🧩 Similarities Between Durkheim & Weber's Methodological Approaches

Yes, you’re absolutely right to observe a similarity — though Durkheim and Weber had fundamentally different epistemologies, both developed systematic methods for studying society. Let’s break down the convergences and contrasts between Durkheim's "Rules for Studying Social Facts" and Weber's "Verstehen & Ideal Types":

🧩 Similarities Between Durkheim & Weber's Methodological Approaches

Aspect	Durkheim	Weber	Similarity
Scientific Aim	Sociology as a science of social facts	Sociology as a science of social action	✅ Both aimed to make sociology systematic & rigorous
Classification	Divides social facts into material & non-material	Uses Ideal Types to classify actions (e.g., traditional, rational)	✅ Both rely on analytical categorization
Objectivity	Study social facts as "things" — external, measurable	Understand actions through subjective meaning, but apply objective analysis	✅ Both stress methodological discipline, even if one is positivist, the other interpretive
Types/Forms	Normal vs Pathological facts	Types of rationality: value, goal, affective, traditional	✅ Both use typologies to analyze the functions or motivations of behavior
Explanation	Social facts explained by other social facts (not psychology)	Social action explained by meaning (not just external forces)	✅ Both reject simplistic biological or psychological explanations

⚖️ Core Differences

Durkheim	Weber
Positivist → Emphasized external social constraints	Interpretivist → Emphasized internal subjective meanings
Social reality is objective & coercive	Social reality is constructed through meaning & understanding
Method: Observation, classification, separation, explanation	Method: Verstehen (interpretive understanding), Ideal Types, Causal Adequacy
Explanation via functionalism (what purpose a fact serves)	Explanation via interpretation (why individuals act the way they do)

🧠 A Synthesized Understanding

While Durkheim focused on macro, external structures, and Weber on micro, internal meanings, both recognized:

The need to systematize sociology
The use of typologies for clarity and analysis
That individual psychology alone is insufficient to explain society
That empirical rigor is essential in social science

🧭 Conclusion

So yes — there is a methodological parallel:

Just as Durkheim classifies social facts and insists on explaining them through social causes, Weber classifies social actions and insists on explaining them through subjective meaning—but both aim for a scientific sociology grounded in method and clarity.

Would you like this in a Notion-ready comparison table or diagram for better visualization?