Mind versus Matter:

Sociology versus the Natural Sciences

by Mark P. A. Ciotola

Part 1. Introduction

With the earliest Greek thinkers, to whom some physical object, or some physical quality, such as hot and cold, might seem to be the most general of all things, there was of course no question of dividing philosophy from science. The two were one. As time went on, and physical science increased, while at the same time men reflected more and more on the operation of their minds, there came to be a tendency to distinguish the two fields of thought and use philosophy only of the latter. But this restricted use of the word has never gained the consent of mankind. Men still think, and rightly think, of philosophy as the attempt to see things whole, and as the vast mass of things presented to our minds are now the subject-matter of some branch of science, it is theoretically impossible to dissever philosophy from science. (Marvin, p. 11).

Persons desiring the advancement of society of society have cast desirous eyes upon the natural sciences, ever since their strident advances of the 1700s. Posed in a modern setting, consider the statement "if only one could use social science with the same precision and reliability to solve the problems of society as do civil engineers use natural science to build structures such as the Golden Gate bridge to solve the physical problems of society." Perhaps the maladies of society–war, persecution, violence, inequity–need be no more. This is the dream and the desire that such persons have pursued ever since the creation of the steam engine.

But what of progress on this front? Certainly economics has had some success in terms of financial markets. Psychology, to the extent that it is a biological science has made some progress as well. Unfortunately such progress falls far short of the dream. Two explanations have been provided as to the barriers to great progress. The first is that social systems are too complicated to treat as a natural science. The second is that social systems are philosophically, fundamentally different from natural systems.

The mission of the Mind versus Matter: Sociology versus the Natural Sciences is to explore, rather than to debate, these barriers. Along the path of this exploration several tangential issues and controversies arise which are worthwhile to consider due to their impact upon the intellectual environment engulfing this paper’s primary mission. While this paper could have explored these matters in several different formats, different "threads" interweave to such a degree that this series utilizes a chronological presentation to provide the richest feeling of flavor, a mosaic of ideas and values.

There have been two major streams of philosophical thought in human society, East and West. This series exclusively deals with the Western stream of thought primarily due to the ignorance of the author on Eastern philosophy and consequent concerns about misrepresenting Eastern philosophy. A second reason is that Chinese sociologists themselves (including pre-Communist scholars), though well-versed in Eastern thought, found little in prior Eastern literature to precede the development of sociology. (Wong, pp. 1-2). Likewise, ancient Western philosophy is given but brief mention, for works of medieval thought appear to have considerably greater impact upon contemporary literature.

References

1. F. Marvin, Comte: The Founder of Sociology, Chapman and Hall, London, 1936.

2. S. Wong, Sociology and Socialism in Contemporary China, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1979.