In this essay I will be writing about the similarities and differences between sociological thinking and commonsense. In a sense many argue that sociological thinking is a growth from commonsense which can be seen as a basic level of practical judgment and knowledge that is held communally. On the other hand, sociological thinking can be seen to be more detailed and can ask and answer questions that commonsense cannot.
One difference between sociological thinking and common sense is that common sense is a cumulative body of observed knowledge dependent on personal experiences which are often limited. Berger stated, “To ask sociological questions, then presupposes that one is interested in looking some distance beyond the commonly accepted or officially defined goals of human actions. It presupposes a certain awareness that human events have different levels of meaning, some of which are hidden from the consciousness of everyday life.” (Berger, 1963). Sociological thinking however tends to try to contemplate society as a collective rather than a classification of isolated individuals or institutions. (Bauman and May, 2001, p.8). It stimulates thoughts that are higher and more developed than individualistic experiences as it puts forth ideas onto society as a whole.
Another difference between the two surrounds a highly debated topic. Sociological thinking can be viewed as more scientific as it attempts to observe the world objectively as fact whereas commonsense is more culturally subjective and is based upon observation and individual experiences which may generate fragmented knowledge. Sociologists use a sociological imagination meaning that they try to understand how a concept was in the past, how it changed through history and what it may be like in the future through scientific methods. (Browne, K. 2005, p.5). An analytical comparison by Nagel between commonsense and science presents the ides that science cannot be made even with commonsense (1974, p.21). However, Elliot endeavoured to prove that commonsense is a part of science in a basic way. Experiments require observation that is an action requiring engagement and interpretation. (1974, p. 24). Sociological thinking analyses the world from an objective viewpoint whereas commonsense uses subjective individual experience and therefore it can be argued that whilst sociological thinking could be considered a science, commonsense cannot. Therefore, commonsense views lack validity and reliability compared to sociological thinking especially when based on quanititative data and positivist methodologies which will be reliable and qualitative data and interpretivist methodologies which will be highly valid.
A further difference is that sociological thinking allows challenges to commonsense and assumed social facts. Brown argues that the collection of facts obtained from collective commonsense are not equivalent to sociological thinking. It can only be fully understood with sociological theories with thought. (1979, p. 6-7). As Bauman and May stated, the relationship between commonsense and sociological thinking is dependent. Sociological thinking is exploring and interpreting social actions and facts that has been identified by commonsense. (2001, p.7). Commonsense is absorbed as a basic state of what it is with little challenge from society or individuals. Sociological thinking opens the gate to this wider context which looks at deeper meanings and can question these hidden explanations behind commonsense.
An example of this difference between commonsense and sociological thinking can be explained using the idea of gender and sex. The commonsense belief around gender is that men and women are different due to biological differences such as reproductive organs and functions, hormones, bodily size and strength and genes. However, sociological thinking would look to deconstruct and reduce this down to distinguish between sex and gender. Feminist sociologists viewed sex as biological and more or less fixed at birth. However, gender is socially constructed and cultural which is learned and changeable. This clearly shows the difference between the simple commonsense view and the more complex sociological thought view.
Another place where commonsense and sociological thinking differ is throught the concept of tradition and status quo. Commonsense tends to reflect social traditions which therefore usually reinforce the ‘status quo’ which resists social change. Conflict approaches in sociological thought raise implications and complications about the status quo and are constantly calling for social change.