Iranian Journal of Sociology

Abstract This study is based on the premise that a problem in contemporary social science research is the inversion of its logical architecture and, consequently, a shift in the roles and relationships among paradigm, problem formulation, theory, and methodology. The theoretical framework draws on the philosophy of science and the philosophy of social science, with emphasis on Kuhn’s concept of paradigm and Lakatos’s notion of the research programme. This study uses documentary research, conceptual analysis, theoretical reconstruction, and critical analysis to formulate the concept of "methodological dominance" and reconstruct the relationship among paradigm, theory, problem formulation, and methodology. Methodological dominance refers to a condition in which methodology moves beyond its subordinate role within research design and becomes a reference point for designing, conducting, and evaluating research. The study argues that the primacy of methodology, and consequently of methods and techniques, weakens sociology’s capacity for problem formulation, conceptualization, and theory building

Abstract Max Weber and Karl Popper have both written about the logic and methodology of the social sciences. A number of Western scholars have compared the views of these two thinkers on issues related to the methodology of the social sciences. The aim of the present paper is to present a critical comparative analysis of the efficacy of the two models for the methodology of the social sciences by Weber and Popper. There is evidence that suggests that Popper was aware of Weber’s views on the social sciences and its methodological characteristics. It would, therefore, not be farfetched to surmise that Popper has developed his own methodological model for the social sciences in light of what he had perceived to be the shortcomings of Weber’s model. The main argument of the present paper is that Popper’s methodological model for the social sciences provides a much more effective theoretical tool for social sciences researchers than that of Weber’s.
 
 
 

Abstract Max Weber attempted to link the German idealist tradition to the positivist approach. His methodology examines human behavior in an interpretative manner. For Weber, the behavior is a purely mechanical bodily movement to the individual and has special meaning to him. Only when the individual's behavior is meaningful, rational, and interpretive is its action. The purpose of this article was to examine Weber's methodology and extract its important characteristics to better understand and analyze social problems. To do this, we used a documentary method. The following characteristics of his methodology emerged from our analysis: social and natural phenomena differ in their methods, believing that phenomena are multi-dimensional, focusing on probability and the relationship between micro and macro levels, paying attention to the importance of qualitative and quantitative methods, creating ideal types, examining the factors and consequences of social problems, and using an interdisciplinary approach.