Chapter1: Introduction: Sociological Theory

METHODOLOGY

Ideal Types

The ideal type is one of Weber's best-known contributions to contemporary sociology (Drysdale, 1996; Hekman, 1983; Lindbekk, 1992; McKinney, 1966). As we have seen, Weber believed it was the responsibility of sociologists to develop conceptual tools, which could be used later by historians and sociologists. The most important such conceptual tool was the ideal type:

An ideal type is formed by the one-sided accentuation of one or more points of view and by the synthesis of a great many diffuse, discrete, more or less present and occasionally absent concrete individual phenomena, which are arranged according to those one-sidedly emphasized viewpoints into a unified analyticaI construct..., in its conceptual purity, this mental construct.., cannot be found empirically anywhere in reality.

(Weber, 1903-17/1949:90)

in spite of this definition, Weber was not totally consistent in the way he used the ideal type. To grasp what the concept means initially, we will have to overlook some of the inconsistencies. At its most basic level, an Meal type is a concept constructed by a social scientist, on the basis of his or her interests arid theoretical orientation, to capture the essential features of some social phenomenon.

The most important thing about ideal types is that they are heuristic devices; they are to be useful and helpful in doing empirical research and ill understanding a specific aspect of the social world (or a "historical individual"). As Lachman said, an ideal type is "essentially a measuring red" (1971:26), or in Kalberg's terms, a "yardstick" (1994:87).Here is the way Weber put it: "its function is the comparison with empirical reality in order to establish its divergences or similarities, to describe them with the most unambiguously intelligible concepts, and to understand and explain them causally" (1903-17/1949:43). Ideal types are heuristic devices to be used in the study of slices of historical reality. For example, social scientists would construct an ideal-typical bureaucracy on the basis of their immersion in historical data. This ideal type can then be compared to actual bureaucracies. The researcher looks for divergences in the real case from the exaggerated ideal type. Next, the social scientist must look for the causes of the deviations. Some typical reasons for these divergences ate:

1. Actions of bureaucrats that are motivated by misinformation.

2. Strategic errors, primarily by the bureaucratic leaders.

3. Logical fallacies undergirding the actions of leaders and followers.

4. Decisions made in the bureaucracy on the basis of emotion.

5. Any irrationality in the action of bureaucratic leaders and followers.

To take another example, an ideal typical military battle delineates the principal components of such a battle-opposing armies, opposing strategies, materiel at the disposal of each, disputed land ("no-man's-land"), supply and support forces, command centers, and leadership qualities. Actual battles may not have all these elements, and that is one thing a researcher wants to know. The basic point is that the elements of any particular military battle may be compared with the elements identified in the ideal type.

The elements of an ideal type (such as the components of the ideal-typical military battle) are not to be thrown together arbitrarily; they are combined on the basis of their compatibility. As Hekman puts it, "Ideal types are not the product of the whim or fancy of a social scientist, but are logically constructed concepts" (1983:32). (However, they can and should reflect the interests of the social scientist.)

In Weber's view, the ideal type was to be derived inductively from the real world of social history. Weber did not believe that it was enough to offer a carefully defined set of concepts, especially if they were deductively derived from an abstract theory. The concepts had to be empirically adequate (Roth, 1971). Thus, in order to produce ideal types, researchers had first to immerse themselves in historical reality and then derive the types from that reality.

In line with Weber's efforts to find a middle ground between nomothetic and idiographic knowledge, he argued that ideal types should be neither too general nor too specific. For example, in the case of religion he would reject ideal types of the history of religion in general, but he would also be critical of ideal types of very specific phenomena, such as an individual's religious experience. Rather, ideal typos are developed of intermediate phenomena such as Calvinism, Pietism, Methodism, and Baptism (Weber, 19044)511958).

Although ideal types are to be derived from the real world, they are not to be mirror images of that world. Rather, they are to be one-sided exaggerations (based on the researcher's interests) of the essence of what goes on in the real world. In Weber's view, the more exaggerated the ideal type, the more useful it will be for historical research.

The use of the word ideal or utopia should not be construed to mean that the concept being described is in any sense the best of all possible worlds. As used by Weber, the term meant that the form described in the concept was rarely, if ever, found in the real world. In fact, Weber argued that the ideal type need not be positive or correct; it can just as easily be negative or even morally repugnant (1903-17/1949).

Ideal types should make sense in themselves, the meaning of their components should be compatible, and they should aid us in making sense of the real world. Although we have come to think of ideal types as describing static entities, Weber believed that they could describe either static or dynamic entities. Thus we can have an ideal type of a structure, such as a bureaucracy, or of a social development, such as bureaucratization.

Ideal types also are not developed once and for all. Because society is constantly changing, and the interests of social scientists are as well, it is necessary to develop new typologies to tit the changing reality. This is in line with Weber's view that there can be no timeless concepts in the social sciences (Roth, 1968).

Although we have presented a relatively unambiguous image of the ideal type, there are contradictions in the way Weber defined the concept. In addition, in his own substantive work, Weber used the ideal type in ways that differed from the ways he said it was to be used. As Burger noted, 'The ideal types presented in Economy and Society are a mixture of definitions, classification, and specific hypotheses seemingly too divergent to be reconcilable with Weber's statements" (1976:118). Although she disagrees with Burger" on Weber's inconsistency in defining ideal types, Hekman (1983:38-59) also recognizes that Weber offers several varieties of ideal types:

1. Historical ideal types. These relate to phenomena found ha some particular historical epoch (for example, the modem capitalistic marketplace).

2. General sociological ideal types. These relate to phenomena that cut across a number of historical periods and societies (for example, bureaucracy).

3. Action ideal types. These are pure types of action based on the motivations of the actor (for example, affectual action).

4, Structural ideal types. These are forms taken by the causes and consequences of social action (for example, traditional domination).

Clearly Weber developed an army of varieties of ideal types, and some of the richness in ins work stems from their diversity, although common to them all is their mode of construction.

Kalberg (1994) argues that while the heuristic use of ideal types in empirical research is important, it should not be forgotten that they also play a key theoretical role ha Weber's work. Although Weber rejects the idea of theoretical laws, he does use ideal types in various ways to create theoretical models. Thus, ideal types constitute the theoretical building blocks for the construction of a variety of theoretical models (for example, the routinization of charisma and the rationalization of society both of which are discussed later in this chapter), and these models are then used to analyze specific historical developments.