INTERPRETIVE UNDERSTANDING MAX WEBER

Interpretive Understanding - Max Weber

Interpretive Understanding Max Weber

Akey part of engaging in sociology is to take up a sociological viewpoint or 'think sociologically'. Etymologically, sociology is the 'study of society' but this doesn't differentiate sociology from other forms of communal study. Hence, many start to describe conceiving sociologically by what it is not - it is not conceiving democratically, conceiving anthropologically, conceiving historic or conceiving psychologically, for example (Berger 1966: 11-36; Reiss 1968: 2-3). Others try to work out the environment of sociological thinking by detailing practical phenomena which can be considered about such as communal schemes and their subschemes, communal organisations and communal structure, and social aggregates, connections, assemblies and organisations (Reiss 1968: 1), or by key mental devices that people who call themselves 'sociologists' use while conceiving, such as continuity, change, action or pattern (Krauss 1980: 12-19). For Levin (1996) thinking sociologically is the human extension of seeing sociologically - observing the social world around us and trying to comprehend it. But these explanations of sociology do not tell us about what Mills (1959) called 'the sociological imagination' - which is the key to thinking sociologically.

Focussing on the concept of 'thinking sociologically' provides a convenient way to grasp the field of sociology. The perspective delineated byC. Wright Mills in his The Sociological Imagination is broadly recognised as a set of key devices in understanding communal phenomena which Willis (1999) expands on. Willis uses Mills to argue that there are four distinct sensitivities that must be used when thinking sociologically - the historical, the cultural, the structural and the critical.

The historical sensitivity is essential as sociology is focused upon the mechanisms of change and the discipline's scope extends to societies of the past and future. Max Weber's work in explaining the nature of authority both in our own and other societies would have been difficult without a sensitivity to history and provides a good example. The cultural sensitivity is fundamental as culture sits at the core of the links between individuals and groups - culture helps to explain the distinctive nature of different groups and societies, and encourages the sociologist to consider the whole rather than the parts. Emile Durkheim's concern of the environment of cultural solidarity provides an example of this sympathy. The concept of structure boosts sociologists to focus upon relationships and communal connections. Marx's partial interpretation for the revolutionary change in his society through the conflict between categories is an example of a structural bend on a sociological problem. And a critical sensitivity, as Mills emphasises, is at the core of the sociological enterprise - to think sociologically is to challenge and test the common sense assumptions about others that surround our daily lives. Critique for Mills was at the core of the sociological imagination on every scale, so I will illustrate this with an example drawn from my own school days. Of course, I am exaggerating each of these examples to draw out a particular aspect of the thinking behind them ...