Weber's social philosophy. Sociological theories M

According to Weber, social actions constitute a system of conscious, meaningful interaction of people, in which each person takes into account the influence of their actions on other people and their response to ϶ᴛᴏ. A sociologist, on the other hand, must understand not only the content, but also the motives of people's actions based on certain spiritual values. In other words, it is extremely important to comprehend and understand the content of the spiritual world of the subjects of social action.
It is worth noting that, having comprehended ϶ᴛᴏ, sociology acts as an understanding one.

In his “understanding sociology”, Weber proceeds from the fact that understanding of social actions and the inner world of subjects can be both logical, meaningful with the help of concepts, and purely emotional and psychological. In the latter case, understanding is achieved by "feeling", "getting used to" the sociologist in the inner world of the subject of social action. It is worth noting that he calls this process empathy. Both levels of understanding of social actions, from which the social life of people is formed, play a role. At the same time, according to Weber, it is more important to have a logical understanding of social processes, their understanding at the level of science. He characterized their comprehension by "feeling" as an auxiliary method of research.

From one point of view, exploring the spiritual world of the subjects of social action, Weber could not get around the problem of values, incl. moral, political, aesthetic, religious ( we are talking first of all, about understanding people's conscious attitudes towards these values, which determine the content and direction of their behavior and activities) On the other hand, a sociologist or social philosopher himself proceeds from a certain system of values. This he must take into account in the course of his research.

M. Weber proposed a ϲʙᴏe solution to the problem of values. Unlike Rickert and other neo-Kantians, who regard the above values as something supra-historical. eternal and otherworldly, Weber interprets value as “the setting of this or that historical epoch”, as “the direction of interest characteristic of the epoch”. In other words, he emphasizes the earthly, socio-historical nature of values. This is important for a realistic explanation of people's consciousness, their social behavior and activities. Material published on http: // site

It should not be forgotten that the concept of ideal types occupies the most important place in Weber's social philosophy. Under the ideal type, he meant a certain ideal model of what is most useful to a person, objectively meets his interests at the moment and in general in the modern era. In ϶ᴛᴏ, moral, political, religious and other values, as well as the attitudes of people's behavior and activities, rules and norms of behavior, and traditions that follow from them, can act as ideal types.

Weber's ideal types characterize, as it were, the essence of optimal social states - states of power, interpersonal communication, individual and group consciousness. By virtue of ϶ᴛᴏgo, they act as ϲʙᴏlike guidelines and criteria, based on which it is extremely important to make changes in the spiritual, political and material life of people. Since the ideal type does not completely coincide with what is in society, and often contradicts the actual state of things (or the latter contradicts it), according to Weber, it carries the features of a utopia.

And yet, ideal types, expressing in its interconnection a system of spiritual and other values, act as socially significant phenomena. It is worth noting that they contribute to the introduction of expediency in the thinking and behavior of people and organization in public life. Weber's doctrine of ideal types serves for his followers as a kind of methodological setting for understanding social life and solving practical problems related, in particular, to the ordering and organization of the elements of spiritual, material and political life.

Weber was based on the fact that in the historical process the degree of meaningfulness and rationality of people's actions grows.
It is worth noting that especially ϶ᴛᴏ is seen in the development of capitalism. “The way of managing the economy is being rationalized, management is being rationalized both in the field of economics and in the field of politics, science, culture - in all spheres of social life; the way people think is rationalized, as well as the way they feel and the way of life in general. All ϶ᴛᴏ is accompanied by a colossal strengthening of the social role of science, which, according to Weber, is the purest embodiment of the principle of rationality.

Weber considered the legal state to be the embodiment of rationality, the functioning of which is entirely based on the rational interaction of the interests of citizens, obedience to the law, as well as generally valid political and moral values.

Without ignoring other forms of cognition of social reality, Weber preferred its scientific analysis. This applies primarily to economic and political phenomena and processes. It is worth noting that he was based on the fact that “a sign of scientific knowledge will be the objective significance of its conclusions, i.e. truth." From the standpoint of truth, Weber believes, a person's worldview is connected with "the interests of his class."

Not being a supporter materialistic understanding history, Weber to some extent appreciated Marxism, but opposed its simplification and dogmatization. It is worth noting that he narrated that "the analysis of social phenomena and cultural processes from the angle of their economic conditionality and their influence was and - if applied carefully, ϲʙᴏ free from dogmatism - will remain for the foreseeable future a creative and fruitful scientific principle" . Such is the conclusion of this broad and deep-thinking philosopher and sociologist, which he made in a work under the remarkable title "The 'Objectivity' of Social-Scientific and Socio-Political Knowledge."

As can be seen, Max Weber dealt with a wide range of problems in social philosophy in his writings. The current revival of interest in his teachings is due to his profound judgments about the solution of complex social problems that concern us today.

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Federal Agency for Education GOU VPO

All-Russian Correspondence Institute of Finance and Economics

Department of Philosophy

Department of Philosophy

Faculty of Management and Marketing

TEST

in the discipline "PHILOSOPHY"

Topic: « Philosophical and sociological
views of M. Weber»

Option number 5

Completed: 2nd year student

Speciality:

Organisation management

Max Weber (1864 - 1920) - German sociologist, social philosopher, culturologist and historian. It can be safely called the Leonardo da Vinci of philosophy and sociology. His basic theories today form the foundation of sociology: the doctrine of social action and motivation, the social division of labor, alienation, the profession as a vocation.

The achievements of Max Weber are simply impossible to enumerate, they are so huge. In the field of methodology, one of his most important achievements is the introduction of ideal types. M. Weber believed that the main goal of sociology is to make as clear as possible what was not such in reality itself, to reveal the meaning of what was experienced, even if this meaning was not realized by the people themselves. Ideal types make it possible to make historical or social material more meaningful than it was in the actual experience of real life.

Weber's ideas permeate the entire structure of modern sociology, forming its foundation. The creative heritage of Max Weber is huge. He contributed to the theory and methodology, laid the foundations for the branches of sociology: bureaucracy, religion, city and labor.

M. Weber himself created many scientific works, including: "Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism" (1904-1905), "Economy and Society" (1921), "Objectivity of Social-Scientific and Socio-Political Knowledge" (1904), "Critical Studies in the Logic of Cultural Sciences" (1906), "On the Categories of Understanding Sociology" (1913), "Basic Sociological Concepts".

Thanks to Max Weber and his colleagues, the German school dominated world sociology until the First World War.

In the term "understanding" Weber puts his own special meaning. This is a rational procedure for studying the actions of social actors (micro level), and through them - studying the culture of a particular society (macro level). As you can see, Weber was a supporter of social nominalism. Nominalism is a theoretical and methodological orientation, suggesting that the nature of individuals, their actions, ultimately determines the essence of society. One of the central points of Weber's theory was the selection by him of an elementary particle of the individual's behavior in society - social action, which is the cause and effect of a system of complex relationships between people.

According to the philosopher, the analysis and typification of people's social actions is the main subject of philosophy. However, not every behavioral act of an individual can be considered a social action. Human action acquires the character of social action if it contains two fundamental points:

1. Subjective motivation of an individual who puts a certain meaning into his act;

2. Orientation to the behavior of other people.

Weber notes: “We call an action a person’s action (regardless of whether it is external or internal, whether it comes down to non-intervention or patient acceptance), if and insofar as the acting individual or individuals associate a subjective meaning with it. “Social” we call such an action, which, according to the meaning assumed by the actor or actors, correlates with the action of other people and is oriented towards it.

It follows from the definition that an action that a person does not think about is not a social action. So, an unintentional fall of a person or an involuntary cry of pain cannot be attributed to social action, because they simply lack a thought process. An action in which a person simply does not see a real purpose is not a social action. So, unintentional or unconscious participation of a person in one or another gathering, campaign, political action cannot be attributed to social action, because in this case there is no thought process and consciously purposeful activity.

The philosopher did not consider actions to be social if they were purely imitative, when individuals are guided by some natural phenomenon (opening umbrellas by many people during the rain) or when they act like crowd atoms, which is characteristic of reactive behavior (behavior as a reaction to a certain stimulus e.g. "danger").

Emotional outpourings, involuntary cries, manifestations of joy from meetings with heroes and leaders, or outbursts of anger against "enemies" also cannot be attributed to social actions, because they simply do not have an active rational principle as a person's ability to reflect and comprehend the world without distorting its real content. excitement or fear.

The action is not social, and if it does not affect the interests of other people, it remains unnoticed by them. An example of this is Manilovism, a dreamy-inactive attitude to the environment, which, as Gogol showed in Dead Souls, is very typical for many Russians, who probably do not even realize this.

Another important remark that Weber makes is that the subject of his concept is the actions of individuals, not collectives. When using the concepts of state, corporation, family, military unit, etc., one should keep in mind that these and other social structures are not in themselves subjects of social action. Therefore, from the point of view of Weber, it is impossible, for example, to understand the action of a parliament or a presidential administration, a firm or a family, but one can and should strive to interpret the actions of the individuals that make them up.

Weber identified four types of social actions of individuals, which differed in the degree of rationality present in them. It goes without saying that in reality a person does not always know what he wants. Sometimes people's behavior is dominated by some value orientations or just emotions. Focusing on the possible real behavior of people in life, Weber identifies the following types of action:

1. Purposeful;

2. Value-rational;

3. Affective;

4. Traditional.

Let us turn to Weber himself: “Social action, like any other behavior, can be:

1. Purposeful, if it is based on the expectation of a certain behavior of objects outside world and other people and the use of this expectation as "conditions" or "means" to achieve their rationally set and considered goal;

2. Value-rational, based on faith in the unconditional - aesthetic, religious or any other - self-sufficient value of a certain behavior as such, regardless of what it leads to;

3. Affective, primarily emotional, that is, due to affects or the emotional state of the individual;

4. Traditional, that is, based on a long habit.

From this classification it follows that there can be a social action in which the meaning of the action and the meaning of the actor coincide, in which there is a clearly expressed goal and meaningful means adequate to it. Such an action was designated by the philosopher as a goal-rational action. In it, both of the above points coincide: to understand the meaning of an action means to understand the actor and vice versa.

An example of goal-oriented actions can be the behavior of people who consciously make a political career and make their own decisions. In such behavior there is a meaning of actions that is understandable to others, prompting the latter to take adequate independent acts that also have meaning and purpose. Purposeful actions can include the behavior of a student who wants to get an education, respectively, aimed at the successful assimilation of the subjects studied.

If, for example, a strong and courageous person, after being hit on one cheek, turned the other, then here we are talking about a value-rational action that can be understood only taking into account the ideas of this person about the values of certain religious dogmas. Value-rational action is based on belief in certain unconditional values, commandments, ideas about goodness and duty. Their absolutization leads to the fact that in such actions a certain component of irrationality inevitably appears. So, if for people the value of their own lives is nothing in comparison with the belief in the unconditional rightness of the leader, the course of the party, for the sake of fulfilling the “infallible predestinations” of which they are ready for deprivation and even self-sacrifice, then they just perform value-rational actions.

Affective actions can be observed quite often in team sports - these or those involuntary, emotional reactions of players. They, as a rule, are determined by the emotional state of a person - passion, love, hatred, etc. Naturally, they go beyond the limits of the conscious, meaningful activity of the individual.

Traditional actions include everyday behavioral acts performed simply out of habit. People behave almost automatically because they have always done it. As a rule, they do not realize why they do this, because they simply adhere to the usual mores and customs. There is almost no goal-setting in such actions, and there is no reflection on the choice of means for their implementation.

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Federal Agency for Education GOU VPO

All-Russian Correspondence Financial and Economic Institute

TOcontrolJob

By discipline: filosophy

Philosophicalsociological views. Weber

Performed: Tarchuk S.S..

Student: 2 well, evening, (2 stream)

Speciality: B/U

no. books: 0 8ubb00978

Teacher: prof.Stepanischev A.F..

Bryansk 2010

Introduction

The object of social philosophy is social life and social processes. Social philosophy is a system of theoretical knowledge about the most general patterns and trends in the interaction of social phenomena, the functioning and development of society, the holistic process of social life.

Social philosophy studies society and social life not only in structural and functional terms, but also in its historical development. Of course, the subject of its consideration is the person himself, taken, however, not “on his own”, not as a separate individual, but as a representative of a social group or community, i.e. in his social network. Social philosophy analyzes the holistic process of changing social life and the development of social systems.

A famous contribution to the development of social philosophy was made by the German thinker Max Weber (1864-1920). In his writings, he developed many ideas of neo-Kantianism, but his views were not limited to these ideas. Weber's philosophical and sociological views were influenced by prominent thinkers of different directions: the neo-Kantian G. Rickert, the founder dialectical materialistic philosophy of K. Marx, as well as such thinkers as N. Machiavelli, T. Hobbes, F. Nietzsche, and many others.

In his control work I will consider "social action theory", "understanding sociology" and the concept of "ideal types".

1. « Theorysocial action "M. Weber

Max Weber is the author of many scientific works, including Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism, Economy and Society, Objectivity of Social-Scientific and Socio-Political Knowledge, Critical Studies in the Logic of Cultural Sciences, About some categories of understanding sociology”, “Basic sociological concepts”.

M. Weber believed that social philosophy, which he characterized as theoretical sociology, should primarily study the behavior and activities of people, whether it be an individual or a group. Hence, the main provisions of his socio-philosophical views fit into the theory of social action. What is social action? “Action,” wrote M. Weber, “should be called human behavior (it doesn’t matter whether it is external or internal action, inaction or undergoing), if and insofar as the acting (or inactive) associates with it some subjective meaning. But "social action" should be called one that, in its meaning, implied by acting or inactive, is related to the behavior of others and this is oriented in its course. Thus, the presence of objective meaning and orientation to others appear in M. Weber as decisive components of social action. Thus, it is clear that only a person or many persons can act as the subject of social action. M. Weber identified four main types of social action: 1) goal-oriented, i.e. through the expectation of a certain behavior of objects of the external world and other people and using this expectation as a "condition" or as a "means" for rationally directed and regulated goals; 2) holistically rational. “i.e. through a conscious belief in the ethical, aesthetic, religious or otherwise understood unconditional own value (self-worth) of a certain behavior, taken simply as such and regardless of success”; 3) affective; 4) traditional, “i.e. through habit.

M. Weber, of course, did not deny the presence in society of various general structures, such as the state, relations, trends, etc. But unlike E. Durkheim, all these social realities are derived from a person, personality, social action of a person.

According to Weber, social actions constitute a system of conscious, meaningful interaction between people, in which each person takes into account the impact of his actions on other people and their response to it. A sociologist, on the other hand, must understand not only the content, but also the motives of people's actions based on certain spiritual values. In other words, it is necessary to comprehend, understand the content of the spiritual world of the subjects of social action. Having comprehended this, sociology appears as understanding.

2. "Understanding sociology" and the conceptmation of "ideal types" M.Weber

In his "understanding sociology" Weber proceeds from the fact that the understanding of social actions and the inner world of subjects can be both logical, that is, meaningful with the help of concepts, and emotional and psychological. In the latter case, understanding is achieved by "feeling", "getting used to" the sociologist in the inner world of the subject of social action. He calls this process empathy. Both levels of understanding of social actions that make up the social life of people play their role. However, more important, according to Weber, is the logical understanding of social processes, their understanding at the level of science. Their comprehension by means of "feeling" he characterized as an auxiliary method of research.

It is clear that, exploring the spiritual world of the subjects of social action, Weber could not get around the problem of values, including moral, political, aesthetic, religious. It is primarily about understanding people's conscious attitudes towards these values, which determine the content and direction of their behavior and activities. On the other hand, the sociologist or social philosopher himself proceeds from a certain system of values. This he must take into account in the course of his research.

M. Weber proposed his own solution to the problem of values. Unlike Rickert and other neo-Kantians, who consider the above values as something supra-historical, eternal and otherworldly, Weber interprets value as “the setting of a particular historical era”, as “a direction of interest characteristic of an era”. In other words, he emphasizes the earthly, socio-historical nature of values. This is important for a realistic explanation of people's consciousness, their social behavior and activities.

The most important place in Weber's social philosophy is occupied by concept of ideal types. Under the ideal type, he meant a certain ideal model of what is most useful to a person, objectively meets his interests at the moment and in general in the modern era. In this regard, moral, political, religious and other values, as well as the attitudes of people's behavior and activities, rules and norms of behavior, and traditions that follow from them, can act as ideal types.

Weber's ideal types characterize, as it were, the essence of optimal social states-states power, interpersonal communication, individual and group consciousness. Because of this, they act as a kind of guidelines and criteria, based on which it is necessary to make changes in the spiritual, political and material life of people. Since the ideal type does not completely coincide with what exists in society and often contradicts the actual state of things, it, according to Weber, carries the features of a utopia.

And yet, ideal types, expressing in their relationship a system of spiritual and other values, act as socially significant phenomena. They contribute to the introduction of expediency in the thinking and behavior of people and organization in public life. Weber's doctrine of ideal types serves for his followers as a kind of methodological setting for understanding social life and solving practical problems related, in particular, to the ordering and organization of the elements of spiritual, material and political life.

3. M. Weber - an apologist for capitalism and bureaucracy

Weber proceeded from the fact that in the historical process the degree of meaningfulness and rationality of people's actions grows. This is especially evident in the development of capitalism.

“The way of managing the economy is being rationalized, management is being rationalized both in the field of economics and in the field of politics, science, culture - in all spheres of social life; the way people think is rationalized, as well as the way they feel and the way of life in general. All this is accompanied by a colossal strengthening of the social role of science, which, according to Weber, is the purest embodiment of the principle of rationality.

Weber considered the rule-of-law state to be the embodiment of rationality, the functioning of which is entirely based on the rational interaction of the interests of citizens, obedience to the law, as well as on generally significant political and moral values.

From the point of view of purposeful rational action, M. Weber gave a comprehensive analysis of the economy of a capitalist society. He paid special attention to the relationship between the ethical code of the Protestant religions and the spirit of capitalist economic management and lifestyle (“Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism”, 1904-1905), Protestantism stimulated the formation of the capitalist economy. He also considered the connection between the economics of rational law and management. M. Weber put forward the idea of a rational bureaucracy, representing the highest embodiment of capitalist rationality (“Economy and Society”, 1921). M. Weber argued with K. Marx, considering it impossible to build socialism.

Not being a supporter of a materialistic understanding of history, Weber to some extent appreciated Marxism, but opposed its simplification and dogmatization.

He wrote that " analysis of social phenomena and cultural processes from the point of view of their economic conditionality and their influence, was and - with careful, dogmatism-free application - will remain for the foreseeable future a creative and fruitful scientific principle.

This is the conclusion of this broad and deep-thinking philosopher and sociologist, which he made in a work under the remarkable title "The Objectivity of Social-Scientific and Socio-Political Knowledge".

As you can see, Max Weber dealt with a wide range of problems of social philosophy in his writings. The current revival of his teaching is because he made profound judgments about the solution of complex social problems that concern us today.

To say that capitalism could have appeared in the few decades it took countries for a rapid revival means to understand nothing in the basics of sociology. Culture and traditions cannot change so quickly.

Then it remains to draw two conclusions: either the reason for the capitalist rise is, contrary to Weber's opinion, economic factors, or, as Weber thought, cultural and religious, but not Protestantism at all. Or, to put it more strictly, not only Protestantism. But even this conclusion will clearly diverge from Weber's teaching.

Conclusion

It is possible that a deeper reading of texts on economic sociology by M. Weber will help to better understand many practical matters that are now facing Russia, which is undoubtedly undergoing a stage of modernization. Is Russia's traditional culture capable of coexisting with pro-Western models of technological renewal and economic models of reform? Are there any direct analogues of Protestant ethics in our country, and are they really necessary for successful progress along the path of reforms? These and many other questions are being asked today; perhaps they will rise tomorrow, or perhaps they will never be removed from the agenda. How, perhaps, the teaching of M. Weber will never lose its cognitive value.

From all the work, we can conclude that the role of social philosophy is to identify among the mass of facts of history the main, defining and show patterns and trends in the development of historical events and social systems.

Bibliography

1. Barulin V.S. Social Philosophy: Textbook - ed. 2nd - M.: FAIR-PRESS, 1999-560s.

2. Kravchenko A.I. Sociology of Max Weber: Labor and Economics. - M .: "On the Sparrows", 1997-208s.

3. Spirkin A.G. Philosophy: Textbook - 2nd ed. - M .: Gardariki, 2002-736s.

4. Philosophy: Textbook / Ed. prof. V.N. Lavrinenko, prof. V.P. Ratnikova - 4th ed., add. and reworked. - M.: UNITY-DANA, 2008-735s.

5. Philosophy: Textbook for universities / Ed. prof. V.N. Lavrinenko, prof. V.P. Ratnikova.- M.: Culture and sport, UNITI, 1998.- 584p.

6. Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: INFRA-M, 2000 - 576s.

A notable contribution to the development of social philosophy was made by the German thinker Max Weber (1864-1920). In his writings, he developed many ideas of neo-Kantianism, but his views were not limited to these ideas. Weber's philosophical and sociological views were influenced by prominent thinkers from various directions. Among them are the neo-Kantian G. Rickert, the founder of the dialectical materialist philosophy K. Marx, such thinkers as N. Machiavelli, T. Hobbes, F. Nietzsche and many others. Weber himself created many scientific works, including: "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism", "Economy and Society", "The Objectivity of Social-Scientific and Socio-Political Knowledge", "Critical Studies in the Logic of Cultural Sciences)". "On Some Categories of Understanding Sociology", "Basic Sociological Concepts".

In his “understanding sociology”, Weber proceeds from the fact that understanding of social actions and the inner world of subjects can be both logical, meaningful with the help of concepts, and purely emotional and psychological. In the latter case, understanding is achieved by "feeling", "getting used to" the sociologist in the inner world of the subject of social action. He calls this process empathy. Both levels of understanding of social actions that make up the social life of people play their role. However, more important, according to Weber, is the logical understanding of social processes, their understanding at the level of science. He characterized their comprehension by "feeling" as an auxiliary method of research.

On the one hand, while exploring the spiritual world of the subjects of social action, Weber could not avoid the problem of values, including moral, political, aesthetic, activities). On the other hand, the sociologist or social philosopher himself proceeds from a certain system of values. This he must take into account in the course of his research.

M. Weber proposed his own solution to the problem of values. Unlike Rickert and other neo-Kantians, who consider the above values as something suprahistorical, eternal and otherworldly, Weber interprets value as “the setting of this or that historical epoch”, as “the direction of interest characteristic of the epoch”. In other words, he emphasizes the earthly, socio-historical nature of values. This is important for a realistic explanation of people's consciousness, their social behavior and activities.

The most important place in Weber's social philosophy is occupied by the concept of ideal types. Under the ideal type, he meant a certain ideal model of what is most useful to a person, objectively meets his interests at the moment and in general in the modern era. In this regard, moral, political, religious and other values, as well as the attitudes of people's behavior and activities, rules and norms of behavior, and traditions that follow from them, can act as ideal types.

Weber's ideal types characterize, as it were, the essence of optimal social states - states of power, interpersonal communication, individual and group consciousness. Because of this, they act as a kind of guidelines and criteria, based on which it is necessary to make changes in the spiritual, political and material life of people. Since the ideal type does not completely coincide with what is in society, and often contradicts the actual state of things (or the latter contradicts it), according to Weber, it carries the features of a utopia.

Nevertheless, ideal types, expressing in their relationship a system of spiritual and other values, act as socially significant phenomena. They contribute to the introduction of expediency in the thinking and behavior of people and organization in public life. Weber's doctrine of ideal types serves for his followers as a kind of methodological setting for understanding social life and solving practical problems related, in particular, to the ordering and organization of the elements of spiritual, material and political life.

Weber proceeded from the fact that in the historical process the degree of meaningfulness and rationality of people's actions grows. This is especially evident in the development of capitalism. “The way of managing the economy is being rationalized, management is being rationalized both in the field of economics and in the field of politics, science, culture - in all spheres of social life; the way people think is rationalized, as well as the way they feel and the way of life in general. All this is accompanied by a colossal strengthening of the social role of science, which, according to Weber, is the purest embodiment of the principle of rationality.

Weber considered the rule of law as the embodiment of rationality, the functioning of which is entirely based on the rational interaction of the interests of citizens, obedience to the law, as well as generally significant political and moral values.

Without ignoring other forms of cognition of social reality, Weber preferred its scientific analysis. This applies primarily to economic and political phenomena and processes. He proceeded from the fact that "a sign of scientific knowledge is the objective significance of its conclusions, i.e. truth" . From a position of truth, Weber believes, a person's worldview is connected with "the interests of his class."

Not being a supporter of a materialistic understanding of history, Weber to some extent appreciated Marxism, but opposed its simplification and dogmatization. He wrote that "the analysis of social phenomena and cultural processes from the perspective of their economic conditionality and their influence was and - if applied carefully, free from dogmatism - will remain for the foreseeable future a creative and fruitful scientific principle" . This is the conclusion of this broad and deep-thinking philosopher and sociologist, which he made in a work under the remarkable title "Objectivity" of socio-scientific and socio-political knowledge.

As you can see, Max Weber dealt with a wide range of problems of social philosophy in his writings. The current revival of interest in his teachings is due to his profound judgments about the solution of complex social problems that concern us today.

In his “understanding sociology”, Weber proceeds from the fact that understanding of social actions and the inner world of subjects can be both logical, meaningful with the help of concepts, and purely emotional and psychological. In the latter case, understanding is achieved by "feeling", "getting used to" the sociologist in the inner world of the subject of social action. He calls this process empathy. Both levels of understanding of social actions that make up the social life of people play their role. However, more important, according to Weber, is the logical understanding of social processes, their understanding at the level of science. He characterized their comprehension by "feeling" as an auxiliary method of research.

Without ignoring other forms of cognition of social reality, Weber preferred its scientific analysis. This applies primarily to economic and political phenomena and processes. He proceeded from the fact that "a sign of scientific knowledge is the objective significance of its conclusions, i.e. truth." From the position of truth, Weber believes, a person's worldview is connected with the "interests of his class."

Not being a supporter of a materialistic understanding of history, Weber to some extent appreciated Marxism, but opposed its simplification and dogmatization. He wrote that "the analysis of social phenomena and cultural processes from the perspective of their economic conditionality and their influence was and - if applied carefully, free from dogmatism - will remain for the foreseeable future a creative and fruitful scientific principle." This is the conclusion of this broad and deep-thinking philosopher and sociologist, which he made in a work under the remarkable title "The 'Objectivity' of Social-Scientific and Socio-Political Knowledge."