Abstract
The question of validity of sign-rule has been a source of continuing disagreement among sociologists. Some of confusion surrounding this question can be dispelled by focusing on problem of providing satisfactory interpretations for calculi constructed to represent various commentators' versions of acceptable sign-rule arguments. It is shown that formulae of a calculus constructed to represent standard sign rule arguments must be interpreted in terms of propositions asserting that rankings of objects in virtue of one property are identical to rankings in virtue of another property. A system constructed on basis of the assumption of high correlations is shown to involve distinctions between logical forms of premises and conclusions of key arguments. This sharply limits deductive power of this system. A third system, constructed on basis of causal modeling view of sign rule, is shown to require an interpretation which renders procedure irrelevant to and testing of general theories. IT IS UNDENIABLE that discourse in area of sociology loosely designated by term theory construction exercises considerable leverage over discourse in rest of discipline. By setting a conception of what constitutes a theory, it molds purposes of sociological investigation, serves to direct sociologist in framing of research problems, and serves to determine what are to constitute obstacles to his inquiries (their methodological problems). Yet, discussion of questions of theory construction is hampered by infuriating impediments. Chief among these is a certain evasiveness on part of its prominent figures in face of serious issues, especially issues of an
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call