The Role of Values in the Selection and Formulation of Scientific Problems
A Reconstruction of Max Weber's Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37062/sf.62.27260Nyckelord:
Value-laden problem selection, Ideas of reason, Personality, Beruf, BildungAbstract
This article presents an integrated interpretation of Max Weber’s view on the role of values in scientific inquiry by linking four social categories – personality, vocation, Bildung, and ethics of responsibility – with four epistemological concepts: historical interest, value relevance, cultural meaning, and value interpretation. Previous interpretations have mostly focused on epistemological and logical aspects of value interference in science, leaving the relationship between Weber’s categories – and the mechanisms through which values shape scientific problem selection – underexplored. Drawing on the case of familial homicides, we argue that researchers integrate their values into the research process through a three-stage model. We trace the origins of Weber’s concept of value interpretation to perspectivism and Nietzsche’s notion of a “battle of values.” By examining the historical development of the concepts of interest and value relevance – particularly in relation to Kant’s theory of reason – we propose a revised reading of the epistemological foundations of Weber’s approach. Finally, we analyze the methodological implications of personality, vocation, Bildung, and responsibility ethics in Weber’s social theory, highlighting their significance for understanding how values are embedded in the selection and framing of scientific problems.
Referenser
Agevall, Ola. (1999). A Science of Unique Events, Max Weber’s Methodology of the Cultural Sciences. Uppsala University, Sweden.
Albrow, Martin. (1990). Max Weber’s Construction of Social Theory, St. Martin’s Press New York.
Beetham, David. (1974). Max Weber and the Theory of Modern Politics. London: Allen & Unwin.
Berman, Marshall. (1988). All That Is Welts into Air, The Experience of Modernity, Penguin books.
Bruun, Hans Henrik. (2007). Science, Values and Politics in Max Weber’s Methodology, London: Ashgate.
Burger, Thomas. (1987). Max Weber’s Theory of Concept formation. Expanded edition. Durham: Duke University Press.
Dibble, Vernon K. (1968). Social Science and Political Commitments in the young Max Weber, European Journal of Sociology, Volume 9, Issue 1, May 1968, pp. 92–110. https://doi.org/10.1017/s000397560000165x
Drysdale, John. (1996). How are Social-Scientific Concepts Formed? A Reconstruction of Max Weber’s Theory of Concept Formation, Sociological Theory, Vol. 14, No. 1. pp. 71–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/202153
Eliaeson, Sven. (1990). Max Weber and His Critics: Critical Theory’s Reception of Neo-Kantian Methodology, International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 513–537. Published by: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01384974
Farris, Sara R. (2013). Max Weber’s Theory of Personality Individuation, Politics and Orientalism in the Sociology of Religion, Leiden, Boston. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004254091
Freund, Julien. (1968). The Sociology of Max Weber, Trans by Mary Ilford, London: Allen Lane; Penguin Press.
Gadamer, H. G. (1975). Truth and Method, Sheed and Ward, London.
Gane, Nicholas. (2002). Max Weber and Postmodern Theory: Rationalization versus Re-enchantment, New York: Palgrave. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556523
Giddens, Anthony. (1972). Politics and Sociology in the Thought of Max Weber, Polity Press.
Goddard, David. (1973). Max Weber and the Objectivity of Social Science, History and Theory, Vol. 12, No. 1 (1973), pp. 1–22, Wesleyan University. https://doi.org/10.2307/2504691
Hekman, S. J. (1994). Weber and post-positivist social theory. In A. Horowitz & T. Maley (Eds.), The barbarism of reason: Max Weber and the twilight of enlightenment, (pp. 267–286). Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/004839319702700407
Hennis, Wilhelm, Ulrike Brisson and Roger Brisson. (1994). The Meaning of ”Wertfreiheit” on the Background and Motives of Max Weber’s ”Postulate”, Sociological Theory, Vol. 12, No. 2. https://doi.org/10.2307/201858
Kieran, Allen. (2004). Max Weber: A Critical Introduction, Pluto P Press London.
Kant, Immanuel. (1999 [1788]). Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1369415400000418
Kant, Immanuel. (1996 [1771]). Critique of Practical Reason, (Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy) 2nd Edition, by Mary Gregory. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/s001221731500102x
Lassman, Peter. (1980). Value-Relations and General Theory: Parsons’ Critique of Weber, Zeitschrift für Soziologie, Vol. 9, No. 1, Schwerpunktheft: Talcott Parsons (1902–1979), pp. 100–111, Published by: Lucius & Lucius Verlagsgesellschaft mbh. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-1980-0105
Lowith, Karl. (2003). Max Weber and Karl Marx, Series: Routledge Classics in Sociology, Editor: Bryan S. Turner, Publisher: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203422229
Merton, R, K (1959) Notes on problem-finding in sociology, Sociology today. Problems and prospects. New York.
Mommsen, Wolfgang J. (1989). The Political and Social Theory of Max Weber, The University of Chicago Press.
Myers, Perry. (2004). Max Weber: Education as Academic and Political Calling. German Studies Review, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 269–288, The Johns Hopkins University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/1433082
Nietzsche, Friedrich. (1887/1967). On the Genealogy of Morals. Translated by Kaufmann, Walter. New York: Vintage Books.
Oakes, Gu. (1982). Methodological Ambivalence: The Case of Max Weber, Social Research, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 589–615, Published by: The New School
Oakes, Guy. (1988). Reading Weber’s “Wissenschaftslehre: Remarks on the Recent German Literature, e: Sociological Forum, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 301–307, Published by: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01115299
Oakes, Guy. (1990). Weber and Rikert: Concept Formation in the Cultural Sciences, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Parkin, Frank. (2002). Max Weber, Edited by: Peter Hamilton, Routledge.
Parsons, T. (1949). Natural and Social Science, in “The Structure of Social Action” (Glencoe, III: The Free Press), 591–601.
Rex, John. (1977). Value-Relevance, Scientific Laws, and Ideal Types: The Sociological Methodology of Max Weber, Source: The Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers Canadians de sociology, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 151–166. https://doi.org/10.2307/3340569
Ringer, Fritz. (1997). Max Weber’s methodology. The unification of the cultural and social sciences. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-003-0012-x
Root, Michael. (1993). Philosophy of Social Science: The Methods, Ideals and Politics of Social Inquiry. Wiley-Blackwell.
Rosenberg, M Michael. (2016). The conceptual articulation of the reality of life: Max Weber’s theoretical constitution of sociological ideal types, Journal of Classical Sociology, Vol. 16(1) 84–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468795x15574414
Rossides, Daniel W. (1972). The Legacy of Max Weber: A Non-Metaphysical Politics, Volume 42, Issue3-4, pp, 183–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682x.1972.tb00236.x
Roth, Guenther & Schluchter, Wolfgang. (1984). Max Weber’s vision of History, Ethics and Methods, University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520324107
Salomon, Albert. (1934). Max Weber’s Methodology, Social Research, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 147–168, Published by: The New School.
Segre, Sandro. (2004). Understanding Lived Experience: Max Weber’s Intellectual Relationship to Simmel, Husserl, James, Starbuck, and Jaspers, Max Weber Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.77–99. https://doi.org/10.15543/mws/2004/1/6
Swedberg Richard and Ola Agevall. (2016). The Max Weber Dictionary: Key Words and Central Concepts, Second Edition, Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503600225
Turner, Bryan S. (2003). Preface to the new edition of Karl Löwith’s, Max Weber and Karl Marx, Series: Routledge Classics in Sociology, Publisher: Routledge.
Weber, Marianne. (1975 [1926]). Max Weber: A Biography. Translated by Harry Zohn. New York: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/55.1.198
Weber, Max. (1998 [1919]). The Profession and Vocation of Politics, in Weber Political Writings, edited by Raymond Guess and Quintin Skinnier, Cambridge.
Weber, Max. (2001 [1930]). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, T. Parsons (trans.), A. Giddens (intro), London: Routledge.
Weber, Max. (2012 [1902-1903]). Note marked “Rickert’s ‘values”‘ (The “Nervi fragment”), in Max Weber: Collected methodological writings, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975612000446
Weber, Max. (2012 [1904]). Objectivity of knowledge in Social Science and Social Policy, in Max Weber on the Methodology of the Social Sciences, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203804698
Weber, Max. (2012 [1905]). Roscher and Knies. The Logical Problems of Historical Economics, in Max Weber: Collected methodological writings, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975612000446
Weber, Max. (2012 [1906a]). The Meaning of “value freedom” in the Sociological and Economic science, in Max Weber: Collected methodological writings, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975612000446
Weber, Max. (2012 [1906b]). Critical Studies in the Logic of the Cultural Sciences: A Critique of Eduard Meyer’s Methodological Views, in in Max Weber: Collected methodological writings, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975612000446
Weber, Max. (2012 [1906c]). Critical Studies in the Logic of the Cultural Sciences: Objective possibility and adequate causation in the historical causal approach, in Max Weber: Collected methodological writings, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975612000446
Weber, Max. (2012 [1906d]). Letter to Friedrich Gottl 29 March 1906, in Max Weber: Collected methodological writings, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975612000446
Weber, Max. (2012 [1910]). German Sociological Society, General Meeting, Frankfurt 1910, in Max Weber: Collected methodological writings, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975612000446
Weber, Max. (2012 [1917]). Science as a profession and Vocation, in Max Weber: Collected methodological writings, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975612000446
Weber, Max. (2012 [1902-1903]). Note Marked “New sciences”, c., in Max Weber: Collected methodological writings, edited by Hans Henrik Bruun and Sam Whimster, Translated by Hans Henrik Bruun, London and New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975612000446
Whimster, Sam. (2007). Understanding Weber, London and New York: Routledge.
Zijderveld, Anton C. (2006). Rickert’s Relevance, The Ontological Nature and Epistemological Functions of Values. Brill, Leiden, Boston. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047409793_009
Zuckerman, Harriet (1978) Theory Choice and Problem Choice in Science, sociological inquiry, Blackwell, pub. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682x.1978.tb00819.x
Downloads
Publicerad
Referera så här
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Copyright (c) 2025 Mohammad javad Esmaili, Mehdi Fazlali Dastjerdi
Detta verk är licensierat under en Creative Commons Erkännande-Ickekommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0 Internationell-licens.
Allt material i Sociologisk Forskning publiceras med omedelbar öppen tillgång (open access), under Creative Commons-licensen CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
Allt innehåll i tidskriften är fritt tillgängligt utan kostnad och får för icke-kommersiella syften fritt läsas, laddas ned, kopieras, delas, skrivas ut och länkas. Innehållet får dock inte ändras. När innehållet används måste författare och källa anges. Upphovsrätten till innehållet tillhör respektive författare. Inga publiceringsavgifter tas ut.
