Sociology as a science was born in the 19th century from the positivist thought of Augusto Comte, who, proposing a analogy to methods used in other sciences such as biology, physics and chemistry, tried to build a science of society. According to Comte, in addition to physical and biological laws, there would be social laws, which would govern social life.
Later, Emile Durkheim would strive to give a more scientific character to sociology. According to Raymond Aron, Durkheim's conception of sociology is based on a theory of social fact, being his aim to demonstrate that there could be a sociological science whose object of study was the facts social. For Durkheim, it would be necessary to observe them as "things", in an impartial and detached way, just like any other facts or phenomena of other sciences, applying for this a specific method (this method developed in its constructions). This effort to institutionalize a science of social life (of social relations and the phenomena that result from them) made a lot of sense in that context if we take into account the consequences of the main social, political and economic transformations through which the Europe.
The development of an industrial society, with an urban character, brought new social problems to light, which could be understood by a new science. However, although sociology has been intended as a tool for intervention in society at times, throughout its constitution as an area of knowledge, it is noteworthy that it does not have as its main objective to solve the problems that affect life in society, but rather understand them. Obviously, as a science, it can collaborate in the construction of alternative ways to solve problems, but then, thinking of it as a tool for solving everything is at least a mistake. Understanding the working logic of phenomena does not necessarily mean being able to intervene. It is enough to mention Medicine as an area of knowledge. How many doctors should study a disease like AIDS? They already know how this evil manifests itself in human beings, its causes, the characteristics of the virus and its effects on the sick body, among many other things. However, a treatment aimed at a cure has not yet been discovered, but only how to treat the patient in a way that their life expectancy can be extended. So, whether sociology, medicine, or any other science, we should only wait for possible explanations for the phenomena in itself, its causes and effects (although they are not so clear in society), and not necessarily the definitive resolution of any problem.
Starting from this point, it is important to know that there is a difference between social problems and sociological problems. In some introductory books on Sociology, such as in the work of Sebastião Vila Nova, it is defined that a social problem has its origins in social factors and has social consequences. Although the classification of a social problem can be subjective (after all, what is a problem for our culture may not be in another), among its more general characteristics, we can say that there is a feeling of indignation and threat to the community that can be generated. The indignation would be linked to the feeling of injustice (from a moral point of view) aroused by this social problem and, similarly, the idea of threat to collectivity would be linked to the destabilization of what Durkheim called social solidarity, which would be responsible for the social ties between the individuals.
Do not stop now... There's more after the advertising ;)
To exemplify the first characteristic (of indignation), we can think of child labor and prostitution, of hunger in the Brazilian Northeast, in the condition of unemployed worker, in the poverty that affects the Brazilian metropolitan regions, among other issues that certainly "bother" us even if we are not affected directly. With regard to the notion of threat to the community, we can think of urban violence, economic crises that lead to unemployment, wars between countries and ethnic groups, in prejudiced actions of the most diverse natures, in short, in a series of factors that affect the social order as a whole.
Sociological problems, on the other hand, are the objects of study in Sociology as a science, which focuses on these in order to understand their general characteristics. As stated above, sociology studies social phenomena, which are perceived as problems social or not, making use of a systematic and detailed observation of organizations and relationships social. Sociological problems, in the words of Sebastião Vila Nova, are questions or problems of theoretical explanation of what happens in social life, that is, in society, such as: marriage, family, fashion, parties such as carnival, the taste for football, religion, work relations, cultural production, urban violence, gender issues, social inequality, etc.
Urban violence, for example, can be a sociological problem, as it can arouse the interest of sociologists to unravel the reasons for such a social phenomenon, but at the same time it is a social problem, as it affects the entire collectivity. However, it would be up to sociology only to explain it, and not necessarily to solve it. Thus, we can say that every social problem can be a sociological problem, but not every sociological problem is a social problem.
Paulo Silvino Ribeiro
Brazil School Collaborator
Bachelor in Social Sciences from UNICAMP - State University of Campinas
Master in Sociology from UNESP - São Paulo State University "Júlio de Mesquita Filho"
Doctoral Student in Sociology at UNICAMP - State University of Campinas
Sociology - Brazil School
