Abstract
***Vários modos de fundamentação para a Sociologia: Weber, Parsons e Schutz***A fundamentação de verstehende Soziologie apresentada pelo próprio Max Weber foi suficiente para que ele pudesse lidar com seus problemas sociológicos concretos. Contudo, pareceu ser insuficiente para Alfred Schutz assim como para Talcott Parsons, a despeito do reconhecimento de ambos em relação às ideias de Weber sobre essa sociologia enquanto tal. Schutz criticou que Weber pouco esclareceu sobre os fundamentos de seus conceitos mais importantes, enquanto Parsons criticou a tendência de Weber “de obscurecer o papel essencialmente não-ficcional do sistema de teoria generalizado”. O que significa a diferença entre eles? Esse artigo tenta dar uma resposta a esta questão comparando Weber e Parsons, Weber e Schutz e Schutz e Parsons, concentrando-se sobretudo nos conceitos de “Verstehen” (compreensão), “ação” e “significado subjetivo”. Com essa análise comparativa espera-se jogar luzes sobre contribuições da fenomenologia para a sociologia.
Highlights
What contribution does phenomenology make to sociology? This is the theme on which this essay will focus
To examine Alfred Schutz’s work intensively in this essay, since he appreciated the so-called “understanding sociology” of Max Weber, and pointed out the limitations of Max Weber’s theoretical work by saying that “as significant as were Weber’s contributions to methodology, [...] just as little did a radical retracing of his results to a firm philosophical foundation concern him, as little as did a clarification of the fundamental layers of the primary concepts he develop
The first is that the foundation of understanding sociology which was considered as insufficient by Schutz was sufficient for Weber
Summary
This is the theme on which this essay will focus It might be reasonable, to examine Alfred Schutz’s work intensively in this essay, since he appreciated the so-called “understanding sociology” (verstehende Soziologie) of Max Weber, and pointed out the limitations of Max Weber’s theoretical work by saying that “as significant as were Weber’s contributions to methodology, [...] just as little did a radical retracing of his results to a firm philosophical foundation concern him, as little as did a clarification of the fundamental layers of the primary concepts he develop. He went on to say that since the purpose of his inquiries in Der sinnhafte Aufbau der sozialen Welt was to analyze the phenomenon of meaning in mundane sociality, it would not be necessary to acquire transcendental experience beyond this, nor to sojourn further in the transcendental phenomenological reduction (Schutz, 1932, p. 129)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
