Max Weber (1864-1920)

Empirical knowledge Vs Rational knowledge

Empirical knowledge, that is, knowledge that comes through physical sensation, and
rational knowledge, that is, knowledge in the form of the ideas and other intellectual
constructs through which it is made intelligible in the mind.
Immanuel Kant (Empirist) who argue that all our ideas and concepts, including both physical
sensations and intellectual reflections, are derived from practical experience of the world around
us and not from pre-existing capacities of the human mind. empiricists to suggest that the kind
of Knowledge that was generated by the speculative, metaphysical and inductive approach of the
social sciences, really did not constitute proper knowledge at all.

Positivism Vs Anti-Positivism
These philosophical debates, between the positivists and anti-positivists, which began in
Germany in the latter part of the nineteenth century, are popularly referred as Methodenstreit.
the most general and probably the most important of which dealt with the relationship between
the natural and social sciences.
Positivists argued that the scientific methodology of natural sciences should be used to
arrive at general theories in social sciences seeing human motives and social
interaction as far too complex to be amenable to statistical analysis. On the other hand,
the anti-positivist scholars (particularly the neo-Kantians) emphasized upon the
subjective dimension of social reality and thus, did not see the possibility of any kind of
universal generalizations in social sciences.
Wilhelm Windelband (1848-1915), one of the leading neo-Kantians, Natural sciences,
according to Windelband, use a nomothetic or generalizing method, whereas social
sciences employ an ideographic or individualizing procedure, since they are
interested in the non-recurring events in reality and the particular or unique aspects of
any phenomenon.

 David Hume [1711-76]), argued that the natural sciences are sciences of fact and so
questions of value were necessarily excluded from the analysis. The social sciences, in
contrast, are sciences of value because they are specifically concerned with
understanding why social actors choose to act in the ways that they do.

Weber as Part Positivist and Part anti-positivist

Example,
He accepted the positivists argument for the scientific study of social phenomena and
appreciated the need for arriving at generalizations if sociology has to be a social science.
But, he criticized the positivists for not taking into account the unique meanings and
motives of the social actors into consideration.
Weber appreciated the neo-Kantians for taking into cognizance the subjective meanings
and motives of the social actors in order to better understand the social reality but also
stressed the need for building generalizations in social sciences.
Weber criticized the neo-Kantians proposition that generalizations are not possible in
social sciences. Weber argued that all sciences, whether natural or social, begin with the
study of a particular phenomenon and try to arrive at some generalization.
Weber also partly accepted Marxs view on class conflict (economic factors) in society
but argued that there could be other dimensions of the conflict as well such as status,
power, etc.

Weber Social Change

Weber defined sociology as a science which attempts the interpretive understanding of
social action in order thereby to arrive at a causal explanation of its course and effects. It
takes account of the behavior of others and is thereby oriented in its course.
according to Weber, sociology is a science concerning itself with the interpretive
understanding of social action. For Weber, social action is the basic unit of social life and
hence the subject matter of sociology.
Weber classified social action into four major types on the basis of the nature of meaning
involved. These four types of social action are
1.GoalRational Action (Zweckrational action):
Chooses his means purely in terms of their efficiency to attain the goal.
2. Value-Rational Action (Wertrational action):
Value-rational action is the one where the means are chosen for their efficiency but the goals are
determined by value.
EX: soldier who allows himself to be killed rather than yield in a war are examples of such
action.
3. Affective or Emotional Action:
For example, the case of a mother who hugs her child, embracing an old friend, etc.
4. Traditional Action:
Traditional actions are those where both ends and means are determined by custom.
Rituals, ceremonies and practices of tradition fall in this category.

Note: Dont forget to study sir note it is very well explained(Refer v.imp tag)