course because for technical reasons, given their clearly defined ends, no other means were available to the actors. To be sure, without the investigators evaluative ideas, there would be no principle of selection of subject-matter and no meaningful knowledge of the concrete reality. It can only be directly verified by reference to the examples of the conduct of the Persians in cases where they were victorious, as in Jerusalem, Egypt, and Asia Minor, and even this verification must necessarily remain unsatisfactory in certain respects. The analysis of the historically given individual configuration of those factors and their significant concrete interaction, conditioned by their historical context and especially the rendering intelligible of the basis and type of this significance would be the next task to be achieved. Every interpretation attempts to attain clarity and certainty, but no matter how clear an interpretation as such appears to be from the point of view of meaning, it cannot on this account alone claim to be the causally valid interpretation. It is necessary to know what a king, an official, an entrepreneur, a procurer, or a magician does; that is, what kind of typical action, which justifies classifying an individual in one of these categories, is important and relevant for an analysis, before. These generalisations are both understandable and define in the highest degree insofar as the typically observed course of action can be understood in terms of the purely rational pursuit of an end, or where for reasons of methodological convenience such a theoretical type can. For the verifiable accuracy of interpretation of the meaning of a phenomenon, it is a great help to be able to put ones self imaginatively in the place of the actor and thus sympathetically to participate in his experiences, but this is not an essential. Undoubtedly, all evaluative ideas are subjective. In this case our purely domestic poverty thesis information serves to demonstrate a high degree of accuracy.
All knowledge of cultural reality, as may be seen, is always knowledge from particular points of view. The results of a type of psychological investigation which employs the methods of the natural sciences in any one of various possible ways may naturally, like the results of any other science, have, in specific contexts, outstanding significance for sociological problems; indeed this has often. On this level it must remain only a peculiarly plausible hypothesis. We thus understand by direct observation, in this sense, the meaning of the proposition 2 2 4 when we hear or read. We wish to understand on the one hand the relationships and the cultural significance of individual events in their contemporary manifestations and on the other the causes of their being historically so and not otherwise. Therefore perhaps Weber had a more pessimistic viewpoint influencing his theories. Weber argues in the text that capitalism developed to the advanced stage that it did in the West due to the fact that Protestantism encouraged the embrace of work as a calling from God, and consequently, a dedication to work that allowed one to earn.