Study/Discussion Questions on Weber, "Objectivity in Social Science"

1.  (pp. 2-3) How does Weber characterize the object of study of the social sciences?  How does it differ from the object of study in physics and in astronomy?  [Though Weber never mentions chemistry, how do the phenomena chemistry studies differ from those studied by physics and astronomy?  What are the similarities and differences between what the social sciences study and what these different natural sciences study?

2.  (p. 3)  Weber speaks about the "empathic understanding" of psychological and intellectual phenomena.  How does this different from the sort of understanding that scientific explanation provides.  To what extent does the role of empathic understanding distinguish the social sciences from the natural sciences?

3.  What roles do values and value judgments play in the social sciences?

4.  Weber talks repeatedly of "cultural significance."  What does he mean and why does he think that cultural significance is important to the methodology of the social sciences?

5.  (pp. 4-9) Weber denies that the goal of the social sciences is the determination of the laws governing social phenomena.  Why?  Do you think he is right?  It appears that he is directly disagreeing with Mill.  Is he?  How do you think Mill would respond to Weber?

6.  What, according to Mill, Marx, and Weber should the social sciences aim to explain?  What explains the differences in the answers these three thinkers would give?

7.  Does Weber think that it is possible to give causal explanations of social phenomena?  What special problems are there about giving causal explanations of social phenomena?

8.  What does Weber mean by "the abstract-theoretical method" (p. 10)?  What is his attitude toward it?

9.  (p. 11)  What are the main differences between Weber's view of the methodology of economics and Mill's view?

10.  What is an "ideal type"?  What roles do ideal types play in the social sciences?  Why are they needed?  In what sense are ideal types "ideal"?  What connections are there between ideal types and the values people attach to social phenomena?