I give an account of Max Weber's views concerning the basis of the objectivity of the cultural sciences. In this connection, I offer a critical discussion of his distinction between different “value spheres,” each with its own “intrinsic logic.” I then consider parallels between Weber's “value spheres” and central elements of Bourdieu's field theory and Luhmann's systems theory, and try to show to what extent Bourdieu's and Luhmann's problems, and the solutions they suggest, can be seen as similar to Weber's. I conclude by a general consideration of Weber's, Bourdieu's, and Luhmann's approach to the problem of objectivity.
Bourdieu, P. [1979] 1984. Distinction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
2.
———. [1984] 1988. Homo Academicus. Cambridge : Polity Press.
3.
———. [1984] 1993. Sociology in question. London: Sage.
4.
———. [1987] 1990. In other words: Essays towards a reflexive sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
5.
———. 1990. The scholastic point of view. Cultural Anthropology5 (4): 380-91.
6.
Bourdieu, P. and L. Wacquant.1992. An invitation to reflexive sociology . Cambridge: Polity Press.
7.
Brecht, A.1959. Political theory. Princeton : Princeton University Press.
8.
Broady, D.1991. Sociologi och epistemologi: om Pierre Bourdieus författarskap och den historiska epistemologin. Stockholm : HLS Förlag.
9.
Bruun, H.H.2001. Weber on Rickert: From value relation to ideal type. Max Weber Studies1 (2): 138-60.
10.
———. [1972] 2007. Science, values and politics in Max Weber's methodology (new expanded ed.). Aldershot : Ashgate.
11.
Gerhardt, U.2006. Zäsuren und Zeitperspektiven: In Kontinuitäten und Diskontinuitäten in der Wissenschaftsgeschichte des 20: Jahrhunderts, edited by R. vom Bruch et al., 39-67. Stuttgart : Franz Steiner.
Jacobsen, B.1999. Max Weber und Friedrich Albert Lange: Rezeption und Innovation . Wiesbaden: DUV .
14.
Kneer, G., and A. Nassehi.1993. Niklas Luhmanns Theorie sozialer Systeme . München: Fink.
15.
Luhmann, N. [1964] 1968. Zweck-Herrschaft-System: Grundbegriffe und Prämissen Max Webers. In Bürokratische Organisation, edited by R. Mayntz, 36-55. Köln/ Berlin: Kiepenheuer u. Witsch.
———. 1976a. Generalized media and the problem of contingency . In Explorations in the general theory of social science: Essays in honor of TalcottParsons, Vol. 2, edited by J. J. Loubser et al. New York: The Free Press.
18.
———. 1976b. Ist Kunst codierbar? In “ Schön,” edited by Siegfried J. Schmidt.München: Fink.
19.
———. 1977. Differentiation of society. Canadian Journal of Sociology2 (1): 29-53.
20.
———. [1984] 1995. Social systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
21.
———. 1985. Die Autopoiesis des Bewusstseins. Soziale Welt36:402-46.
22.
———. 1986a. Distinctions directrices: Über Codierung von Semantiken und Systemen. In Kultur und Gesellschaft, edited by F. Neidhart and R. Lepsius , 145-61. Opladen: WDV.
———. 1994. The higher amorality of politics. Theory, Culture & Society11:25-36.
25.
———. 1996. Complexity, structural contingencies and value conflicts . In Detraditionalization, edited by P. Heelas et al., 59-71. Oxford/ Cambridge : Blackwell.
26.
———. 1997. Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
27.
Martin, L.2003. What is field theory?American Journal of Sociology109 (1): 1-49.
28.
Münch, R.1991. Dialektik der Kommunikationsgesellschaft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
29.
Oakes, G.1982. Methodological ambivalence: The case of Max Weber . Social Research49:589-615.
30.
———. 2003. Weber on value rationality and value spheres. Journal of Classical Sociology3:27-46.
31.
Rasch, W.2000. Niklas Luhmann's modernity. Stanford : Stanford University Press.
32.
Rickert, H.1902. Die Grenzen der naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffsbildung . Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck. (5th ed. 1929).
33.
Scaff, L.1989. Fleeing the iron cage. Berkeley / London: University of California Press.
Schluchter, W.1991. Religion und Lebensführung. Frankfurt : Suhrkamp.
36.
———. 1996. Paradoxes of modernity. Stanford : Stanford University Press.
37.
Schwinn, T.1995. Funktion und Gesellschaft. Zeitschrift für Soziologie24 (3): 196-214.
38.
Simmel, G.1892. Probleme der Geschichtsphilosophie. Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot.
39.
Swartz, D.1997. The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago/London: Chicago University Press.
40.
Swedberg, R.2005. The Max Weber dictionary. Stanford : Stanford University Press.
41.
Türk, K.1995. Die Organisation der Welt. Opladen : WDV.
42.
Turner, S.P., and R.A. Factor.1984. Max Weber and the dispute over reason and value. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
43.
Wagner, G.1997. The end of Luhmann's social systems theory. Philosophy of the Social Sciences24 (4): 387-409.
44.
Max Weber Gesamtausgabe, Tübingen: Mohr. Quoted as MWG.
45.
Weber, M. [1922] 1968. Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre . Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck. Quoted as GAW.
46.
———. [1920] 1963. Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Religionssoziologie I. Tübingen: Mohr. Quoted as Gars.
47.
———. [1924] 1988. Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Soziologie und Sozialpolitik. Tübingen: Mohr . Quoted as Gass.
48.
———. 1948. From Max Weber (edited by, introduction H. H. Gerth and C. W. Mills), London: Routledge. Quoted as FMW.
49.
———. 1959. The Methodology of the Social Sciences (edited by E. A. Shils and H. A. Finch).New York: The Free Press. Quoted as MSS.
50.
———. 1975. Roscher and Knies: The logical problems of historical economics, introduction by Guy Oakes. New York: The Free Press. Quoted as ORK.
51.
———. 2002. The Protestant ethic and the “spirit” of capitalism, and other writings, introduction and edited by Peter Baehr and Gordon C. Wells.New York: Penguin. Quoted as Pe.
