In this lecture, we shall discuss the methods employed by sociologists in their study of social life. The primary aim is to illustrate how sociologists go beyond common sense understandings in trying to explain or understand social phenomena.

Sociology versus Commonsense

Common sense, in everyday language, is understood as “the unreflective opinions of ordinary people” or “sound and prudent but often unsophisticated judgment” (Merriam-Webster). Sociology and other social sciences have been accused of being nothing more than the sciences of common sense. While there is certainly some basis for the accusation - some of the findings of sociology do confirm common sense understandings of how society seems to work – sociology goes well beyond common sense in its pursuit of knowledge. Sociology does this by applying scientific methodology and empiricism to social phenomena. It is also interesting to note that common sense understandings can develop from sociological investigations. Past findings in sociological studies can make their way into everyday culture, resulting in a common sense understanding that is actually the result of sociological investigation. Examples of sociological investigation refuting and serving as the foundation for common sense are provided below.

The workings behind common sense are that people usually do not have a word for their thoughts about society that can be summed into one word. Sociology helps provide the words to alter multiple thoughts into a defined word.

In the 1970s and early 1980s a New Religious Movement was gaining notoriety for its rapid expansion. This movement, The Unification Church or The Moonies, was heavily criticized because it encouraged members to give up all of their ties to non-members of the religion and to move in to movement centers to realize the movement's vision of a better world. Accusations of brainwashing were common; it was believed The Moonies were forcing people to join the movement and give up their previous lives against their will. In order to determine if the common sense accusations were accurate, Eileen Barker (1984) undertook a lengthy sociological investigation to explore how people came to affiliate with The Moonies. She found that converts to The Unification Church were not being forced into the religion against their will but instead were making a reasoned decision to join the movement. While there was pressure for people to join the movement, the pressure was not such that it attracted more than a small fraction of the people who were introduced to the movement. In other words, the movement did not brainwash its followers; it provided a new and alternative worldview, but did not force anyone to adopt it. Of course, the social ties people developed once they joined the movement made it difficult for members to leave. But this isn't anything particularly new: members of many religions and denominations that have been around much longer than The Moonies find it difficult to leave because of their social attachments. What Barker's research uncovers is that The Moonies were only being accused of brainwashing because (a) they were a New Religious Movement and (b) they encouraged a distinct separation from the outside world. This is a common accusation leveled at New Religious Movements, especially those that demand significant commitments from their members. This example illustrates how sociology can test common sense understandings of social processes.