Max Weber and the Empirical Historical Inquiry

IF 4.1 2区社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Politics & Society Pub Date : 2020-11-19 DOI:10.5007/175-7984.2020v19n45p118

E. Hanke

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Max Weber is a worldwide respected sociologist, but there are other ways to approach andappreciate his oeuvre, especially in historical science. He has been seen as the last German-speaking polyhistor, as the founding father of historical cultural studies, and even as theforerunner of a problem-focused historiography. At the same time, history provides himwith an almost inexhaustible reservoir of single data. Weber demonstrates what about datais scientifically interesting and how to make use of it for dealing with scientific questions.My approach in this essay will be as follows: Firstly, I will identify Weber’s methodologicalreflections about how to deal with empirical-historical reality. Secondly, I will show how Weberembraces history with special focus on his sociology of domination – a centerpiece of Economyand Society. Finally, I will shortly explore the possibilities of adapting Weber’s main theses topresent-day historical sciences.

查看原文本刊更多论文

马克思·韦伯与实证历史调查

马克斯·韦伯是一位享誉世界的社会学家，但也有其他方法可以接近和评价他的作品，尤其是在历史科学领域。他被视为最后一位讲德语的多面手，历史文化研究的创始人，甚至是以问题为中心的史学的先驱。与此同时，历史为他提供了一个几乎取之不尽用之不竭的单一数据库。韦伯展示了什么是数据在科学上是有趣的，以及如何利用它来处理科学问题。我在这篇文章中的方法如下：首先，我将识别韦伯关于如何处理经验历史现实的方法论反思。其次，我将展示韦伯雷是如何通过特别关注他的统治社会学来影响历史的——这是《经济学与社会》的核心。最后，我将很快探讨将韦伯的主要论文改编为当代历史科学的可能性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Politics & Society Multiple-

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.