Schutz and Parsons: Debate or dialogue?

Rehorick, David

doi:10.1007/bf02331820

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This translation tends to exclude the "understanding" (Verstehen) side and mistakenly restricts the theme to "causal explanation," which Parsons, as mentioned above, conceived of as one of the goals of developed by pointing out an affinity between Schutz and Parsons (Rehorick, 1980;Jules and Rosette, 1980). 4 Although the section titles are not by Weber but by an editor, they seem to be largely appropriate.…”

Section: Weber and Parsonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Various modes of the foundation for Sociology: Weber, Parsons, and Schutz

Nasu

2017

Civitas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The foundation for Max Weber's verstehende Soziologie provided by himself was sufficient for him to deal with his concrete sociological problems. It appeared, however, to be insufficient for Alfred Schutz as well as for Talcott Parsons, in spite of their appreciating Weber's ideas of this sociology as such. Schutz criticized that Weber made little clarification of the fundamental layers of his primary concepts, whereas Parsons criticized Weber's tendency "to obscure the role of the essentially nonfictional generalized system of theory." What does this difference among them means? This essay tries to make an answer to this question through comparing Weber and Parsons, Weber and Schutz, and Schutz and Parsons by focusing mainly on the concepts of "Verstehen" (understanding), "action" and "subjective meaning." Such a comparative investigation is expected to shed light on contributions of phenomenology to sociology.Keywords: Action. Verstehen. Understanding. Subjective meaning. Project. Resumo: A fundamentação de verstehende Soziologie apresentada pelo próprio MaxWeber 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.Palavras-chave: Ação. Verstehen. Compreensão. Significado subjetivo. Projeto.

show abstract

Section: Weber and Parsonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Various modes of the foundation for Sociology: Weber, Parsons, and Schutz

Nasu

2017

Civitas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Contemporary Sociology (Coser, 1979;Giddens, 1979;and Wagner, 1979) and in Human Studies (Embree, 1980;Jules-Rosette, 1980;Rehorick, 1980;Tibbetts, 1980;Valone, 1980;and Wagner, 1980). 2.…”

Section: The English Version Of the Debate Was The Subject Of Review mentioning

confidence: 99%

Academic dispute or clash of commitments?: The Schutz-Parsons exchange reconsidered

Buxton

1994

Hum Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…'''; he wrote, ''If I accept your statement in place of my own formulations which you criticize, what difference would it make in the interpretation of any one of the empirical problems that run through the book' ' (p. 67, original emphasis). The dialogue between the two stopped long before Schutz died in 1959, 1 but discussions of the debate continued (Coser 1979;Giddens 1979;Wagner 1979;Embree 1980;Tibbetts1980;JulesRosette 1980;Rehorick 1980;Nasu 2005;Wilson 2005). However, these discussions have not distilled any methodological implications for sociologists that could inform their empirical investigations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Understanding the Subjective Point of View: Methodological Implications of the Schutz-Parsons Debate

2008

Hum Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Schutz and Parsons: Debate or dialogue?

Cited by 11 publications

References 3 publications

Various modes of the foundation for Sociology: Weber, Parsons, and Schutz

Various modes of the foundation for Sociology: Weber, Parsons, and Schutz

Academic dispute or clash of commitments?: The Schutz-Parsons exchange reconsidered

Understanding the Subjective Point of View: Methodological Implications of the Schutz-Parsons Debate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About