Interactionist vs. Positivist

Sociologists are broken into different categories regarding their perspective and the way they approach
things such as their experiements. The two major categories are positivism and interactionism. Both theories are attempt to investigate sociological issues and functions, but from complete opposite spectrums.

In sociology interactionists are interested in the social process by which particular behaviors come to be understood as deviant and the consequences of these for those who are labelled deviant. It is a theoretical perspective that derives social processes from human interaction. Positivists on the other hand believe that in social as well as natural sciences, data derived from sensory experience and logical mathematical treatments of such data are together the exclusive source of all authentic knowledge. Personally I feel that from the interactionist's perspective one can better grasp the interaction and relationship of individuals and society.

Because sociology is a social science, the positivist perspective is unreasonable. Statistics that have not been developed from interviews, questionaires, or any type of human interaction cannot help a sociologist focus on what sociology is set to explain- the influence of our relationships around us and how they affect our behaviours and attitudes. A positivist who uses quantitative data alone is incapable of getting thorough insight as to how society influences individuals' behavior. An interactionsit focuses more so on validity (whether or not the researcher received the information/answer he or she set out to receive); which I think is important, because without it the whole experiement was a waste of time.

Any social science requires interaction with individuals closely related to the topic of interest. One can not gain a deepeer knowledge about sociological issues, without researching the issue and those that the issue greatly impacts (which requires complete interaction).