Max Weber PDF

# Max Weber - Social Action, Ideal Types, Authority, Bureaucracy, Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism Max Weber, like Durkheim and Marx, was one of the pioneers of the discipline of Sociology and was one of the early founders of the Interpretivist approach. Like Durkheim, he addressed the...

# Max Weber - Social Action, Ideal Types, Authority, Bureaucracy, Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism Max Weber, like Durkheim and Marx, was one of the pioneers of the discipline of Sociology and was one of the early founders of the Interpretivist approach. Like Durkheim, he addressed the problem of scope and nature of the discipline and he also established the first department of Sociology in Germany. Sometimes, he is also referred to as the father of modern sociological thought. He pioneered a new approach to study the society which, later, came to be known as the interpretative approach. This approach put the individual and the way the individuals think, in the centre of analysis of society. Instead of focusing on society at the grand level, as the functionalists like Durkheim did, he advocated to maintain focus on micro level on the individual and his or her actions only. He is also considered to have bridged the gap between Positivism and Idealism. Sticking to Positivism, he favoured the use of Scientific Method in Sociology for the purpose of achieving objectivity and on the other hand, drawing from idealists like Neo-Kantians, he developed the scope of Sociology as the meaning attached by the actors to their actions. He opposed pure abstract theorising. Instead, his theoretical ideas are embedded in his empirical, usually historical, research. According to him, the behaviour of a man in society is qualitatively different from physical objects in the natural world and organisms in the biological world. In his book, Methodologies of Social Sciences, written during the first decade of the 20th Century, he defined Sociology as - 'Sociology is a science which attempts Interpretivist understanding of social action, in order thereby, to arrive at an explanation of its cause and effect.' ## Social Action While Durkheim defined the scope of Sociology in terms of social facts, Weber used social action and Ideal Types as the basis of his theoretical framework. According to Weber, subject matter of Sociology is to study social action which he defined as – 'Any action is social by the virtue of the meanings attached to it by the actors, it takes into account the behaviour of others and is thereby, oriented in its course.' In this definition, Weber mentions two conditions for any action to become social: 1. Action is social if some meaning is attached to it by the actor, i.e., actor must be conscious of his or her action. The meanings are in the form of motivation of an individual, which is his own subjective state. Weber rejected the independent influence of values on individual, rather the values are interpreted by the actor, according to his or her motivation and according to that, an action is taken. 2. Action is social if it is oriented to some other, i.e., only those actions are social which are taken in orientation to some other object. The orientation can be physical or mental, i.e., the other person may or may not be present in a social action. Weber also differentiated between action and behaviour. Behaviour is a biological concept and is spontaneous in nature with no attachment of meaning. He also excluded imitative actions and mass conditioned actions from his definition as they are not oriented to some other object and no conscious meaning is attached to them. According to him, the establishment of cause and effect should be the aim of Sociology. Understanding the meanings attached by the actors to their actions can help us to establish cause and effect relationship. ## But how to establish the meanings? He suggested some methods for it, like - 1. **Verstehen** - This method literally means comprehending or understanding at the level of the actor. It is one of the tools for interpretative understanding. This method was the cornerstone of the interpretive Sociology and most of Weber's work lies on the foundation of this method. It involves, the comprehension of the meaning by using simple steps of investigation, which include - * Investigator should reconstruct the situational choices and constraints of the actor. It involves developing the description of an actor by using secondary resources. * The investigator should be at the same wavelength as that of the actor. It involves developing communication abilities which help the investigator to effectively interact with the actor. For example, medium of instruction and mode are some factors to take into account. * The investigator should not have any sympathy with the actor or the situation, i.e., there should be indifference and interest should be confined to establishment of meanings alone. This will help in ensuring objectivity in the analysis. * Finally, the investigator can enter into a conversation with the actor and use primary sources of data collection to establish meanings. In this way, by using some systematic and scientific approach, Weber maximises the probability of establishing meaning. He discusses two types of understandings which can be used to decipher the meanings: * **Direct observation understanding** i.e., what the investigator observes. * **Explanatory understanding** i.e., in which, the investigator draws meanings by explaining the situational constraints and meanings. 2. **Causal Pluralist Methods** - Weber rejected the mono-causal explanations, and stressed that the causes can be multiple or plural. This approach is also termed as **probabilistic approach**. He favoured identification of probable factors, rather than emphasising upon the singularity of the causes. 3. **Ideal Type** - Verstehen cannot be used alone and should be used with other methods like Ideal Type. Ideal Type is a mental construct which is used to identify certain regularities in social life. It doesn't deal with the notion of perfection, but, commonly understood meanings in terms of regularities. Ideal Types are used to further understand the meanings attached by the actors. This is the second most important concept in Weberian understanding of the sociological works. At the highest level of abstraction, he developed four Ideal Types of his basic unit of analysis, i.e., of social action. Four Ideal Types of social actions are: * **Traditional Social Action** - It is that type of social action in which meanings are drawn from certain beliefs and traditions. It involves least conscious thinking over action. Examples can be religious actions. * **Affective Social Action** – In this case, the meanings are generated due to emotions of an actor. It involves orientation of emotions like love, hatred, anger and fear. Here, consciousness is relatively higher than traditional action. Example of such action is a mother slapping her child out of anger. * **Zweckrational Social Action** - Such actions are also called end/goal-rational actions. In this type, action is carried out by taking into consideration the means and goals/ends. Hence, action is more logical as ends are logically defined. Here, cause and effect relations are established in actions which will finally help in achieving the goals. It is the most conscious action. Example can be of scientific research. * **Wertrational Social Action** – It is also called value oriented rational actions. In this, the goal is defined by the values of the society and the actor takes logical action in order to fulfil that goal. Such actions are galore in traditional societies like India, which have strong belief systems. Its example is soldiers going to save the country. Any actual action can be compared with these Ideal Types of actions and meanings can be attached. A particular action may contain a combination of elements of from various Ideal Types. His work on Ideal Types is significant because, Ideal Type methodology provides investigator with ready models and hence, saves time of the investigator. Thus, Weber acknowledges the existence of regularities in societies, but unlike Durkheim, he insists that these regularities exist in the mind of the individuals. The expression of these regularities is visible in terms of the actions on the basis of subjective interpretation of these regularities. His idea of social action and other methods and approaches are generally criticised on following grounds - 1. According to Hans Gerth and C Wright Mills, although Weber implied that he had a great concern with mental processes, he actually spent little time on them. 2. He laid greater stress on individual meanings and ignores influence of social structure in the understanding the reality. 3. His claim of objectivity is also not true. His methods of Verstehen and Ideal Types are highly susceptible to subjectivity of the investigator. 4. His idea of social action has focus on individual and collective action is ignored. 5. Weber also ignores unintended meanings and consequences of social action. Merton highlights such consequences in terms of latent functions. 6. His definition of social action is also handicapped by inclusion of orientation towards others. Parsons expanded the meaning of social action by including situational choices, constraints and aspiration of the actor as well. ## Ideal Types Weber believed that it was the responsibility of the sociologists to develop conceptual tools, which could be used later by historians and sociologists and one such conceptual tool was Ideal Types which he defined as - '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 one-sidedly emphasised viewpoints, into a unified analytical construct. In its conceptual purity, this mental construct, cannot be found empirically anywhere, in reality.' In Weber's view, Ideal Type was to be derived inductively from the real world of social history and not deductively or from personal judgments alone. According to Weber, Ideal Types is a type of objective methodology to study social action. The concept is not new per se, for example, Durkheim's types of suicides are Ideal Types of suicide. According to him, Ideal Types are abstractions or pure types (not most desirable or perfect), constructed through emphasising on certain traits of a given social item, which are employed in order to understand the complexities of the social world. It constitutes various elements which, though, are abstract, but can be later recombined and reconstituted to understand a particular reality. The highest level of abstraction is in the form of Ideal Types of social action itself. According to Lachman, Ideal Types are significant because they act as a measuring rod for the investigator to understand the actual phenomenon. They are heuristic devices. They are useful in doing empirical research and in understanding a specific aspect of the social world. According to Weber, Ideal Type is not a reality in itself, but a way to express the reality. The individual elements may be meaningless, but when combined with other elements, they form the reality. Ideal Types act as fixed point of reference. According to Weber himself - 'Its function is the comparison with empirical reality, in order to establish its divergences or similarities, to describe them with the most unambiguously intelligible concepts, and to understand and explain them causally. Ideal Type is not a conception of perfect or desirable, but it is a pure or typical form of certain phenomenon. Although Ideal Types are to be derived from the real world, they are not to be mirror images of that world. Rather, they are to be one-sided exaggerations (based on the researcher's interests) of the essence of what goes on in the real world. Need for building an Ideal Type arises from the nature of social reality itself as it is complex to comprehend. One can know the reality in parts, and not whole at a time. To understand each part, features of that part must be understood separately. In this process, some critical features have to be given more importance over the others. Construction of Ideal Type depends upon the inquiry and the features may vary. ## Formulation of Ideal Types - Ideal Types are formed by a number of elements which, though, found in reality, may or may not be discovered in their specific form. These elements must be found by trained investigator in the form of abstractions drawn from subjective meanings of the individual. Investigator must be capable of looking at the phenomenon from the eyes of an individual actor. These elements are thus, based upon interpretation of investigator, but are definitive specific traits which constitute the reality. Weber used Ideal Types extensively in his works like Economic and Social Organization, The City and Sociology of Religion. Ideal Types developed by Weber are grouped into many categories: 1. **Ideal Types of Historical Particulars** - These are Ideal Types of particular historical phenomena like some ancient city, protestant ethics and capitalism. 2. **Ideal Types of Abstract Phenomena in Social Reality** – It involves developing an abstract phenomena like social action and authority which can be used to understand a social phenomenon. 3. **Ideal Types of Particular Behaviour** - He also developed Ideal Types of particular behaviours like economic or political behaviour. 4. **Structural Ideal Types** - These are forms taken by the causes and consequences of social action. For example, traditional domination. In line with Weber's efforts to find a middle ground between nomothetic (general) and idiographic (specific) knowledge, he argued that Ideal Types should be neither too general nor too specific. For example, in the case of religion, he would reject Ideal Types of the history of religion in general, but he would also be critical of Ideal Types of very specific phenomena, such as an individual's religious experience. Rather, Ideal Types are developed for intermediate phenomena such as Calvinism, Pietism, Methodism and Baptism. Ideal Types are also not developed once and for all. Because society is constantly changing, and the interests of social scientists as well, it is necessary to develop new typologies to fit the changing reality. Ideal Types perform various functions for the researcher. First of all, they act as a measuring rod for a social process. Secondly, they act as a ready reference and save the researcher from the hassles of studying a phenomenon afresh. For example, Ideal Type of capitalism can be used as a ready reference for a host of commercial activities of the 17th Century. Thirdly, it makes prediction possible. Situations which approximate an Ideal Type will have a similar outcome. Ideal Type of bureaucracy has made it possible for sociologists to predict many of its consequences in organisations. Fourthly, it also helps in establishing linkages between multiple social phenomena, as demonstrated by Weber in his Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism. However, this heuristic device of Weber is criticised for the following reasons - 1. Weber has not suggested any specific method to identify elements of Ideal Type and it is totally left on investigator. 2. Despite his claim of objectivity, Ideal Type is highly susceptible to subjectivity of investigator, especially in selection of elements of Ideal Type. ## Authority Weber's conception of authority is a demonstration of his concept of Ideal Type in action. According to him, both power and authority are social in character and come into play where relations are there. He links the concept of power and authority by using different Ideal Types. Power is defined by Weber as: *The chance of a man or a number of men to realize their own will in a communal action, even against the resistance of those who are participating in the communal action.* Authority, according to Weber, is a form of legitimate power, i.e., power which is considered legitimate in society. Weber identifies three sources of legitimacy - tradition, rationality and affective or charisma and on the basis of these, he developed three pure types or Ideal Types of authority. Like all other concepts, concept of authority is also developed by Weber as an Ideal Type. According to him, coercion differentiates power from authority. Power has an element of coercion in it. Power is the capability of individuals to influence others irrespective of their will. According to Weber, there are three elements of authority or three Ideal Types of authority, which are based upon his conception of various types of social action - 1. **Traditional Authority** – It is that type of authority which stems out from traditional social actions, i.e., authority based upon beliefs, customs and values. An example would be a leader who comes to power because his or her family or clan has always provided the group's leadership. For example, authority exercised by a hereditary monarch, a feudal lord, a caste Brahmin. In developing countries like India, even political leadership often exercises traditional authority as top positions in parties are occupied by members of the same family. Weber also used his Ideal-type methodology to analyse historically, the different forms of traditional authority. He differentiated between two very early forms of traditional authority. A gerontocracy involves rule by elders, whereas primary patriarchalism involves leaders, who inherit their positions. Still more modern form is feudalism. Weber saw structures of traditional authority, in any form, as barriers to the development of rationality. Weber argued that the structures and practices of traditional authority constitute a barrier to the rise of rational economic structures, in particular, capitalism as well as to various other components of a rational society. 2. **Charismatic Authority** - This is a result of personal qualities of the person who exercises it. It corresponds to affective social action. For example, authority exercised by Mahatma Gandhi over masses. Although Weber did not deny that a charismatic leader may have outstanding characteristics, his sense of charisma was more dependent on the group of disciples and the way that they define the charismatic leader. If the followers fail to recognise a leader as a charismatic leader, he ceases to remain one. To Weber, charisma was a revolutionary force. The rise of a charismatic leader may well pose a threat to the system and lead to a dramatic change in the system. This type of authority becomes more pronounced in times of crisis and turmoil, when other types of authority seem to be failing and new forms of authority are needed. According to Weber, a charismatic system is inherently fragile. It survives only as long as the charismatic leader lives or the crisis lasts. This type of authority is also not as effective as legal-rational authority, as organisation is not done on rational criterion and members are not technically trained. An organisation based on charismatic authority has no formal rules, no established administrative organs, and no precedents to guide new judgments. 3. **Legal-Rational Authority** - This authority is based on Zweckrational social action or total rational action. Legal-rational authority can take a variety of structural forms, but the form that most interested Weber was bureaucracy, which he considered the purest type of exercise of legal authority. Weber paid most of his attention to this form of authority as it leads to the most efficient systems. Actual authority may be a combination of above Ideal Types of authority. For example, Franklin D Roosevelt, as a president of the United States and Nehru as the Indian prime minister, ruled on all three bases as they were elected in accordance with a series of rational-legal principles. By the time they were elected three times, a good part of the rules had traditional elements. Finally, many disciples and followers regarded them as charismatic leaders. In the real world, there is constant tension and, sometimes, conflict among the three bases. For example, the charismatic leader is a constant threat to the other forms of authority. Further, a particular type of authority may change over time and transform into another type. Weber refers routinisation of charisma and traditionalisation of rationality as examples of such transformations. His theory of authority is criticised on various grounds - 1. Weber's conception of authority is primarily criticised for the anomaly in Ideal Types of social action and Ideal Types of authority. He mentions four types of social actions, but mentions only three types of authority. 2. Michel Foucault has argued that authority and power don't lie with particular institutions and persons, as Weber suggested. Power is highly dispersed in society and operates at all levels in different situations. 3. According to Robert Dahl, authority is situational and one may hold different kinds of authority. It is also relative. One may be in a controlling position in one instance and may be controlled by others in another instance. ## Bureaucracy Bureaucracy as a general sociological concept shall be discussed in the chapter on polity and society. Here, we shall discuss it from the view point of Max Weber. Bureaucracy, like his many other concepts, is also linked to the Ideal Type construct and Weber associated it with the rising rationalisation of society. It is an Ideal Type of organisation in which, structure is based on legal rational authority. According to Weber, bureaucracy is a type of organisation which suits most of the modern societies where work is done rationally. It is a hierarchical organisation, designed rationally to coordinate the work of many individuals, in the pursuit of large scale administrative tasks and organisational goals. Capitalism, which is the basis of economy in the modern world also works on rational organisation and it requires bureaucratic organisations for its working. According to him - 'From a purely technical point of viewus a bureaucracy is capable of attaining the highest degree of efficiency, and is in this sense, formally the most rational known means of exercising authority over human beings. It is superior to any other form in precision, in stability, in the stringency of its discipline, and in its reliability. It thus, makes possible, a particularly high degree of calculability of results, for the heads of the organisation and for those acting in relation to it. It is finally superior, both in intensive efficiency and in the scope of its operations and is formally capable of application to all kinds of administrative tasks.' Weber distinguished the ideal-typical of bureaucracy from the ideal-typical bureaucrat. He conceived bureaucracies as structures and bureaucrats as positions within those structures. According to Tony Waters and Dagmar Waters, in their Weber's Rationalism and Modern Society: New Translations on Politics, Bureaucracy, and Social Stratification, 2015, Weber specified certain typical elements associated with the bureaucracy, like - 1. Bureaucracy works on the basis of written legal rational rules. Activities of bureaucrats are in the form of official duty. 2. There is a hierarchy of officials in authority. 3. Work is specialised in bureaucracy and staff is trained accordingly. 4. Bureaucrats are permanent and paid and they may have to work overtime. 5. Office work is vocation for bureaucrats and they are expected to do their work honestly. 6. The incumbent is not allowed to appropriate the position. Position always remains a part of the organisation. 7. Administrative acts, decisions, and rules are formulated and recorded in writing. This Ideal Type bureaucracy is only approximated in reality, but Weber argues that bureaucracies of modern societies are slowly moving towards this pure type as this type of organisation has technical superiority over other types of organisations. Weber had certain scepticism also about bureaucracy and despite it being most efficient type of organisation, Weber foresaw it as a source of alienation of human being. He referred it as iron cage of rationality which makes human beings, slave of rationality, who cannot escape it as they get too addicted to it. His major fear was that the rationalisation that dominates all aspects of bureaucratic life was a threat to individual liberty and creativity. He described bureaucracies as escape proof, practically un-shatterable and among the hardest institutions to destroy once they are established. Unlike Marx, he didn't see future in terms of dictatorship of proletariat, but in terms of dictatorship of officials. Weber's concept of bureaucracy attracted wide criticism. Roberto Michels, in his Political Parties, 1911, said that bureaucracy becomes so dominating in democracy, that it reduces a democracy into an oligarchy. Bureaucratic institutions were criticised for reducing human beings as simply cogs in the organisational machines. Others also claimed that this conception of pure legal rational institutions was utopian as humans cannot be totally rational. Organisations need flexible behaviour to deal with uncertain events and bureaucratic structures cannot provide such flexibility. ## Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism Weber's theory of Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism is contained in his The Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism, 1904, widely known for its use of scientific methods in Sociology, possibility of studying macro phenomenon in terms of micro and a demonstration of his idea of causal pluralism or probabalism, as he factored in political, economic and religious factors in the rise of capitalism. His study of capitalism is that of modern capitalism and, unlike Marx who gave primacy to economic structure and material aspects, Weber put more emphasis on ideas leading to an economic system. He was concerned with Protestantism, mainly as a system of ideas, and its impact on the rise of another system of ideas, the spirit of capitalism, and ultimately on a capitalist economic system. His analysis starts with an observation - 'In modern Europe, business leaders, owners of capital as well as higher grades of skilled labourer and even more, the higher technologically and commercially trained personnel of modern enterprise are predominantly protestant.' Further, he observes that, it is not only a contemporary fact, but also a historical fact. The individuals in this statement are representatives of capitalism in Europe. In contrast to feudal mode, which was represented by aristocracy, capitalism was represented by the entrepreneurs and skilled- personnel. This observation led Weber to ponder over if 'Is there any correlation between Protestantism and Capitalism?' Thus, Weber makes an empirical observation based on the existing records as a basis for initiating the study of protestans ethics and spirit of capitalism. It points towards the Scientific Methodology used by Weber in his theories. In order to explore the possible correlation, Weber developed the Ideal Types of Capitalism and Protestant Ethics. He chose Calvinism as the most original form of Protestant Ethics for this purpose. Later, he made a comparative study to establish causal linkages between the two. Finally, he validated his theory by taking Ideal Types of other religions and again comparing them with the Ideal Type of capitalism. ## Ideal Type of Calvinism was proposed with following elements 1. **Doctrine of predestination** - In Calvinism, some people are chosen by God to enter into heaven and nobody can know whether one is chosen or not. 2. **This worldly asceticism** - Protestant Ethics suggest strict self-discipline with no enjoyment and more hard work for the glory of God. 3. **All work is sacred** - Work is not merely work, it is a calling or mission and should be done with devotion for the glory of God. 4. **God created the world for his own glory** - A supernatural explanation to the existence of the world is given and God is deemed as unknowable. 5. **No mediation of any priest can help us in knowing God** - As God is unknowable, he cannot be known through mediators as well. 6. **Wealth has to be conserved and devoted to God** - Riches earned through hard work should not be spent on luxuries, but in the glory of God. ## Ideal Type of capitalism is explained with following elements 1. It is an economic system which is aimed at unlimited accumulation of profit. 2. Work in modern capitalism is organised rationally. 3. Various ethics in capitalism are, time is money, work should be done well, work is for an end called profit. 4. Capitalism honours individualism, innovation, profit pursuit and hard work. After developing these two Ideal Types, Weber draws comparison to explore the possibility of correlation between the two. According to Weber, Doctrine of Predestination results into uncertainty about the destiny of Protestant Calvinists resulting into anxiety. As their destiny was unknowable, a feeling of insecurity is generated. This led to intense this worldly activity as success in this world was considered as being the chosen one in that world. Calvinists tried to rationalise the religious tenets in search of salvation and as a result, hard work and asceticism were seen as avenues to overcome the fear of the uncertain. Among other factors, Weber sees role of Charismatic leaders also in this development. This leads to much needed hard work that is required for the rise of capitalism. Asceticism produced savings and much needed reinvestment in the nascent capitalism. Notion of calling made them hard working, similarly, other ethics of Calvinism were also suitable for the growth of capitalism. In this way, Weber concludes that there is an elective affinity between some elements of protestant ethics and spirit of capitalism, i.e., there was a coincidence between requirements of Capitalism and tenets of Calvinism. Working hard and making money, both became religious and business ethic. Protestant Ethics only provided spirit, there were other factors as well in rise of capitalism like substance in the form of capital and technology, which led to rise of capitalism. According to Michael Shea, in this article The Protestant Ethic and the Language of Austerity, 2015, the spirit of capitalism does not refer to the spirit in the metaphysical sense, but rather, a set of values, but to the spirit of hard work, austerity and growth. Weber believes in plurality of causes. In this theory as well, dual variables exist in the form of - spirit and substance. Spirit may have been provided by the Protestant Ethics, but only spirit cannot lead to practice of capitalism; substance should also be there. During this time, substance was already present in the form of new factory system, new techniques of accounting, recently invented tools and machines, democratic political system for stable governance and market, etc. Further, Weber tried to validate this correlation through historical comparative studies of various world religions. He developed Ideal Types of those and proved why capitalism didn't rise in their context in other countries. In his book Religion of China, 1951, he concludes that despite the presence of a developed economy, trade and commerce, the Confucius ethics didn't permit the rise of capitalism as it stressed upon collective harmony, traditionalism and family obligation. These values were not in harmony with the requirements of rise of capitalism. Similarly, in his book Religion of India, 1958, he concluded that ideas of Karma, Dharma and Punarjanma prevented the rise of capitalism. In India too, substance was there, but spirit was absent as there were many structural barrier in the form of caste and spiritual barriers in the form of ideas of Karma and Punarjanma. As a result, for Hindus, activity in this world was not important, because the world was seen as a transient abode and an impediment to the spiritual quest. Similarly, in case of Judaism in his Ancient Judaism, 1952, Judaist ethics had elements which could have promoted capitalism, but certain Historical factors scattered Jews. So, the spirit was there, but the substance was absent. While Durkheim made a generalisation from narrow examples of aboriginals, Max Weber took a much wider observation of the religions across the world. His writings also differ from those of Durkheim in the sense that his writings concentrate on religion and social change, something which Durkheim gave little attention to. ## Weber's idea of rise of capitalism is criticised on following grounds 1. **Ideal Types which Weber drew upon may be erroneous.** He seems to have concentrated on certain aspects of religion only and ignored the others. 2. **It is also argued the doctrine of calling was already present among the Catholics.** 3. **He seems to be selective while drawing elements for his analysis.** For example, according to Milton Singer, he took selective elements out of Hinduism, there is an equivalent of Calvinists. in forms of Chettiars of Madras. 4. **Lawrence Stone's studies in England concluded that it were not Protestant Ethics, but British aristocracy which had accounted for the rise of capitalism.** ## Capitalism - Marx and Weber | View of society | Marx | Weber | |---|---|---| | | Karl Marx takes society as his unit of analysis. | Weber studies society in terms of meanings attributed or given by individuals to the world around them. | | View of capitalism | Marx describes capitalism as one of the historical stages and gives a mono-causal explanation for its rise. | Weber understands capitalism in terms of the psychological motivations of individuals and gives a causal-plural explanation of its growth. | | Emergence of capitalism | Marx sees the emergence of capitalism in terms of a shift in the mode of production. | Weber sees rise of capitalism as a result of mutual affinity in Protestant Ethics and factors conducive for the growth of capitalism. | | Consequences of capitalism | According to Marx, capitalism leads to alienation of workers. | Capitalism is a symbol of growth of rationality, but Weber also acknowledges that bureaucracy and capitalism grow side by side and will ultimately lead to disenchantment of human beings. | | Stratification | Marx sees class as the only dimension of stratification in a capitalistic society as it overshadows all other dimensions. | Weber argues that class is only one dimension and there are other dimensions also in form of status and party. | | Solution | Marx foresees a revolution as an end to capitalism. | Weber sees no end to rationality as it is necessary in modern societies. | | Contribution of Weber | Weber is immense as he managed to rise above the Positivism and non-Positivism debate. He added many new perspectives, concepts, methods to Sociology and was later, followed closely by Chicago School and others as well. He enriched the subject matter and scope of the discipline. He never claimed of giving universalistic theories, but rather, focused upon establishing cause and effect through multi-causal approach. In present society, his ideas are still relevant in the understanding of society in the wake of tremendous rise of individualism, isolation, etc. His prognosis of bureaucracy as an iron cage of rationality is also found to be correct to a great degree and we have seen tremendous growth of such bureaucratic institutions. His concepts are still widely used by the contemporary scholars. George Ritzer in his McDonaldization of Society, 1993, used Weberian bureaucratic model to explain the increasing mechanisation/rationalisation of human experiences and its negative impacts. Ritzer argues that McDonaldisation is dehumanising as we make queues to get a burger as if we are on a conveyer belt and staff repeats the same mundane tasks again and again like robots. | ## IRON CAGE OF RATIONALITY Max Weber used the term to describe the bleak, but inevitable, future of bureaucracy and increasing rationality in social life. According to him, more rationality would not lead to universal freedom as Enlightenment theorists had believed, but would rather create an 'iron cage' from which there would be no escape. It will reduce the men into mere cogs in the machine as individuals will lose autonomy and individuality in wake of increasing specialisation and rational organisation of work.