Weber’s methodology of social sciences began with a consideration of the overriding importance of objective sociology. He was of the opinion that no scientific analysis can include ethical values within it and be regarded as objective. During the time of Weber many did not believe that an objective sociology was possible as values were not separated from research process. Weber confronted the problem of values by observing that sociological inquiry should be objective or value-free.

By value free sociology Weber meant that researchers’ personal values and economic interests should not affect the process of social scientific analysis. If such factors affected the research process then the social action could not be represented as objective. Objective analysis were possible if sociologists use a rational method in which the research process is systematic that is

1) empirical data must be categorised in terms of clearly formulated concepts,

2) proper rules of evidence must be employed, and

3) only logical inference must be made.

With the help of his methodological orientation Weber implied that value-free sociology could not be a moral science and thereby distinguished between ‘what ought to be’ that is the sphere of values from ‘what is’ the sphere of science and that social science should focus only on the latter. He also implied that new science of sociology contributes to an ongoing historical process in which magic and other forms of inherited wisdom become less acceptable as means for explaining events. Weber referred to this change as the process of rationalisation.

Weber was aware that it would be difficult to separate values and science in practice but to distinguish helped in the highlighting the relevance of values before and after the research. Social scientists face a very practical problem how to choose the topic of research. Weber said that there was no scientific way of choosing a topic of doing research. However, the choice of topic comes before the research is undertaken. The only basis for the individual to choose a particular topic is values. But once a topic is chosen for study Weber advocates that the scientist must follow an objective research process. The situation is even more difficult when dealing with public policy issues. With regards to issues of public policy as well Weber was of the opinion that the selection of one goal rather than another and one strategy over the other ultimately depended on people’s political values, their economic interests and so forth but it does not mean that social science are irrelevant to public policy and believed that sociologists could do their task objectively by categorising the data in terms of clearly formulated concepts following proper rules of evidence and making logical deductions. Weber rejected the search for general laws in favour of historical theories and opined that universal laws excluded important and unique historical events.

Though Weber projected the methods to make social sciences objective, he wanted to address the bigger empirical questions which existed during his time like the why capitalism originated in West and not somewhere else. He was aware that emphasis on the development of general theories would not allow for an examination of such issues. For him ideal types were the method for dealing with these issues.

Weber and Popper. Durkheim tried to show us how objectivity can be maintained in sociology through the use of social facts and treating it as things. On the other hand Weber tried to show us that objectivity is not absolute in sociology as culture is value oriented and selecting the topic of research itself is based on these values. However, objectivity can be maintained by following the procedures of research in an objective manner and thereby making inferences in a logical behaviour. Popper unlike the two founding fathers of sociology maintains that objectivity in social sciences can be achieved through inter-subjective criticism.