Must use socio-historical approach. Getting at truth is no a simple matter. Sees a qualitative difference between two. Depending upon whether one is a Positivist, Hegelian, or a Marxist, the principles of selection, the direction of the study, and the categories of meaning will differ. One cannot posit an abstract, impartial knowing subject in the study of history.
People have aspirations, values, and attitudes.
Weber s ascetic Protestantism, Marx s historical materialism- were perspectives and relational as is all historical knowledge. Not a question of which is right or wrong. Different historical pictures, different interpretations, different standpoints, different depths of penetration- saw dialectic interaction as way to progress knowledge. Conservative Thought Saw a transition to a sociology of knowledge. Concerned with styles of thought, their relationship to one another, their place in the larger social context, but more explicitly and systematically with the social basis of a given movement of thought.