The Differences Between Simmel And Weber

Max Weber is well known within sociology as one of the founding fathers. He believes that over-generalisation should be avoided as much as possible and we should understand human action, hence ‘social action theory’. Weber contributed four ideal types that should be used to study

Both Simmel and Goffman have greatly contributed to the development of the sociological investigation of human interaction and experiences, they have taken a science that was not easily understood and brought it to the center of attention. While using different methods to ultimately obtain an understanding of how society functions, whether it be on the individual level or the as a group interplay.

Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, and Max Weber were three historical sociologists. Their views have become world renown and have shaped many ways of interpreting the social structure of many modern societies. This essay will take a glimpse into the three sociologists’ ideals and expose the similarities and differences they may have.

Before commencing a discussion on analyzing the article “What makes sociology a different discipline” from the other sciences we should have the know-how about sociology. In the words of modern thinkers of sociology namely Karl Marx, Max Weber and Emile Durkheim “Social fact should be the subject matter for the study of social life and can provide explanations for human thinking and behavior (p19)”. What we infer from the above definition is that man is born as a social animal. Man cannot live alone. He prefers to live in groups and his behavior that is actions and deeds are well governed and regulated by certain rules and laws of conduct that comprises of moral ethics and civic standards. His standard of living is said to be within the

Georg Simmel and George Herbert Mead are famously influential sociologists who made significant contributions to the exploration of society, the construction and established theories of society and the way individual people act within a society. Both of the sociologists were interested in the way that people create the society and the laws used to govern from within. Despite the similarity of the subject studied, the scientist took very different approaches in their research and beliefs. I’ve even heard of them referenced as the “ying and yang of sociology”. Mead is considered the paradigm of symbolic interaction using a pragmatic approach in his research, Simmel focuses on duality and is often referred to as one of the founders of

Two names that are repeatedly mentioned in sociological theory are Karl Marx and Max Weber. In some ways these two intellectuals were similar in the way they looked at society. There are also some striking differences. In order to compare and contrast these two individuals it is necessary to look at each of their ideas. Then a comparison of their views can be illustrated followed by examples of how their perspectives differ from each other.

Beilharz, Peter. 1992b. "Weber", in Social Theory: A Guide to Central Thinkers. Peter Beilharz (ed.). St Leonards: Allen and Unwin.

Seidman worries about the way those sociologists have been developing and communicating their theories of social life because their theories have only reached the attention of “academic theorist” and not the attention of the public. The main problems with the way many sociological theorists conduct their work is that they are losing their role as public educators, which results in the lack of “thoughtful public discussions” (pg.2). After reading Seidmans point of view, I do share his concerns. I think that many of the work that sociological theorist have accomplished have been kept in close doors from the public, but not from people that have the same ideas or interest as them. An advantage of how sociological theory has been conducted is

By explaining the humanistic perspective proposed by him, the author convincingly demonstrates that sociology is more than its methods, such as surveying, or its theories. There are many sociological theories, but they all are part of the fundamental vision of all processes as the effects of human interactions. Berger (1963) often refers to his own experience of being a sociologist, and this adds reliability to his arguments. Also, despite beginning the book in a light and humorous manner, the author further turns to complicated scientific notions and perspectives; this shows his expertise and makes the book’s major thesis more persuasive.

In sociological theory there are many concepts discussed that are utilized in the analyses of society and culture. Some of the main concepts are Postmodernism, Historical Materialism, Structuralism, Interpretive Sociology and Poststructuralism to name a few. These theories are relevant to the research of understanding certain or specific cultural texts. These concepts provide problems and solutions associated with some of the research approaches fore-mentioned. Analysing the main dimensions will be covered by discussing the appropriate concepts separately and by individually contrasting the classical and modern theories with Quentin

Commentators made it apparent on so many occasions that there was no place, patience or understanding for the study of ethnic relations in classical sociological theory (Stone, 1977, 1995; Zubaida, 1978; Berlin, 1992; Guibernau, 1996). It has been constantly and persistently argued that the classics of sociology had very little to say about ethnicity and that even when they made some comments, these were regarded as sporadic and largely irrelevant to their general theories of society. Although ethnic relations were not the primary focus of their analyses all four founding fathers of sociology – Marx, Durkheim, Simmel and Weber – developed coherent and, within their respective theoretical positions, consonant and well articulated theories of

The theoretical works of Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim and Max Weber still influence sociological theory. Though their works are decades old they still are a major part of what sociology is today. Though their theories can seem very different, there are some similarities. To become a great sociologist one most learn and understands how to use all sociological perspectives. To do this one must understand and use the different theoretical perspectives created by Marx, Durkheim, and Weber.

The sociological imagination raises three core questions. Firstly, what is the structure of the society being studied? Secondly, what relevance does its context in history have? And thirdly, how does it influence and shape those within it? (Mills, 1959: 6-7). The consideration of these questions enables the greatest understanding of the relationship between society and an individual’s position and circumstance, and is what makes the concept sociological.

There are a number of different modern social theories regarding the nature of society, social change, human's place within society and the idea of how integration and alienation fit within a modern society. These paradigms combine reflexively into a notion of history. Max Weber was a German politician, scholar, economist, and sociologist. In fact, he founded the modern studies of sociology, public administration, and organizational theory. He was born in 1864 and so was writing and publishing after Marx, but still looking at capitalism, socialism, and the various dictates of society as ways humans are shaped, actualized, and able to have upward mobility. He is most famous for his works surrounding the sociology of religion and government, and how those two institutions shaped, controlled, and contributed to humankind.

Georg Simmel was born in Berlin (Germany) in 1858 and died in 1918. He delivered and then published one of his most famous pieces of work ‘The Metropolis & Mental Life’ in 1903 in New York. Habermas (1996) described Simmel ‘as a critic of culture is in a peculiar way both near to, and far away from us’ (Frisby, Featherstone 1997). Simmel was a well known sociologist, his family was business oriented and Jewish. Weber, Friedrich and Kant (He became interested in the philosophy of his work) all had a key influence on Simmel when he combined all of his ideas together. Massimo Cacciari made a bold claim that ‘the problem of the Metropolis, as a problem of the relation between modern existence and its forms, is the point from which all of Georg Simmel’s Philosophy develops’ (Frisby, D 2013). When Simmel talks about living in the city and what the social structure and economics are like, this is very similar with the analysis Weber uses (Rationalization).