Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Chapter 15 "Objective" in Social Science

I am going to be perfectly honest when I read Max Weber’s piece on objectivity in social science I was slightly confused and I still do not fully understand all of what he was saying because he seemed to contradict himself with his main points.

Weber maintains that there is no way to explain social values scientifically because values are not scientific they are created by the culture and not scientific in any way. He believes that we should never try to mix values with science because they are two separate things that can not explain each other; but rather you can only use them to explain themselves, for example economics. Economics is treated as a science but the three laws of economics are based upon the values of those who said that they were the laws of economics and therefore is not scientifically valid because the whole “science” is based on cultural values and not fact.

Because you cannot use scientific fact to explain values you cannot use science to compare religions, or governments or anything social because society and values are not scientific, you must have a value oriented point of view. In other words one cannot detach from your social self when studying different societies because it is the only way one can understand it. According to Weber one must focus his thoughts inward when studying a society because it is futile to try and explain it intellectually.

This is where I begin to get confused because, from what I understand, Weber also argues that one must stay objective when studying sociology. Well at least as objective as possible being that total objectivity. How can Weber tell us that we must focus our studies inward and at the same time tell us to be as objective as possible? How can we be scientific in any way if society cannot be explained by science and only by values which cannot be explained in any intellectual way? Weber left me confused and with many questions which I tried to explain but only left me questioning not only Weber but myself.

No comments: