A Social Science Founded on a Unified Natural Science

A SOCIAL SCIENCE FOUNDED ON A UNIFIED NATURAL SCIENCE The Social Sciences are Founded on Natural Science I T is common enough to compare the social sciences unfavorably with natural science. Sometimes it is the social conservative who disparages the "claims of the social sciences ," because he believes that social scientists tend to be too liberal. Sometimes it is the natural scientist who is appalled that the vague and tenuous theories, the sketchy statistics, the public opinion polls of social sciences should be compared with his beautiful equations so exactly verified in the neat precincts of his laboratory. Sometimes it is the man-in-thestreet who contrasts the marvelous inventions given us by natural science with the feeble attempts of social scientists to predict or ameliorate our social crises. What these critics do not realize is that historically the social sciences arose precisely because man's knowledge of society contrasted so painfully with his increasing exact knowledge of nature.1 The social sciences, however, depend on natural science for much more than an inspiration or an example of method. The study of human behavior in society presupposes a sound understanding of the nature of man. This is the work of psychology. Psychology in turn makes use of all the achievements of physics, chemistry and biology both to understand man's own structure and the environment in which he lives. To be sure, this dependence of the social sciences on natural 1 See Simon Deploige, The Conflict between Ethics and Sociology, trans. by C. C. Miltner C. S.C. (St. Louis: Herder, 1988). Alvin Boskoff, "From Social Thought to Sociological Theory," in Howard Becker and Alvin Boskoff, eds., Modem Sociological Theory in Continuity and Change (New York: Dryden Press, 1957), pp. 8-84 and J. Leclercq, Introduction a la Sociologie (Louvain: Nauwelaer 's ed. nouv., 1959), Chap. III-IV, pp. 89-74. 605 606 BENEDICT M. ASHLEY science ought not to be exaggerated. Ordinarily the social scientist cannot himself be an expert in natural science, nor does he have to sit idly waiting for a perfect account of man before he can begin to collect his own data, or develop his own conceptual systems. At any given moment there may be psychological information of which the social sciences do not yet have use, and there may be sociological findings which psychologists cannot yet explain. Are the social sciences a branch of psychology? Since this partial dependence of the social sciences upon biology and psychology is so obvious, we might well inquire whether the social sciences ought not to be regarded simply as a branch of natural science, namely as one of the fields of psychology. Comte long ago thought of sociology as the culminating natural science, including physics, chemistry, and biology as its elements. Today more and more the term " behavioral sciences'' is becoming popular. Indeed psychologists in attempting to define their own field commonly state that social psychology is an intermediate discipline connecting psychology and sociology. Klineberg says: " Psychology has been defined as the scientific study of the activities of the individual. Social psychology may be defined as the scientific study of the activities of the individual as influenced by other individuals." 2 I am afraid, however, that definitions of this type hardly satisfy the requirements of logic or of a rigorous philosophy of science. • 0. Klineberg, Social Psychology (New York: Henry Holt, !lnd ed. 1954) p. S. The difficulty is stated by Kimball Young and Linton Freeman, "The conception of interaction has always been regarded as central to social psychology as well as sociology. From birth on, the survival of the human being depends on the intercession of another individual, normally his mother or mother-surrogate. As he grows up, he lives in social interaction with other members of his family and later with individuals in other primary associations; finally, he moves into the world of specialized secondary and segmentalized groups. Thus from birth on he is part and parcel of a series of interconnected, interactional units, the model of which is the dyadic parent-child, child-child, or adult relationship " (" Social Psychology and Sociology," in Becker and Boskofl', op. cit., p. 550). SOCIAL SCIENCE FOUNDED ON A UNIFIED...