The day I declared that I also wanted to study sociology some of my friends foresaw the worst possible scenario: Not only I confessed that I was very concerned about my buddies that were all superbpotheads, but I was also "wasting my talent and capacity studying a subjective career".
"Besides" -they insisted- "you won't find a certainty in your life if you follow that path, not even THEY know WTF they are doing!".
“Ask not the elves for advice, because they will tell you both 'yes' and 'no'.”
J.R.R. Tolkien
No matter how hard I tried I was never able to specialize in a specific field of science, not even the real sciences: Natural or exact. Precisely that was what lured me in, the uncertainty, the usual doubt about everything one knew:
The constant need for questioning and re-questioning.
But, what makes social sciences look so "poorly strict"? Why are they not seen as "true sciences"?
Perhaps it is because of the fact that social sciences have a few characteristics that to be strict and scientific are required to be totally different!
The main difference between social and hardcore sciences is complexity, the complexity of a subject to study such as the social reality. Even when it looks hard to study a star because it is fucking far away: It is a piece of cake compared to the challenge it means to attempt to study the effects of prolonged warfare in cultures. It is a fucking BIG mess that rotates around a whole different axis.
Once I said: "science may not tell you the real truth, but it will tell you, at least, which one of the truths is not real". I should have been more specific. That only applies to hardcore sciences. In social sciences: Nothing is to be held as absolute. Whenever you have "evidence" you better show it, before it expires.
We already know that Nature is messy, when we study societies contained within that nature we empower that complexity, at least, to the cube (this is estimate, remember, no absolutes!).
That is just not complicated enough, sociology is forced to work under the complexity of specific power relations transversed by cultural and social contexts that are constantly changing as they forge each other, even historic ones! Not to mention the always present conflicts of interests.
Believe me, it is easier to measure the behavior of a free falling body when this body is not interacting with other bodies which hold unknown properties each.
Sociology cannot even be considered a "neutral" science, as we notice that its knowledge is able to empower the speech of people that should never be empowered!
It is hard, conflictive, never absolute to be a sociologist.
But, as knowledge piles up, it is easier to study ourselves more and more as new environments arise. It becomes easier to fight against the problems that arise in them, because we (somehow) understand them now.
It is a lovely science that forces you to do what all scientists love to: