ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to

my Sociology Generic Teacher, Professor Namrata
Basu, whose valuable guidance has been the one that
had helped me to patch this assignment on time and
make it success. Her instructions and suggestions have
served as the major contributor towards the completion
of the project.
I would like to thank God for giving me the spiritual
guidance till the end of this assignment. Then I would
like to thank my parents and classmates who have
helped me with their valuable suggestions and guidance
which have been helpful in various ways for the
completion of the assignment.

Sannita Datta
Dept. Of Psychology (Hons.)
Gokhale Memorial Girls' College.
 INDEX

SL. NO CONTENTS PAGE NO.

1. Introduction 1-2

2. Concept of 3-6
Social Action

3. Criticisms of 7-8
Social Action

4. Conclusion 9

5. References 10
 INTRODUCTION
Max Weber [1864-1920] is a memorable thinker in
Sociology, for he has left a deep imprint upon
Sociology. He was a scholar, reader and writer. He
entered the field of Sociology through law and
remained as one among the great sociologists of the
20th century.
Max Weber defined Sociology "as the science which
attempts the interpretative understanding of social
action in order to arrive at a causal understanding
and explanation of its course and effects." He
emphasized the importance of seeing individuals as
reasoning and motivating actors. He believed that social
sciences could benefit from the objectivity brought to it,
by natural science combined with the depth of
understanding achieved through the sympathetic
subjective Interpretation of social action. For Weber,
the individual's role in creating social and historical
situations, is central. The meaning an individual
attaches to his actions, is the foundation of any
sociological explanation of those actions.

Weber employed the German word "Verstehen" -

which means ‘understanding’ or ‘insight’ in describing
approach for learning about subjective meanings people
attach to their actions. In using this method, said Weber,
sociologists mentally attempt to place themselves in the
shoes of other people and identify what they think and
how they feel.

While Sociologist Durkheim, started with social whole,

Weber started with the individual.

MAX WEBER [1864-

1920]
 CONCEPT OF SOCIAL
ACTION
For Weber human action is social in so far as "the
acting individual attaches a subjective meaning to it."
Mere behavior becomes action (a.) when it derives from
dealing with others and (b.) when it is meaningful that
is oriented in its course. The basic requirement is that
the actor is aware of what he or she is doing which can
be analyzed in terms of their intentions, motives and
feelings, as they experienced. All human interactions
are therefore, not social. For example, says Weber, "a
collision between two cyclists is in itself a natural event
when there is no intentional reference by each to that of
the other. But their attempt to avoid each other,
language they use after the event, constitute, true social
behavior or social action." An activity is social which,
in the intention of the actor, has reference to, and is
determined by the behavior of others. As Weber says,
"Action is social is to far as, by virtue of the subjective
meaning attached to it by the acting individual (s), it
takes account of the behavior of others and is thereby
oriented in its course."
Behavior which is meaningless cannot by definition, be
understood: it is by placing “meanings” (interpretating)
on the behavior of others that we understand it.
However, the meaning of action is never self-evident--
it always requires an interpretation, even if it is easily
forthcoming; this is a fundamental axiom of Weber's
interpretative Sociology; actions never speak
themselves - they always require "the placing of
meanings."
Weber argues that there is some objective standard of
social action against which actual human behavior can
be measured. He points out that sociological
understanding of action involves seeing them in the
light of the standard meanings which arise in typical
social actions and can be expressed in common
symbols. From the point of social science, to understand
a social action is to regard it as an instance or ‘case’ of
a type of activity characteristic of that society. This is
possible because the actor himself sees his behavior as
of a certain socially recognized type. Since however the
investigator cannot directly perceive the
meaningfulness of another person's behavior, he has to
frame a hypothesis about the nature of the social action
in question on the basis of the type of conduct common
to persons in such situations.
Proceeding from the assumption that social sciences
study only individual aspects of various phenomena,
Weber seeks to determine "type patterns of behavior"
and classifies social action into four types:
(1) ZWECKRATIONAL (MEANS END or GOAL-
RATIONAL); Action is rational in relation to a goal.
The individual chooses the best means available to
achieve his intended goal. ~ "technocratic thinking"
(2) WERTRATIONAL ("VALUE-RATIONAL"):
Action is rational in relation to a specific value, The
individual acts not to attain a definite and external goal,
but because he perceives it as right; to do otherwise
would be dishonorable; for example, a brave captain
who goes down with his ship.
(3) AFFECTIVE: Action is emotional behavior, driven
by emotions and feelings.
(4) TRADITIONAL: Action is dictated by customs, by
beliefs.
These kinds action says Weber, are ‘ideal types’, which
are constructed by isolating and listing their
characteristic traits. An ideal type for Weber, is a
theoretical construct, not a picture of reality, but
provides a measuring rod of reality.
The typology of social action is of great importance in
Weberian sociology Weber's concern is to use his
analysis of goal rational, value rational, affective and
traditional action as the building blocks for thinking
about social in terms of ideal types of social interaction.
His objective is to create a set of formal concepts which
will enable him to organize empirical research so as to
reach an understanding of the distinctive characteristics
of modern society. He is particularly concerned to
contrast traditional and rational types of society. To this
end, he developed ideal types of contemporary
phenomena, such as capitalism and bureaucracy, all of
which are ultimately reducible to meaningful patterns of
interaction among individuals. Indeed, Weber's
sociology revolves round his theory of social actions.
 CRITICISMS OF SOCIAL
ACTION THEORY

Weber's theory of social action, especially his typology

of social action, has encountered severe criticisms in the
First place Talcott Parsons who was influenced by
Weber criticizes him for -stressing too much the
element of voluntary subjective meaning of the actor.
For Parsons, the action of an actor is involuntary; it is
behavior directed by the /meanings attached by actors to
things and people.
• Secondly - A. Schultz criticizes Weber for not
providing a satisfactory account of meaningful action
since if meaning is too much divorced from the actor it
becomes an objective category imposed by the
sociologist.
• Thirdly - According to P.S. Cohen, Weber's typology
of social action is confusing due to Weber's emphasis
on subjective meaning of the actor.
• Finally- It is said that Weber's tendency to explain
social reality in terms of individual motivation blurred
the line between Sociology and Psychology.
Despite these short comings Weber's theory of social
action has inspired sociologists of subsequent
generations. Talcott Persons has been foremost in
expounding and developing Weber's typology. Some
contemporary sociologists like. R.K. Merton and W. J.
H. Sprote view the concept of social action as the key
concept in Sociology, but it has not proved fruitful in
the analysis of actual social systems.
 CONCLUSION

To summarize, Weber shows how important it is to

have hypotheses and information about the actor's
motives and goals. Nevertheless, motives and goals
may not be viewed as the sole determinants of action as
might be through from the standpoint of a crude
"psychological reductionism" (Hummell & Opp 1968,
Raub & Nass, 1981.) Sociological research has to take
into consideration both individual and social factors.
Wrong (1970:21) illustrates this with an example "Tо
say, that people. decide to have more children because
they like babies, while ignoring the specific social and
economic considerations... is like saying that a man
who has been shot, died because his heart stopped
beating." Individual and structural factors are
interconnected, and so sociological research should
consider both of them. A sociological program that
posits a strong connection between the individual and
the social or structural level is Methodological
Individualism.
 REFERENCES

The sources used to gather information are:

1) Masters of Sociological thought. --- Lewis A. Coser

2) Sociology --- D.C. Bhattacharyya.

3.) www.wikipedia.org

4.) www.yourarticlelibrary.com.