Since the Enlightenment, public scientists tried out to use philosophical ideas to comprehend the social world, and one of the principles is epistemology which means the analysis of knowledge. Above this, there are two unique techniques, positivism and interpretivism. The first one targets objective knowledge, as common truth of the interpersonal world, that is to say knowledge be gained through observation. The present day academic self-control of sociology began with the studying of Emile Durkheim, who's an extremely important French sociologist and the founding daddy of positivism. He described the interpersonal sciences are a rational extension of the natural sciences in to the land of human being tendencies, and insisted that they may keep carefully the same objectivity, rationalism, and method of causality(Wacquant, 1992). The other way called interpretivism, which is also called antipositivism. As opposed to positivism, interpretivism targets subjective knowledge, this means that knowledge is built in the mind, and affected by personal experience. Furthermore, studying humans' subjective encounters may cause the obtainment of knowledge. Potential Weber was an integral proponent of interpretivism, arguing for the analysis of interpersonal action through interpretive ways, predicated on understanding the reason and meaning that individuals put on their own actions (Macionis, 2012). Above these two founding fathers of sociology, the ideas and methods are relatively different. Therefore, this essay will account the comparison and contact about their theories and methods to make a better understanding. Finally, there are four sections in this paper, section one and two will identify the detailed ideas and methods supported by Durkheim and Weber respectively. The comparisons and the contacts will in section 3.
Emile Durkheim's theory and method
Auguste Comte effectively wanted to extend and apply the clinical method within the natural sciences to the communal sciences, this sociological positivism affect on Durkheim's thought (Calhoun, 2002). According to Comte, two of ideas are developed by Durkheim which can be social simple fact and suicide method.
2. 1 Friendly Fact
"A social fact is every way of acting, fixed or not, with the capacity of exercising on the average person an external constraint; or again, every way of acting which is basic within a given culture, while at exactly the same time existing in its right self-employed of its specific manifestations"(Durkheim, 1895, pp. 13). For Durkheim, sociology was the research of communal facts. By meaning, social fact is that social set ups that exist separately of the average person. In this theory, the main element point is public structures which include institutions, traditions and beliefs, and habits of tendencies (Dictionary of the Communal Sciences). Durkheim's work for this, and argued that "a cultural fact must be looked for one of the antecedent communal facts rather than among the says of the individual consciousness" (Durkheim, 1895, pp. 13). That is to say, social fact is an independent lifestyle greater and more objective than the activities of the individuals that combine modern culture. Though such review, sociology could determine whether a given world is 'healthy' or 'pathological', and seek interpersonal reform to negate organic break down. In his review social simple truth is not add up to social sensation, the studying of social happening is not really a person's subjective activity, but it is a kind of objective lifetime, and the communal fact once happens, it'll affect the individuals in world.
2. 2 Suicide method
Durkheim also attempted to discover whether human action was caused by social set ups, rather than an individual's mental formal. Among his researches, his seminal monograph, Suicide (1897), was shared. In Suicide (1897), Durkheim explores the various suicide rates among Protestants and Catholics, speaking about that stronger sociable control like Catholics lead to lessen suicide rates. As Durkheim's researcher, Catholic contemporary society has normal levels while Protestant society has low levels. Overall, suicide rates aren't brought on by non-social factors, such as competition, genetics, mental disorder, climate, season of the entire year, in addition, suicide rates are induced by social factors, such as religious faith, marital position, employment, and immediate change in income (Calhoun, 2002). Thus Durkheim cared for suicide as a sociable fact, detailing there are specific things like 'public facts' that impact an individual's behavior. In Durkheim's though, suicide isn't only the assortment of personal habit, it gets the feature model of this trend. In soul of its constraints, Durkheim's studying on suicide has influenced supporters of control theory, and yes it is often meant as a classic sociological study. The theory founded modern positivism and served to decide social science from psychology and political idea (Poggi, 2000).
2. 3 Method using
With positivism, social scientists started to 'transfer' or acquire views, assumptions and ways of research from physics, chemistry, and specifically anatomy. Within the strategy, Durkheim also developed the functional examination of sociological research rules. In his book, Guidelines of the Sociological Method (1895), whenever a world is unchanging it could be affirmed to be healthy and normal; whenever a society is within opposition maybe it's understood as unnatural. This description is similar as anatomy, when all the structures in the body are healthy, the body is healthy and normal; when one organ can not work, the whole is affected and its behaviour is irregular. In addition, analysts would need to exclude the mental factors, moral view, and prejudices disturbance, and stand on the standpoint of neutrality. From your social fact with stability, the description of the sensation is technological (Allan, 2005).
Max Weber's theory and method
Different from Durkheim, the key theory is named "Verstehen " which is the interpretive understanding of social action, and though this learning, 'ideal types is the primary method Weber used.
3. 1 Verstehen
Verstehen is a German phrase; generally speaking it is the situation of German school of thought and interpersonal sciences. Verstehen requires an understanding of what someone is considering, which needs an understanding of the culture that folks reside in. Weber thought of sociology as a research of social action. He believed that studying why individuals do the items they are doing is the essential basis of sociology, this is actually the strategy he termed Verstehen. In addition, He argued that sociologists should not only study an organization of people but also make an effort to improve an empathetic understanding for the individuals for the reason that group (Udehn, 2001). There is a key phrase which is "put yourself in his shoes". This is the same as what Verstehen explain: developing a knowledge of interpersonal action from the insider's viewpoint in order to raised understand the exchanges within an organization and the group's willpower. This, subsequently, helps to explain how groups of men and women make sense of the world around them, how they fit into society all together, and exactly how they've helped culture evolve over time(Udehn, 2001). Weber put value to understanding and meaning of key elements - not only with notion or account with the individual but also the creation of "systematic and thorough research". The goal is to identify human action and understanding them as observable events leading us to assume that it not only provides for a great reason for human habit but also for group interactions. This is attached must include constraints and limitations and assess the motivation for action. Weber thought that this gives the sociologist an advantage above a natural scientist because "We are able to accomplish something which is never attainable in the natural sciences, particularly the subjective knowledge of the action of the component individuals" (Weber, 1968, p. 15).
3. 2 Method using
One of the techniques Weber used to review his items of analysis was 'ideal types'. This means an abstract synopsis of the normal features of intricate social phenomena. For Weber, among the many subjective principles which certainly discriminate sociology from natural technology is social research depends on the engineering of hypothetical ideas in the abstract. Therefore, ideal type is a subjective department in interpersonal theory. Weber published: "A perfect type is developed by the one-sided accentuation of one or more points of view and by the synthesis of a great many diffuse, discrete, pretty much present and sometimes absent concrete specific phenomena, that happen to be arranged according to people one-sidedly emphasized viewpoints into a unified analytical build. . . " (Shils& Finch, 1997). While opposition supporters of the ideal type including normal type theory followers. Some sociologists consider that, ideal type more prone to extreme phenomena and ignore the interconnection, it is difficult to display how the kinds and the elements in to the whole sociable system theory.
The comparisons and the contacts
On the basis of theoretical track record and the reasonable starting point, Durkheim and Weber inherited and developed the original sociable theory of two methods in the analysis: positivism and interpretivism, and laid the essential methodology figure for future decades of sociological research.
Durkheim treated social facts as its research objection of sociology. In comparison to Weber's public action, is the macro level. From this point Durkheim's theory of modern culture is existent, while Webb argues that only individuals exist, only explain the knowledge of human sociable action, understand the meaning behind, and finally makes a causal reason. This is actually the whole process of sociological research.
Durkheim's sociology theory is positivism. It used the objectivity of interpersonal facts as the thing of research, and thought society and dynamics are identical in dynamics. As the objective necessity of domination, contemporary society and natural phenomena will be the same, which establishes its research methods can be used the empirical research method in the natural sciences, through observation, such as tests, comparisons, and test methods (Durkheim, 1895, pp. 13). Weber's sociological understanding to communal action is identical to the research thing, and argued that the method of natural technology in special impact is difficult to apply social research research, it cannot make clear human action with subjective meaning hidden behind the value and relevance (Weber, 1968, p. 15). Weber thought that researchers should concentrate on experience, at the same time, putting on the same at the mercy of each other's as their own thinking and analysis, its distinctive feature is the sentiment in the considering object and thinking process type. Therefore, research workers make an acceptable explanation about cultural fact though changing the role the subjective motives of others' communal action.
But the analysis method of Weber and Durkheim's theory still has something in common. In a sense, Weber thought methods in cultural science research should build the ideal type (Shils& Finch, 1997). He noticed that the research object of public technology has unique characteristics and subjective, and when experts want to keep carefully the total objectivity is not a fairly easy job. Ideal type identifies a series idea system in sociological research where scholars generally known and accepted, so that it can reduce or even all the sociological research of arbitrariness and disunity. Research workers in research techniques must keep value objectively themselves, and eliminate their additional effect and involvement on the thing of study. In the same way, Durkheim also emphasized that the actual fact more important than the conception; the living precedes the substance; and observation of the phenomenon should be taken away the subjective sentiment (Allan, 2005). .
Above all, the public fact and communal action are two different sized concepts, that can be said a romance between containing and being covered. That is to say, Weber's social action is more specific than Durkheim's communal fact. Because interpersonal facts and macroscopic reasons, Durkheim research object in the idea of sociology is the objective life. But Weber's public knowledge research should be specific, specific existence, it will be in the contemporary society of individuals action as the research object, to describe the knowledge of it, and to know the "secret" the covered behind the specific social action, in order to make the causality of the final paper. Weber will provide two major responsibilities of sociology as the explanatory understanding and causality of cultural action description. In this way, both major factions in public technology research -- positivism and interpretivism, make variations between progressively bigger, thus it triggered the contradiction between both sides.
Conclusion
In final result, this essay referred to and examined Durkheim's and Weber's ideas and methods. Both of these played important tasks in social research history, plus they have big impact on social knowledge. Their ideas and methods are researched and employed by many scholars. After contrast, maybe it's seen that their ideas about interpersonal science are very different. Durkheim's theories based on positivism. It used the objectivity of sociable facts as the thing of research, and thought contemporary society and mother nature are similar in dynamics.
Durkheim thought that buildings that exist separately of the individual.
Weber's theories predicated on individuals' existence, he only described the understanding of human sociable action, understood this is behind, and lastly made a causal reason. Weber thought that verstehen requires an understanding of what someone is thinking, which needs an understanding of the culture that person lives in. But, the comparison of the ideas is the fact that the study approach to Weber and Durkheim's theory still has something in common.
The difference of public research methods found by the two fathers cannot say which is way better, because both of them in the field of social science had gained the success that seduced worldwide attention, and each method found a reasonable breakthrough for sociological research. As a result of this differences, making the social knowledge research shows a kind of mutual opposition and common encouragement and supplement of the state. Society knowledge research is infinite in the future, each historical giant higher later is through the shoulder blades of giants before. But interpersonal science research is still arduous task, cultural scientist should summarize the knowledge of the previous step-by-step, to be able to continuous the development and progress of science which is a heavy and significant subject to population.
