「막스ㆍ웨버」의 理念型에 있어서의 問題點

• 영문명: Some Problems in Max Weber's "Ideal Types"
• 발행기관: 서울대학교 경제연구소
• 저자명: Mun-Whan Choe(崔文煥)
• 간행물 정보: 『경제논집』경제논집 4권 1호, 1~28쪽, 전체 27쪽
• 주제분류: 경제경영 > 경제학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 1965.03.31

영문 초록

I Max Weber's ideal type has been a common asset of all sciences as a useful methodological mean. When we form a theory we give up individualities and clarify the substantialities. Alfred Marshall's "representative firm," Karl Marx's "pure capitalism," and Max Weber's "ideal type" have a common property that they all reject secondary attributes and focus attention of analysis to the substantial matters of things. Weber's ideal type concept has been applied widely, yet, there has been no sufficient inquiry into its nature. In this paper I will inquire into the ideal type and propose its problems. Before 1902, Max Weber, as a young scholar, engaged in the study of history and showed deep concern about social and political problems. But after that time he became more speculative and went into a new phase of his scholatic life. He speculated on methodology and epistemology. In his methodological papers published later, he developed the theory of ideal type and rejection of value judgements. According to Weber, social science is the science of reality. We seek to understand the natures of reality of life: on the one hand we want to understand the realtions of individual social phenomena and their cultural meanings, on the other hand we want to clarify the bases of these relations. Therefore his scientific attitude is similar to that of Rickert, who maintains that cultural science can only be verified by historical and individual approach, and natural science by universal method. In his contribution to scientific methodology, Gesammehe Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre (1920), he argues that the cultural phenomena are relevant only when we evaluate them on a certain cirterion and that human behaviors are different in nature from natural sciences because systematic understanding and valuations play a decisive role. When we are to study social phenomena we facea great number of raw materials and we select from those materials what are relevant from the view point of a ceratin cultural value (Wertgesichtpunkt), i.e., we can construct sociological knowledge only on a certain premise. Karl Mannheim's perspectivism, Sprott's value climate, and Merton's cognitive orientations are also similar to Weber's concept. Weber's value method in social sciences is different in economics from the methodology of clasical economists and of Austrian School, who pursues in economics universal laws as in natural sciences. In such methodology all individualities are rejected as accidental. By this method Carl Menger, the founder of Austrian School, developed his marginal utility theory. Weber thought that such method of natural sciences was not relevant to social sciences. Furthermore, to interprete social system by psycholgical laws is to reverse the logical order. The German Historical Method School is the product of reaction to such a naturalistic monism. But this school has contradictions in itself. This school pursue to understand the historical reality by universal laws, i.e., by stages of development which are valid in any case. Weber thought that this method cannot achieve its desired end. The methods of classical school and Austrian School are too theoretical; and that of historical school is too empirical; therefore the two must be combined. Weber sought to combine theory and history so as to develop the concept of ideal types (Idealtypus) From the various matherials of historical and social phenomena, we select important factors and constitute with them a body of thought by induction, Weber calls this body of thought which is consistent in itself, ideal type. In reality ideal type is nowhere and has a nature of utopia. This body, which is not a piuture of reality, is different from reality. The value of ideal type, which is a mean to test the reality, is depend upon whether it can effectively elucidate the relations of real phenomena, causality and meanings of concrete social facts. Ideal type is different from the concep

목차

Ⅰ

Ⅱ

Ⅲ