neutrality in social science research. (2015)
- What is value-free Sociology? Clarify (2016)
- Examine Max Weber’s method of maintaining objectivity in social research. (2016)
- Distinguish between fact and value in Weber’s Protestant Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism. (2018)
- Is sociology a value-free science? Discuss. (2020)
- How does a researcher achieve objectivity in interpretative research? (2022)
- Do you think ‘objectivity’ is an over-hyped idea in sociological research? Discuss the merits and demerits of non-positivist methods. (2024)
Important Keywords
Positivism, Fact, Value and Objectivity, Robert Bierstedt, David Hume, Nietzsche, Fact-Value Dichotomy, Ernest R House, Observations, Value neutrality, Clear Research Design, Standardized Data Collection, Quantitative Methods, Replication of Studies, Peer Review and Collaboration, Reflexivity and Triangulation.
