This article addresses the issue of how to theorize with the help of the classics in sociology; and it is pointed out that the main difficulty involved is that Weber et al have told us next to nothing of how they actually produced their analyses. We are left with trying to search written statements for some clues; and there are not many of these. Furthermore, written statements represent a distinct universe of their own, meaning by this that some things can be said in a written form and others not. While the advantages of having something in a written form are clear, much of what goes into theorizing is of a nature that is hard to express in a written form. Several suggestions for how to theorize with the help of the classics can nevertheless also be found in the article.

本文探讨如何借助社会学经典进行理论化的问题；并指出所涉及的主要困难是 Weber 等人几乎没有告诉我们他们实际上是如何进行分析的。我们只能尝试在书面陈述中寻找一些线索；这些并不多。此外，书面陈述代表了他们自己独特的世界，这意味着某些事情可以书面形式表达，而另一些则不能。虽然以书面形式拥有某些东西的优势是显而易见的，但理论化的大部分内容都具有难以以书面形式表达的性质。尽管如此，文章中也可以找到一些关于如何借助经典进行理论化的建议。