Your paper should accomplish the following: 1. Demonstrate an understanding of t

Your paper should accomplish the following:
1. Demonstrate an understanding of the core differences in assumptions about social reality.
2. Identify and discuss the strengths and limitations of each for assessing social reality.
3. Build an argument that defends one stance over the other (i.e., offer a well-reasoned “why’).
4. Develop and argument with a supporting example that demonstrates how both could be used to better understand a single topic.
5. Offer insight into how learning about both epistemologies has impacted your understanding social theory and sociological knowledge.
Accomplishing the above will require you to understand the premises and assumptions of both epistemologies which means putting in the time to learn from the lectures, readings, and videos provided to you. You should also ask questions!
Directions:
Use the outline below to write a paper that accomplished the five goals above. You can cite readings, lectures, and videos where appropriate, but it is possible to write the paper without direct quotes. You should focus on identifying relevant (concrete) examples to support your logic, arguments, and reasoning. That is, you need to offer a “why” that is supported while engaging in critical thinking. Students will be required to follow the outline below and include headings for every sections. Finally, students will need to thoroughly edit the paper. Poor grammar, run-on sentences, poorly worded arguments, etc. will impact your grade. If you have issues with writing you will need to use Tutor.com located at the top of all Brightspace pages. All papers must be submitted as Word documents that can be submitted to Turnitin.com.
Required Paper Outline
DO NOT INCLUDE A TITLE PAGE (Your name on the first line is fine).
I. Introduction: (1-1 ½ pages) The introduction MUST contain the following.
A. A focused discussion on at least three assumptions of Positivism you believe are the most important to its claim to knowledge of social reality.
B. A focused discussion on at least three assumptions of Idealism you believe are the most important to its claim to knowledge of social reality.
Note: For this section, you only need to have supported statements as to why you chose each assumption, you do not need examples (just a brief “why”).
II. Critiques (1 ½-2 pages): Provide two critiques of a PREMISE or ASSUMPTION for each epistemology. That is, you need to critique two assumptions of positivism and two assumptions of idealism. Your critique should focus on a problem or issue related to “knowing social reality.” Your critiques MUST be supported with an example that makes sense.
If you do not know what a critique is, you should use the internet to learn about critical thinking and critiques and identify examples that make sense to you. It is imperative that you understand what critical thinking means and how to do it
A. What are two problems/issues with using Positivism to understand or gain knowledge of social reality/society?
B. What are two problems/issues with using Idealism to understand or gain knowledge of social reality/society?
Note: You must provide examples for your critiques, and they must be based on phenomena tied to social reality (not the “natural” world, this is not natural science!).
III. Idealism vs. Positivism: Using your knowledge of history and the social world, develop an argument in support of Idealism or Positivism for gaining knowledge of social reality. That is, construct a defense for the ONE you believe is best for accumulating knowledge of social reality and provide me with a supported reason for why that includes at least 2 concrete examples based on historical or current events from existing or past societies. You can also use personal experience if the experience is placed into a proper context (i.e., it is tied to socialization or social reality), and you can use examples from other classes (1 ½ – 2 pages).
A. Argument supporting Positivism over Idealism.
OR
B. Argument supporting Idealism and over Positivism.
Note: The internet is your friend. There are unlimited news stories and lots of historical records that you can search and use as concrete examples. Be sure to cite your sources and you can use direct quotes if needed. You can also search academic articles! JSTOR (a library search engine) is an excellent tool that you can use to find research articles that you can use as examples!
IV. Synthesis: Based on your critiques and arguments, develop an informed discussion as to whether there is room for a possible “merger” of the two epistemologies. That is, can both epistemologies be used to study the same thing from different perspectives, and would doing so give us better knowledge? (1-1 ½ pages)
A. If “Yes,” identify a topic or social phenomena that you can use as an example to explain how a merge could take place. How can applying both epistemologies help us understand the topic better? Provide a brief explanation of how and why applying BOTH would help expand our understanding of the topic you are using for your example.
OR
B. If “No,” explain why a merge could not take place using an example. Again, pick a topic, but this time pick one that you think positivism or idealism addresses better. That is, say why either idealism or positivism would be superior for addressing your topic AND say why the other one would not be better or cannot be used.
V. Conclusion: Not a traditional conclusion! (Paragraph to 1 page).
A. Provide a statement on how your new understanding of Positivism and Idealism’s role in constructing sociological knowledge affects how you understand society. Describe any new limits or possibilities that you are now aware of, or topics that you might be more interested in researching. You should support your reasoning with at least one example or provide a statement about a new insight you gained.