For several years within the social sciences, including criminology but especially in sociology, students and professors have debated over what is more important, theory or research methods. Others have argued over what is better theory, micro-structural or macro-structural theory; that is, whether criminologists should attempt to explain and study only small slices of reality, such as child molestation or burglary, or whether they should develop comprehensive theories. The criminologist links scientific advancement with the development of a comprehensive or general theory of criminology. He believes that a good general theory of crime is necessary, even though formulating such a theory may be difficult. He notes organizational constraints that have worked against the development of a general theory. The professors reject this argument, asserting that no theory can explain all types of crime and that a general theory would force different kinds of crime into one false mold.