Reassessing the “rules of the game”: Max Weber and Peter Winch on rule-following

Abstract

Peter Winch’s critical remarks concerning Max Weber’s interpretive sociology are centered around the notions of “rule” and “rule-following.” While Winch gave credit to Weber for much of his theoretical insight, he nevertheless found his account unsatisfactory for two reasons: its neglect of rules and rule-following in social life, and its apparent reliance on causal explanations. This article attempts to show how Winch might have been less than charitable on both of these accounts: that once one pays close attention to Weber’s concept of a “rule,” and to his ideas concerning “adequate causation,” the two frameworks for interpretive sociology could turn out to be much more similar than it is usually assumed.