Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Zeitschrift für Soziologie

Ed. by Auspurg, Katrin / Kalthoff, Herbert / Kurz, Karin / Schnabel, Annette / Schützeichel, Rainer

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.633
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.833

CiteScore 2018: 0.75

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.515
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.781

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 9, Issue 1


Value-Relations and General Theory: Parsons’ Critique of Weber

Peter Lassman
  • Faculty of Commerce and Social Science, The University of Birmingham P.O. Box 363, Birmingham, England, B15 2TT
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2016-05-21 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-1980-0105


Talcott Parsons and Max Weber, despite the complexities and uncertainties of the latter’s work, represent two competing approaches to the nature of sociological theory. Despite his reliance upon many aspects of the work of Weber, Parsons’ critical remarks on the problems of value-relevance and value-neutrality can be interpreted in this light. The methodological views of both theorists are tied to differing views of the development of western society and of the role of the Social Sciences. Both are haunted by the spectre of relativism.

About the article

Published Online: 2016-05-21

Published in Print: 1980-02-01

Citation Information: Zeitschrift für Soziologie, Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages 100–111, ISSN (Online) 2366-0325, ISSN (Print) 0340-1804, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-1980-0105.

Export Citation

© 1980 by Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart.

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Irmhild Saake and Armin Nassehi
Berliner Journal für Soziologie, 2004, Volume 14, Number 4, Page 503
Peter Ghosh
European Journal of Sociology, 1994, Volume 35, Number 01, Page 104

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in