Explaining the social world: Historicism versus positivism

For quite some time, my best professional friends have encouraged me to drop the term positivism from my advocacy for a natural science of human society. They are, no doubt, correct in their advice because the label "positivism" is widely misunderstood by sociologists and, today, is often used pejoratively to condemn those committed to the epistemology of science. Indeed, positivism is now a kind of "straw man" (and woman, as well) for advocacy of alternative epistemologies to science. The fine essay by Richard York and Brett Clark makes many of the standard critiques of positivism, and like many previous commentators, their characterization of positivism does not reflect the nature of positivist theorizing in sociology. Still, York and Clark bring some new and important ideas to the table that need to be discussed and debated. Moreover, their essay adds many lines of substantive thinking to Marxism and historical analysis that, while quite engaging, I will not discuss in my comments; instead, I will stay focused on the respective merits of positivistic and historical approaches to sociological explanation, beginning with York and Clark's portrayal of positivism. © 2006 Midwest Sociological Society.