Social Science Between Neo-Kantianism and Philosophy of Life: The Cases of Weber, Simmel, and Mannheim

2Citations
Citations of this article
2Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

In recent years, a group of social scientists have credited Wilhelm Dilthey with the status of a “classical sociological theorist” (Bakker 1999) and a key figure with regard to the establishment of the social sciences since the last decades of the nineteenth century.1 Such evaluations stand in distinct contrast to Dilthey’s reputation as a firm critic of sociology on the one hand and his dubious standing within his proper field, philosophy, on the other, where he is perceived as a failed epistemologist. Generally, his influence on social and cultural science is associated with his notion of Erleben and understanding as fundamental categories for the interpretive sciences and their unique relatedness to their particular subject. On the basis of this starting point, he eventually established a division between Verstehen and Erklären and, correspondingly, human and natural sciences.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Šuber, D. (2010). Social Science Between Neo-Kantianism and Philosophy of Life: The Cases of Weber, Simmel, and Mannheim. In Archimedes (Vol. 21, pp. 267–290). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3540-0_14

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free