Professional Documents
Culture Documents
257
258 THE JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY
6 SLH, p. 56.
7 SLH, p. 46.
8 SLH, pp. 60 ff.
CONCEPT AND THEORY FORMATION 261
10 SLS, p. 53.
11 Op. ext., p. 126.
12 Mind, Self and Society, Chicago University Press, 1937.
13 See Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation,
translated by A. M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons (New York, 1947), p. 88.
CONCEPT AND THEORY FORMATION 263
16 SLB, p. 63.
17 Some of the points dealt with in the following are presented more
elaborately in my paper, Common-Sense and Scientific Interpretation of
Human Action,'* in Philosophy and Phenomenological Eesearch, Vol. XIV
(September 1953), pp. 1-37.
CONCEPT AND THEORY FORMATION 267
field of the social scientist, however, namely the social reality, has a
specific meaning and relevance structure f o r the human beings
living, acting, and thinking therein. B y a series of common-sense
constructs they have pre-selected and pre-interpreted this world
which they experience as the reality of their daily lives. It is
these thought objects of theirs which determine their behavior by
motivating it. The thought objects constructed by the social sci-
entist, i n order to grasp this social reality, have to be founded upon
the thought objects constructed by the common-sense thinking of
men, living their daily life within their social world. Thus, the
constructs of the social sciences are, so to speak, constructs of the
second degree, namely constructs of the constructs made b y the
actors on the social scene, whose behavior the social scientist has to
observe and to explain i n accordance with the procedural rules
of his science.
Thus, the exploration of the general principles according to
which man i n daily life organizes his experiences, and especially
those of the social world, is the first task of the methodology of the
social sciences. This is not the place to outline the procedures of
phenomenological analysis of the so-called natural attitude by
which this can be done. W e shall briefly mention only a few prob-
lems involved.
The world, as has been shown by Husserl, is f r o m the outset
experienced i n the pre-scientific thinking of everyday life i n the
mode of typicality. The unique objects and events given to us
in a unique aspect are unique within a horizon of typical familiarity
and pre-acquaintanceship. There are mountains, trees, animals,
dogsin particular Irish setters and among them my Irish setter.
Rover. Now I may look at Rover either as this unique individual,
my irreplaceable f r i e n d and comrade, or just as a typical example
of " I r i s h setter," " d o g , " ' ' m a m m a l , " " a n i m a l , " " o r g a n i s m , " or
' ' object of the outer w o r l d . ' ' Starting f r o m here, it can be shown
that whether I do one or the other, and also which traits or qualities
of a given object or event I consider as individually unique and
which as typical, depends upon my actual interest and the system
of relevances involved therein^briefly, upon my practical or theo-
retical "problem at h a n d . " This "problem at h a n d , " i n turn,
originates i n the circumstances within which I find myself at any
moment of my daily life and which I propose to call m y biograph-
ically determined situation. Thus, typification depends upon my
problem at hand f o r the definition and solution of which the type
has been formed. It can be further shown that at least one aspect
of the biographically and situationally determined systems of
268 THE JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY
ON S O - C A L L E D " C O U N T E R F A C T U A L CONDITIONALS''
T H E PROBLEM