Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/wiley/why-rickert-regarding-the-dogma-about-heinrich-rickert-s-influence-on-gEyxka7QL8
References (15)
-
G. Oakes (1988)
Weber and Rickert. Concept formation in the cultural sciences -
T. Parsons, Alexander Schelting (1936)
Max Webers Wissenschaftslehre.American Sociological Review, 1
-
T. Parsons (1991)
Talcott Parsons. The early essays -
P. Ghosh (2010)
Max Weber, Werner Sombart and the Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft: The authorship of the ‘Geleitwort’ (1904)History of European Ideas, 36
-
T. Burger (1987)
Max Weber’s theory of concept formation: History, laws, and ideal types -
T. Burger (1994)
Wagner und Zippian -
(2001)
Weber on Rickert: From value relation to ideal type -
H. H. Bruun (1972)
Science, values and politics in Max Weber’s methodology -
P.‐U. Merz (1990)
Max Weber und Heinrich Rickert. Die erkenntniskritischen Grundlagen der verstehenden Soziologie -
S. Eliaeson (2002)
Max Weber’s methodologies. Interpretation and critique -
G. Oakes (1986)
Rickert -
U. Gerhardt (2001)
Idealtypus. Zur methodologischen Begründung der modernen Soziologie -
R. Swedberg (2005)
The Max Weber Dictionary -
D. Henrich (1952)
Die Einheit der Wissenschaftslehre Max Webers -
(1997)
Max Weber’s Methodology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Copyright
- © 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
- ISSN
- 0021-8308
- eISSN
- 1468-5914
- DOI
- 10.1111/jtsb.12344
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
For almost a century, scholars have held the conviction that Max Weber's methodology was based upon neo‐Kantian philosophy. This belief was founded on the idea that Weber's methodology was dependent on the neo‐Kantianism of Weber's Freiburg colleague and friend Heinrich Rickert. This idea began with Rickert himself and then was promoted by his student Alexander von Schelting. This belief was then passed down through numerous American scholars to the point that today, sociologists have the conviction that Weber's writings on method are tied directly to those of Rickert. In light of this, one may suggest that this conviction has been transformed into dogma. However, as will be demonstrated in this essay, Weber's methodological ideas are fundamentally different from those of Rickert and that is based upon the fact that Weber's methodological goals were fundamentally different from those of Rickert.
Journal
Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour – Wiley
Published: Jun 1, 2023
Keywords: dogma; methodology; neo‐kantianism; Rickert; Weber