Both empiricism and theory are fundamental components that contribute significantly to the realm of sociology, however, I believe that more empirical research is needed within the discipline. To defend this position, I will be structuring this paper by: Firstly, discussing the limitations of sociology as a theoretically-rich discipline due to the increasing demands of advanced theoretical development and nuanced research put forth by Healy (2017), Besbis and Khan (2017); and 2. Argue that the discipline should consist of a more empirical-based structure by reviewing the argument and the fundamental concepts featured in Rutherford’s (2012) Kinky Empiricism.
Advancing theoretical development in sociology has generated a theoretical-rich field which Besbris and Khan (2017) argue (using Bourdieu’s capital to demonstrate) counterintuitively depletes the field theoretically, as concepts are drained of their content to meet advancing theory, which produces ambiguousness and a magnitude of rigid theoretical frameworks only appropriate to singular cases. This notion is analogous to Healy’s (2017) nuance traps, who argues theoretical glossing of empirical findings is counterproductive and leads to inflamed nuanced concepts which lose their substance (Healy 2017; Besbris and Khan 2017). Like myself, Healy (2017), Besbris and Khan (2017) argue that theory is important to sociology, however the discipline should contain a less theoretically saturated nuanced structure (as theory is reformulated it loses conceptualisation, thus becoming counterproductive) and consist of more empirically-rich approach by requesting that the majority of academia should be detailed; as science is the formation of innovative empirical discoveries (Besbris and Khan, 2017).
Extending on this trajectory, Rutherford (2012) discusses the demand for empiricism to reclaim its position by arguing we must further discuss the synergistic interaction of social phenomena on multiple scales and levels. Rutherford formulates ‘Kinky Empiricism’, is founded on an anthropological structure attuned to ethical, analytic, and reflexive variations which effectively create a research method allowing one to understand the position of the subjects in question (Rutherford, 2012). Correspondingly, by bringing ethnography into play, we can clearly comprehend vital descriptions of social phenomena, lived experiences, perspectives and realities of the subjects being studied (Rutherford, 2012). Through this trajectory, empiricism is not only a vital component of social research which illuminates the patterns, issues, phenomena and the essence of social world, but ironically adds theoretical contribution and proves/disproves theory. Empiricism is not only a compulsory instrument necessary to investigate the social world but is fundamental to the contribution and generation of knowledge within the discipline.
To conclude, both theory and empiricism are fundamental components that contribute significantly to the realm of sociology, however I believe more empirical research is required within the discipline. In defending this position, throughout this paper I have firstly discussed the limitations of sociology being a theoretically-rich discipline through arguments put forth by Healy (2017), Besbis and Khan (2017), who argue that the demands of theory development and nuanced structure counterintuitively deplete the discipline theoretically. Secondly, I have argued that the discipline should consist of a more empirical-based structure by reviewing the argument behind, and core concepts featured in Rutherford’s (2012) Kinky Empiricism.