Max Weber’s Ideal Types – Drawing the line between fact and fiction


Max Weber, sociologist
Max Weber, sociologist via Wikipedia

This has been updated at earthpages.org

2 comments

  1. To my knowledge, Weber never claimed Ideal Types were the only or best way of classifying or listing group representations. Every critique I’ve come across of it lists its faults or shortcomings as a total scientific image, which misses the entire point.

    Also, while ethical methodology should always be utilized in the pursuit of understanding, the understanding itself is separate from ethics and morals. Truth and facts are truth and facts, regardless of the ethics and morals of the person or people viewing them. It is in the application and practice of the knowledge that ethics and morals come into play.
    (Apologies if this is a bit disjointed. I’m not entirely awake.)

    Like

  2. Thanks for your comments. Some would say that the pursuit of understanding cannot be divorced from ethics. This is partly because money is almost always directly or indirectly involved, and to spend it for understanding – instead of in some other way – is, one could argue, a choice involving ethics.

    As for truth, it seems that this, too, is a potentially problematic concept. While truth and facts may be truth and facts from God’s perspective, for most of us mere mortals, we only see from a perspective and, to borrow from St. Paul, through a glass darkly.

    Like

What are you thinking?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.