His father died inand the family relocated to Naumburg, where he grew up in a household comprising his mother, grandmother, two aunts, and his younger sister, Elisabeth. Nietzsche had a brilliant school and university career, culminating in May when he was called to a chair in classical philology at Basel. At age 24, he was the youngest ever appointed to that post. Before the opportunity at Basel arose, Nietzsche had planned to pursue a second Ph.
Indeed, Dahrendorf leaves unclear exactly what Weber's view of objectivity was. More specifically, Dahrendorf does not venture to lay out a detailed explanation of whether Weber believed that the social scientist could eliminate the influence of values from the analysis of facts.
Did Weber believe that, even though facts are one thing and values another, social and economic facts could be evaluated without the analysis being influenced by values? And what is the relation of objectivity to values? Could objectivity, for instance, be used to show that one value is superior to another?
Or does objectivity apply only to the analysis of facts? Do one's values or perspective stem from human nature, metaphysical views, personal identity, or is it just as likely that they are a mere construct of culture?
These questions, and others like them, underlie much that has been considered ambiguous in Max Weber's writings: Since his death, sociologists and political scientists have been disputing where Weber stood with regard to questions concerning the relationship of objectivity to facts and values.
This essay has more humble ambitions. Although it takes issue in the final section with part of the exhaustive view laid out by Portis, this essay does not purport to set forth yet another definitive interpretation of Weber's views on objectivity. Rather it seeks to shed light on Weber's view of the applicability of objectivity by attempting to answer the overarching question that sits at the foundation of those posed above: Was Weber an advocate of value-free social science?
The answer, as will be shown, is both yes and no -- because, this essay will argue, Weber maintained a two-tiered approach to value-free social science. On the one hand, he believed that ultimate values could not be justified "scientifically," that is, through value-free analysis.
Thus, in comparing different religious, Friedrich nietzsche second essay or social systems, one system could Friedrich nietzsche second essay be chosen over another without taking a value or end into consideration; the choice would necessarily be dictated by the analyst's values.
On the other hand, Weber believed that once a value, end, purpose, or perspective had been established, then a social scientist could conduct a value-free investigation into the most effective means within a system of bringing about the established end. Similarly, Weber believed that objective comparisons among systems could also be made once a particular end had been established, acknowledged, and agreed upon, a position that allowed Weber to make what he considered objective comparisons among such economic systems as capitalism and socialism.
Thus, even though Weber maintained that ultimate values could not be evaluated objectively, this belief did not keep him from believing that social problems could be scientifically resolved -- once a particular end or value had been established.
It is, no doubt, influenced by one of his key concerns: And in yet other essays, it champions individual liberty. Indeed, Weber's perspective changes, and it is likely to be driven not by one value but by levels of them, ranging from humanism to a concrete objective.
But the fact that Weber had a perspective lends little support to the two-tiered interpretation, other than to show that he believed it was permissible for a social scientist to possess a value-determined standpoint. His treatment of perspective is another matter, however.
One hint that begins to shed light on Weber's view on the fact-value question is a characteristic that recurs in several of Weber's essays and speeches: Weber announces, often at the beginning of a speech or essay, the standpoint from which he plans to evaluate a given situation or set of facts.
Likewise, if he changes his focus during a presentation, he often declares the new standpoint. In his opening remarks of "The Nation State and Economic Policy," one of Weber's early speeches, he sets a precedent for this pattern while unveiling a justification for his perspective.
Similarly, in one of his later lectures, "The Profession and Vocation of Politics," Weber tells his audience near the beginning of his remarks that he will expose "the political deficiency of this system An example of the influence of culture upon perspective lies in Weber's comments about political economy.
As soon as the method of analysis known as political economy makes value judgments, Weber says, "it is tied to the particular strain of humankind Menschentum we find within our own nature. The economic policy of a German state, and, equally, the criterion of value used by a German economic theorist, can therefore only be a German policy or criterion.
Regardless of whether a social scientist's value-orientation stems from cultural norms, nationality, or a worldview, what remains certain for Weber is that the value is neither intrinsic to the subject matter nor specific to its context -- a view that categorically separates value from facts.
Weber takes care to refute such views in his discussion of the methodology of political economy in "The Nation State and Economic Policy. The notion that there are independent or socio-political ideals shows itself to be a delusion as soon as one delves into the literature in an attempt to identify the basis for its evaluation, Weber says.
For Weber, it is less important what another analyst's core values are than whether he clarifies them for the benefit of both himself and his audience.
Weber also criticizes those scientists who often "unconsciously allow the starting point for our analyses and explanations of economic events to determine our judgements of these events," 10 demonstrating that he separates the subjectivity of value-orientation from the objective evaluation that is carried out after the value orientation has been established.
In other words, Weber is chastising those scientists who allow the subjectivity of their perspective to determine their analysis of the facts. As examples of the economic scientists who have made this mistake, Weber points to the historical apologists and to the Marxists.
In "The Profession and Vocation of Politics," Weber explicitly articulates how one must look at life from a chosen value: To be "a match for them inwardly" is to cling to one's values even in the face of the inevitable "polar night of icy darkness. Lassman and Speirs, in their introduction to Weber: Political Writings, provide the answer.Friedrich Nietzsche (–) was a German philosopher and cultural critic who published intensively in the s and s.
He is famous for uncompromising criticisms of traditional European morality and religion, as well as of conventional philosophical ideas and social and political pieties associated with modernity.
An essay on Max Weber's view of objectivity in social science, by Steve Hoenisch. + free ebooks online. Did you know that you can help us produce ebooks by proof-reading just one page a day? Go to: Distributed Proofreaders. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (/ ˈ n iː tʃ ə, -tʃ i /; German: [ˈfʁiːdʁɪç ˈvɪlhɛlm ˈniːtʃə] () or [- ˈniːtsʃə]; 15 October – 25 August ) was a German philosopher, cultural critic, composer, poet, philologist, and a Latin and Greek scholar whose work has exerted a profound influence on Western philosophy and modern intellectual history.
Friedrich Nietzsche (—) Nietzsche was a German philosopher, essayist, and cultural critic. His writings on truth, morality, language, aesthetics, cultural theory, history, nihilism, power, consciousness, and the meaning of existence have exerted an enormous influence on Western philosophy and intellectual history.
Nietzsche spoke of "the . Hitler Myths. Originated: 29 May Additions: 29 Sep.
The following provides a brief explanation for some of the most common misconceptions about Adolf Hitler.