An ideal type is formed from characteristics and elements of the given
phenomena, but it is not meant to correspond to all of the
characteristics of any one particular case. It is not meant to refer to perfect things,
moral ideals nor to
statistical averages but rather to stress certain elements common to most cases of the given phenomenon. In using the word "ideal," Max Weber refers to the world of ideas (, "mental images") and not to perfection; these "ideal types" are idea-constructs that help put the seeming chaos of social reality in order. Weber wrote: "An ideal type is formed by the one-sided accentuation of one or more points of view and by the synthesis of a great many diffuse, discrete, more or less present and occasionally absent concrete individual phenomena, which are arranged according to those onesidedly emphasized viewpoints into a unified analytical construct..." Therefore, ideal types are a form of perfect representation. It is a useful tool for
comparative sociology in analyzing
social or
economic phenomena, having advantages over a very general, abstract idea and a specific historical example. It can be used to analyze both a general, suprahistorical phenomenon such as
capitalism or historically unique occurrences such as in Weber's
Protestant Ethics analysis. To try to understand a particular phenomenon, one must not only describe the actions of its participants but "interpret" them by classifying behavior as belonging to some prior "ideal type." Weber described four "ideal types" of behavior:
zweckrational (goal-rationality),
wertrational (value-rationality),
affektual (emotional-rationality), and
traditional (custom, unconscious habit). Weber states that an "ideal type" never seeks to claim its validity in terms of a reproduction of or correspondence with social reality. Its validity can be ascertained only in terms of adequacy, which is too conveniently ignored by the proponents of positivism. This does not mean, however, that objectivity, limited as it is, can be gained by "weighing the various evaluations against one another and making a 'statesman-like' compromise among them", which is often proposed as a solution by those propounding methodological perspectivism. Such a practice, which Weber calls "syncretism", is not only impossible but also unethical, for it avoids "the practical duty to stand up for our own ideals" [Weber 1904/1949, p. 58]. ==Scholarly reception==