(a) What are the different dimensions of qualitative method? Do you think that qualitative method helps to gain a deeper…

(a) Dimensions of qualitative method and its depth of insight

Qualitative method studies the social world through the meanings actors give it, using words, observation and interpretation instead of numbers. It has several dimensions.

Epistemological: interpretivism, the attempt to understand (Weber's Verstehen) rather than only explain. Methodological: inductive and flexible design, in which theory emerges from data, as in Glaser and Strauss's grounded theory. Techniques: ethnography and participant observation, in-depth and unstructured interviews, focus groups, case studies, life histories and content analysis. Descriptive: Geertz's "thick description" of layered meanings. Contextual and reflexive: behaviour is studied in its natural setting, and the researcher examines his or her own position.

It gives deeper insight for four reasons. It captures lived experience, emotion and process that surveys miss; it explains why and how, not only how much; it is open to the unexpected and can generate new concepts; and it gives voice to marginal people. Srinivas's Rampura study, Béteille's Caste, Class and Power (Sripuram) and Leela Dube's work on women's kin roles illustrate this for India.

It also has limits. Findings rest on small samples and the researcher's interpretation, so generalisability, replicability and validity are questioned (Denzin). Qualitative method is therefore best judged by credibility, transparency and thick description, and combined with quantitative work through triangulation.

(b) Weber's theory of stratification and how his class differs from Marx's

In Class, Status, Party (part of Economy and Society), Weber treated stratification as multidimensional, with three separate but interacting orders of power.

Class is the economic order. A class is a group with a similar market situation, that is, similar life chances through property, skills and services in the market. There can be several classes: propertied, professionals and technicians, the petty bourgeoisie and the working class. Status is the social order, based on honour, prestige and lifestyle. Status groups close themselves through endogamy, commensality and exclusive practices; caste is the extreme case. Party is the political order, where groups organise to acquire power.

Weber differs from Marx in four ways. Marx defined class by relation to the means of production, a two-sided relation of owners and non-owners. Weber defined it by market situation, which allows several classes. Marx held that class conflict will polarise society and turn a "class in itself" into a "class for itself", whereas Weber saw class action as contingent and often blocked by status loyalties. Marx saw the state and status as reflecting economic interest; Weber saw status and party as independent sources of power. Weber did not make economic change the sole driver of history.

Weber's scheme explains the Indian mix of caste and class better than a purely economic view.

(c) Ethical issues in participant observation

Participant observation requires prolonged immersion in a group's life, which raises sharp ethical problems.

Informed consent and deception. In covert research, subjects cannot consent and are deceived, as in Laud Humphreys' Tearoom Trade (1970), where men's sexual encounters in public toilets were observed and they were later traced through vehicle numbers. Overt research has its own problem, since consent must be renewed as roles change. Privacy and confidentiality. Researchers witness private, illegal or stigmatised acts and must anonymise people and places, while deciding whether to report illegal behaviour. Harm. Publication can expose informants to legal, social or economic harm. Role conflict and overinvolvement. Friendships and "going native" threaten detachment, and informants may expect help or patronage. Exploitation and exit. Withdrawal after close bonds can feel like betrayal, and benefits to the community are often unequal.

Safeguards include professional codes such as the American Sociological Association's, institutional ethics review, pseudonyms, honest disclosure of the research role, negotiated exit and sharing findings with participants. The tension between richness of data and respect for persons cannot be fully removed.