Explain The Differences Between Ordinary Human Inquiry And S

Explain The Differences Between Ordinary Human Inquiry and Social Science

According to Harris (2022), the differences between ordinary human inquiry and social science largely hinge on their methodologies, purposes, and levels of rigor. Ordinary human inquiry is everyday reasoning used to understand the world based on personal experiences, beliefs, and informal observations. It often relies on anecdotal evidence and subjective judgment, making it susceptible to biases and less systematic. Social science, by contrast, employs structured methods, empirical data collection, and scientific principles to analyze social phenomena objectively. The goal of social science is to develop generalizable and reliable knowledge that can be tested and verified, moving beyond anecdotal insights to establish rigorous explanations. Harris emphasizes that social science aims for an explanation grounded in systematic inquiry, often involving hypotheses, evidence, and analysis, whereas ordinary inquiry is more intuitive and context-dependent (Harris, 2022, p. 4). This distinction underscores the importance of methodological discipline in social science to ensure the validity and credibility of findings, which are often lacking in everyday reasoning.

Paper For Above instruction

Understanding the fundamental differences between ordinary human inquiry and social science is crucial in appreciating how social knowledge is constructed and validated. Harris (2022) articulates that ordinary human inquiry is embedded in daily life, characterized by informal reasoning that hinges on personal experiences, intuition, and anecdotal evidence. Such inquiry is inherently subjective, often influenced by biases and cultural perspectives, and typically lacks systematic rigor (Harris, 2022, p. 5). For example, a person might observe that their friend is always late and conclude that the friend is irresponsible, based solely on personal observation without considering broader contexts or systematically investigating the behavior.

Conversely, social science adopts a structured approach to understanding social phenomena. Harris explains that social scientists formulate hypotheses, collect data systematically, and analyze information using scientific methods to ensure objectivity and reproducibility (Harris, 2022, p. 6). The emphasis on empirical evidence and rigorous methodology distinguishes social science from casual inquiry. For instance, a social scientist studying punctuality would employ surveys, experiments, or observational studies, applying statistical tools to analyze patterns and test hypotheses. These methods help mitigate biases, allowing researchers to produce findings that are more reliable and generalizable.

The purpose of social science is also different from ordinary inquiry. While everyday reasoning aims at practical understanding or immediate problem-solving, social science seeks to develop theories that explain social patterns and inform policy or societal change. Harris notes that this systematic, evidence-based approach elevates social science as a discipline capable of producing knowledge that transcends individual biases and subjective judgments (Harris, 2022, p. 8).

Importantly, Harris underscores that the scientific rigor in social science involves iterative processes of hypothesis testing, peer review, and replication, which are generally absent in informal inquiry. This systematic approach improves the validity and credibility of findings, making social science a more reliable means of understanding complex social realities. In sum, the primary difference lies in the methodological discipline, purpose, and reliability of inquiry: social science is characterized by systematic, empirical investigation designed to produce generalizable knowledge, unlike the informal, subjective nature of ordinary human inquiry.

References

• Harris, S. R. (2022). How to critique journal articles in the social sciences (2nd ed.). Waveland Press.
• Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. University of California Press.
• Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.
• Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Pearson.
• Gerring, J. (2012). Social science methodology: A unified framework. Cambridge University Press.
• Babbie, E. (2017). The practice of social research. Cengage Learning.
• Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage.
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.
• Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research. Harcourt.
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.