Is Sociology Merely Descriptive or Prescriptive?

This question has long divided sociologists and continues to provoke debate within the discipline today.

At its heart, sociology is about understanding human society—its structures, its inequalities, and its transformations. We use evidence to analyse social problems and explore the complexity of human interactions. But once we understand a problem, should we stop there? Or should we go further and suggest alternatives, even solutions? After all, what is the purpose of knowledge if it doesn’t help improve the human condition?

There are three broad perspectives on this debate:

1. Should Sociology Be Value-Free?

In the mid-20th century, positivist sociologists—drawing heavily on Durkheim—sought to establish sociology as a credible, objective science. Their goal was to uncover social facts and develop general laws of human behaviour, much like the natural sciences. They believed that sociologists should remain neutral observers, free from political or moral bias.

This approach helped sociology gain academic legitimacy, especially in post-war Britain and the United States. But it also attracted criticism. Can any social research ever be truly neutral, particularly when it deals with deeply personal or political issues like race, class, or gender?

2. Should Sociology Be Value-Laden?

Max Weber offered a more nuanced approach. He argued that while complete objectivity is impossible, sociologists should aim to be as rigorous and impartial as possible in data collection and analysis. However, he acknowledged that our values inevitably influence the topics we choose to study and the questions we ask.

Weber’s position allows for a balance between scientific integrity and moral awareness. It doesn’t pretend that researchers are robots, but it also cautions against letting personal ideology distort the evidence.

3. Should Sociology Be Value-Committed?

For many radical and critical sociologists, values are not just unavoidable—they are essential. These scholars, including those in the Marxist, feminist, anti-racist and post-colonial traditions, argue that sociology must take a stand. Our discipline, they contend, has a moral duty to challenge oppression and amplify the voices of those on the margins of society.

From this perspective, sociology is not just a mirror to reflect society but a hammer to shape it. Why merely document inequality when we can also fight it? Why retreat into the ivory tower when we can take to the streets?

So, Where Does That Leave Us?

The tension between description and prescription, objectivity and activism, remains a live issue in sociology today. But perhaps it is this very tension that gives sociology its unique vitality. Unlike other disciplines, sociology exists in the messy space between science and ethics, theory and practice.

In a world facing deepening inequality, ecological breakdown, and political polarisation, sociology has never been more necessary. It can help us see beyond the headlines, challenge lazy narratives, and imagine different futures. It can illuminate the structures that shape our lives—and, crucially, propose ways to transform them.

Are There Any Right-Wing Sociologists?

This is a provocative question—and an important one. Sociology has often been associated with progressive or left-leaning politics, largely because it tends to focus on inequality, social justice, and marginalised groups. But there are conservative or right-leaning sociologists, though they are fewer in number and sometimes less visible.

Thinkers like Charles Murray (known for his controversial work on welfare and intelligence), or Peter Berger (who combined a sociological imagination with a Christian worldview), offer examples of more conservative approaches. Some sociologists study the social order, tradition, and authority not to critique them, but to understand and preserve them. Their voices challenge the discipline to confront its own biases and ensure that it does not become an echo chamber.

Sociology continues to grapple with big questions: How can we live better together? What kind of society do we want? And how can evidence help us get there?

---

Final Thought:

Sociology is not just about what is. It’s also about what could be. Whether you lean toward objectivity or activism, sociology invites us to ask better questions—and, perhaps, to become better citizens in the process.

---