Weber and Sociology

Sociology

Marx, Weber and Polanyi

Chapter One Unforeseen Consequences

Science is driven by theory construction.  Max Weber pointed out that economic action is almost always related to political power and differences between participants.

An exchange economy rests on networks of relationships that are contractual in nature. Weber would claim to use this s a counter to some of the overly determined analyses of Marxists of his day. Polanyi would make a similar claim.

Polanyi and the Substantivist economists would study economic histories of diverse cultures from the Old Stone Age to the present.

Polanyi outlined an economy embedded in social responsibilities as being nearly universal. From generalized balanced reciprocity between communality members cementing family ties, then to balanced reciprocity of gift exchanges be trading partners forming long-term alliances and the opposing tendencies of political relations to plunder, swindle, production for profit and modern financial institutions both ends of the economic exchange were examined. Until recently the negative was to be kept in check for the survival of society. Both Weber and Polanyi would offer a nice dialectical balance to Marxism.

Economic relationships require some sort of control labor and means and methods of production and distribution. Important in any economic understanding is the motivation behind the economic activity. Why do people work. The incentive of work is as significant as the way employment is established. The manner labor is organized to carry out the jobs allocated to individuals within a society is often multifaceted with several dimensions, not just survival. Yes physical subsistence of the individuals within their communities is basic. Also depending of the economic system understudy other factors paly an important role. Self-interests including recognition, accumulation wealth and establishment of power is very common. But, so is ethical concern for others, social responsibility to family, kinship, and community. Pleasure of creative work, happiness in receiving satisfaction in the craft of inspired resourcefulness of problem solving and interacting with the skills while identifying with the craft. These motivations are all important in any economic system and not mutually exclusive in any. But some are historically and culturally more important in one culture over another. Until the market economy of early 19^th century the second was more important than it would be in a pure market economy. Though there has never been a pure market economy. The tension between self-interests and social responsibility would increase under capitalism. Both Weber and Polanyi would study the intervention of a modern professional bureaucracy would emerge as problem solving catastrophic restriction because of the disastrous influences of a free market of the social and moral fabric of society.  Again a Hegelian dialectal balance to Marx is re-established.

Social relations are transmissible in their organization. This forms the bases of Weberian Sociology. Beyond that not much more can be said about social organization. There are about as many different explanations as there are examples. At this level Weberian sociology is very descriptive in creating a very useful tool in understanding social organization.

With any organization identification is important. Often though not always this leads to a feeling of being a part or at least supportive of a definable group. This is often reflective of social relations involved in economic activity and the corresponding power relations. These relations can either correspond to supporting or challenging the established social organizations of society. For Weber political and economic cannot be separated.

This group identity may be felt strongly, or it may be no more than an attitude.     This in turn leads to a motivation to bring together a diversity of interests under a united direction of actions. This mutual agreement maybe broadly or more narrowly focused. Class versus status according to Weber, but nothing happens without alliances. This often leads to conflicts within the unite front between purists, pragmatists, and those using the front for a contradictory projects. But, more often while acknowledging conflicting agendas the majorities connect to and identify with the larger cause. This association, however loosely it defines itself, lasts only so long as the general agreement of purpose is important enough to over come the differences that do exist. As long as the group has this common cause differences remain secondary. Weber complements class struggle with common practicalities and programs.

Assertion of dependability is initiated upon commonality. Solidarity can often does lead to a set of shared experiences. Leading to having access to the resources allocated to members of the group, in turn leads to sharing in some degree in the benefits and responsibilities. Working from being subject to a set of rules external to any single individual within the group to being headed by an illogical captivating despot.

This is the foundation of many movements in history. All movements are histories of a people’s actions within specific historical, cultural and sociological settings. E need to isolate and study the short range and long range goals of the various factions making up the larger group.

Sociology is history that studies changing social environments in a way that looks for patterns in behavior in those emergent and evolving social cultural settings. People’s motivations are related to the goals people set for themselves. In turn these incentives are expressed in a developing and changing involving a combination communal and customary influences lived experiences and situations. Most of our action ends up having short-term consequences and long-term effects many are unforeseen at the time. Here Weber would are with Althusier.

How much of these social behaviors of our actions are the result of these expressed goals and how much are the expressed goals are the result of jointed desires that are the outcome of after the fact ideological justification for past behavior is open to question. Early Marx also expressed such concerns.

The end result of historical sociology can add to history a deeper understanding of the current tensions. But, Weber would be the first to agree there will never come a time when can either predict or fully understand future problems. Unforeseen consequence, have powerful influences on how things turn out. The most we can say about the social setting is that it establishes possibilities. It will always come down to probabilities.

In the study of history Weber stated social actions could be typed into average categories of behavior. These were not meant to represent actual real behavior, but common traits shared over a range of similar behaviors.  These were called ideal types or typical features used by scholars to understand what is happening. In doing this we assume rational decisions making by the people evolved. If this were true there would be no serious mistakes. At this point we are exploring unforeseen consequences. Thus for the sake of our study we put corrupting elements temporarily to one side in setting up our research model. These distorting parts briefly to rest will be explored later when we understand the social planning that went into this collective behavior. This is where unforeseen consequences can be studied by comparing what we thought would happen to what did happen.

In our ideal type irrationality, mistakes and unforeseen consequences are discounted but not overlooked or disregarded. Now we have a model to use in examining shared actions we can now study how illogicality, slip-ups and interrupting outcomes not only enter the social scene, but alter forever the future. Like Marx, Weber set up a simple model first to outline a rough skeletal framework upon which more complex elements can be added later in step-by-step analysis of complex situations.

The simple model is compared to a more complex reality. In fact while the economy move toward equilibrium other elements undermine equilibrium. Both are happening at the same time and in opposition to each other. Thus we can isolate patterns and counter patterns to study these segregated prototypes and their shared interaction more easily.  A good example is the relationship between price and value, never equal but related. Both Weber and Marx realized that their models were not real but a tool to get closer to reality.

It is at this point we can begin to understand how much of social behavior is planned, how it much is habit, how much is simply impulse reaction.  At this point contradictions become apparent. These inconsistencies develop and are noticeable are often the source of unexpected results leading to surprising actions require to counter disturbing costs. Planning and damage control as a result of those plans are standard day-to-day attempts. These corrupting elements can be looked at more closely. The unforeseen consequences can now be seen as having a profound influence over real life day to day and in the future.

Sociology as its base is a study of history. History is an observation in which a number of options present themselves at any time. Sociology of Weber never claimed to be predictive at most with each different option we can outline probabilities of potential outcomes if certain actions are taken. Probabilities simply state likelihoods not certainties keeping in mind unanticipated outcomes still will always play a role.

In this we have a dynamic model not a static replica. Because of this we have an animated paradigm not an inert duplication of what was not real to begin with. Ideal types are not photographs. Our paradigm not only reflects a changing social environment, but the social history of the researcher as her position in her society in fact creates a mental map to work with and is part of the model.

How much do we really have a say over those decisions that affect our lives and is there a hope of having real choices? What can we do to improve those options? Thesis, antithesis, synthesis or the internal contradictions begin to undermine what is, while opening new possibilities. Change happens if we choose it or not.

Karl Marx Capital Volumes 1, 2, 3

Karl Polanyi Great Transformation

Max Weber General Economic History

Economy and Society Max Weber

Chapter Two: Action and Reaction

Action is most often subject to opposing and conflicting impulses.  By comparing one situation with a slightly different situation and different settings, we can outline the defining characteristics of mass actions. Here cultural anthropology rounds out historical sociology.

We are motivated by a motivated by a complicated set of interactive subjective interpretations of what is happening and all the various meanings that goes with all of that. Adequacy of meaning of coherent action that closely corresponds to our beliefs, our thoughts and culturally defined probabilities set in motion our planned behavior. Yet errors and irrational emotional reaction complicates the results.

Typical actions are both in many ways and what is in several respects understood as the result of approximately what was expected. Each specific action varies in its results. Thus, it is the averages that become the focal point in defining future actions.

Differentiations in the structure of the system are as important as its unity. Discrepancies in the organization of the assembly of the decided upon proposes the action reinforce the definition of its agreement among actors. All parts interact. Some parts are more important in the over all whole. Within a society each part meets the needs of social units and their positions in the larger social environment. The social units internal parts function with a degree of harmony. This includes biological, psychological and sociological needs of the individual within the larger social whole. These are in part organized around socially understood concepts.

Social institutions of modern industrial society and global commercial society are of course historically unique. Other societies continue their own set of institutional arrangements. These non-capitalist economic systems survive until violently overwhelmed by the spread of capitalism from Western Europe and even some traditional elements survive and adapt however distorted. Articulation of modes of production is created that is in fact the coexistence more than one economic system. . Construction of approaches of economic distribution procedures interact support and resist the spread of a universal market economy.

Each economic evolutionary path while influenced by other systems, has its own historical particulars. This evolutionary trajectory continues until a new continuing direction lingers in the face the obvious desires caused by the repression of local needs until conquered by the external forces coming from the needs of capitalist expansion. This began in Britain spreading shortly to Western Europe and then the rest of the world with the reducing of the outlying areas reduced to dependencies.

Community traditions of contemporary developed and international market based civilizations are obviously customarily exceptional because their jurisdictions are grounded in domains that are clearly routinely outside divisions traditional ethics that protect the social fabric of society from search for wealth of the few.  Even in traditional societies the search for wealth is often, not always, known; but the economy continuously being embedded in a social ethic of communal duty because of a social ethic of social responsibility to others there is a built in protection from the ravages of personal greed and avarice in the quest for prosperity, desire and building up stocks not tied to personal artistry.

Because any society is always changing to begin with, capitalism is lacking a larger social ethic is even more unstable.

Every society is always changing to begin with.  It is emergent with modifications within the continuously adjustable and fluctuating within the shifting social and natural settings. Because of this culture is an adaptation to a constantly changing and evolving environment. Because of these two factors translate into the proposition all social-cultural arrangement are changeable to begin with. Now add to this outside its core areas capitalism is brought in from the outside by force, except Japan, only intensifies the internal tensions, with a new set of contradictions. Cultural Ecological Marxism becomes a possibility.

Terms define by Weber become important here. Rationalization according to Weber is to make a social organization operate more efficiently. Decisions are made in a systematic routine to achieve goals both productively and effectively as possible. There is an attempt to keep to a minimum secondary and unforeseen consequences. Success is judged by how much of the unexpected outcomes are prevented; knowing full well perfection is impossible. Because unforeseen consequences can never be prevented so to manage them professionally become the decisive schema.

To Weber rationalization is an ideal type. It does not exist. It is to be approximate but never fully achieved. Because it is approached but on no occasion completed rationalization is defined by a set formal written rules to be referred to.

Capitalist attempt to appeal to those decisions that value the efficient pursuit of profits. Given the value of accumulations of wealth for wealth sake, investment decisions judged using rational in this sense.

Rational legal authority is a form of leadership in which the authority of an organization is largely tied to legal legitimacy of the bureaucracy i.e. official printed guidelines. Each agency has a particular objective in controlling explicit difficulties as they result from those unforeseen consequences.

Weber defines formal and substantive rationality. Weber uses the term “formal rationality” to refer to plain easily achievable rational problem solving. Substantive rationality refers to goal oriented rational action within the context of ultimate ends or values or minimum goal or final goals.

Weber defines formal and substantive rationality where both exist together. This typical of any arrangement of an on going administration and the bi-laws the govern them. In studying how these two types of rationality mutually support each other it is important to understand the conflict between the two.

The practical having a stable source in circumstance establishes confidence that is erecting a definite origin in fact and thus notable, important, and understanding and performed in agreement with guidelines resolved in accord with rules of official important situations. With these guidelines rational calculations are analyzed in terms of quantities. Describing these quantities in recognized amounts are necessary to secure given and certain sets of values. This is necessary in order to understand the basic material needs for the members of the community as outlined in the substantive and utilitarian appreciation of the agreed upon ethical requirements for conflict resolution.

Rationality changes within a market economy. Market competition is established with a set of norms that define a market economy. Prices reflect a set of principles centered under profit maximization, modified by marginal utility. Price reflects these kinds of decisions. In non-market exchanges there is established economic rules, however different value is in due course decided according to social relations in which social respect is more important than profit.

Both market and non-market economies are guided by actions toward some clear set of expectations of outcomes. But, the outcomes are different. Short term profit maximization for the individual. Ethical guide to responsible action toward the larger community leads economies being embedded a set of social ethics.  Appropriate standard of responsible achievements concerning the needs of the public advances economies being rooted a circle of community-defined morals. When this happens the rational can be secondary. It is good to be good. Ethics is important because it is the right thing to do whether or not we succeed. Other times actions are guided by deeply felt emotions. Finally action is carried out through commitment to tradition. Polanyi calls this embedded and Weber limited rationality.   Either way traditional behavior is often an almost automatic response to habit. Much of our daily action is on the level of habit.

Ethical actions are made from self-conscious choices based upon higher sets of values. Such actions are decided upon because it is the right thing to do. Alternative motives or ambitions play a minor role. On the other hand rational action carefully looks at the effects such actions and makes decisions accordingly ethics are secondary. This says nothing of motivation at this time. This creates a tool to understand how ideology molds behavior. Social action is now outlined. Social relationships have groups of people behaving in a way that shows concern about what others are doing. Action then is in part decided upon by the actions of others. Weber with ideology and Marx with material basis supplement each other. Dialectical relationship between economy and ideology create a developing modification of the environment social and natural, the economy, culture and ideology.

People react to external stimuli existing before interpretations.  Understanding expresses symbolic connections to those involvements. Through human action meaning becomes attached to our surroundings. Given past experience, cultural history, outlining the substantial surroundings of an evolving environment, with periodic material disruption and intellectual sensations of being bemused of liveliness can earnestly amend these perceptions. The traditional remnants are altered through reinterpretations.  It would take a materialist orientation to supplement this study of the world of ideas. Ideas connected to an external world. Through direct observation of conduct in a thoughtful careful examination and examination of behavior will help us gain a deeper understanding how the subjective sympathetic understanding gives us a deeper grasp of the actors being observed.

General Economic History Max Weber

Economy and Society Max Weber

Anti-Dühring Friedrich Engels

Max Weber

Sociology is a science, which is an interpretative understanding of social behavior used to explain causes, courses and effects of human interaction within a larger social context.

Social behaviors are the activities of individuals whose conduct is an interaction with others and are making decisions accordingly.

Meaning is derived from a specific actor in a specific historical situation.

Ideal type is the subjective meaning attributed to a hypothetical actor in a given category of actions in constituting a standard of a particular generalized model in wide-ranging category of surroundings. From this we can create an intellectual construction that is abstracted from experience in which individual elements are combined to form a whole that is conceptually independent of empirical factors or variables, but against which particular examples of the appropriate class found in life can be measured.

Ideal type is an agreed upon intellectual tool or paradigm used in Sociology and Anthropology drawn from logic, careful research of observable reality and generalization although not conforming to empirical reality in its details. The tool is useful because of the careful simplification and overstatement of its characteristics. It is a constructed intellectual tool used to approximate reality by selecting and emphasizing certain key elements.

Much of our understanding of others’ and their behavior comes from our ability to imagine their experiences, based upon similar experiences that the observer may have had. Through the use of subjective imagination, which is brought together with the careful objective gathering of facts, we develop a sympathetic understanding.

Sympathetic Understanding, which means not making guesses or making statements of others based on preexisting attitudes toward a people. Because all people have imagination they are able to develop empathy toward people whose lives are different from their own. Through rational understanding based on data, this Compassionate Insight is brought about by information about real people in their own cultural and historical setting, based on Facts not Fiction.  This is the origin of empathy. From this ethics is born.

The bases of a good paper are clarity, verifiable proof, and provide data that can be expanded upon by others.

Rational proof is empirical and logical.

Rational proof can be achieved within the context of meaning.

Lucidity, clarity, eloquence with verifiable proof that is logical in a clear intellectual grasp of the subject matter

Contingent upon reexamination of past studies, the validity of any study is the possibility duplicating the results in another examination, i.e. replicable.

Empathetic proof comes from participation directed by sympathetic emotional understanding. This is an expressively vital in creatively favorable approach allowing for participation in the everyday life of the subjects being studied. This leads to participant observation and sympathetic understanding

Sympathetic understanding or “verstehen” again a sociologist can reflect on the meaning an actor attaches to her actions. In doing so, the sociologist takes on the role or view of others by looking at the actor’s motives, how the individual perceives objects and others, considers these, and acts in response.

Verstehen is the empathic in the s historical sociological understanding of human action and behavior.

The ability to gain an understanding to gain a sympathetic understanding requires an understanding of a value system of the culture being studied.

To understand behavior, it is necessary to understand the cultural and historical context in which that set of behaviors takes place. To understand the reaction to those behaviors it is necessary to understand how the actors in the environment in which those behaviors are taking place perceive the behavior.

Behavior is all we can observe yet behavior is set in a cultural context, value-relevance as the foundation of historical knowledge.  This can lead to a rational empirical observation of behavior, becoming aware of the most important to balanced investigational scrutiny of performances of people in their everyday life.

Through direct empirical understanding with rational understanding we gain an explanatory understanding. From this understanding we can act more intelligently with fewer unforeseen consequences.

To develop a science of behavior our working explanations requires a grasp of the context of meaning used by the actors within the course of those actions within a historically specific social setting.

Within emotionally charged sets of behaviors the subjective meaning of that behavior exists within the relative social context of its meaning. Connotation is described and contained by this emotive milieu. 

This sets up an interpretative understanding of serving to interpret with an explanatory understanding of events.  Concrete individual cases with the use of fairly accurate approximation within a sociological mass analysis of the social setting we are looking at. This allows for a clarification a recurrently phenomenon as a formulated system. We can now investigate the origin, nature, and limits of human knowledge.

Any decisively noteworthy sufficient concentration of understanding must refer at some point to the subjective interpretation of a plausible direction of behavior whose elemental components parts organized into a coherent whole. These come together in familiar process of thoughts and feelings. Representing distinctive multifaceted sets of meaning.

Causal links are not flawlessly assured, what is certain are when strong correlations of events can be shown in which there exists a relationship of one event leading to another than when the process is reversed there is an argument for cause. If this can be established empirically, the interpretation is meaningful and adequate. This style of research can be used in formulating studies using statistical uniformities and eventually establishing sociological generalizations. Before this can be firmly set up the use of subjective understanding as a source for generating testable hypothesis is very helpful.

What is studied is behavior. Behavior is the behavior of individuals.  This is set in a larger social context of having meaning for actors engaged in those sets of actions. From careful observation the historical sociologist can group together of similar concepts and to be able to establish usable terminology. The sociologist can now arrange these collective concepts to be able to study modes of social behavior. These interpretations represent behavior that is meaningful to the actors. The study social behavior is guided by an understanding of underlying variables that influence their actions. 

Behavior that increases chances of survival leading to the continuation of cultural distinctiveness and continuous connected comprehensive collective of equivalent categories of social behavior that will have an effect on choices made by the actors. This has long-term consequences only if these sets of behavior become typical for any social group.

Generalizations are understandable if we look at social behavior as rational and related to some socially defined goals and values.  This is a methodological decision to avoid unverifiable and unobservable psychological speculation.  Defiant behavior has fundamental plausible and rational ancestry given the specific cultural worldview.

The behaviors we observed could by classified and categorized into useful tools we call laws, which are nothing other than statistical probabilities confirmed through empirical observation. These laws are artificial tool created by us to understand empirical regularities that we observed.

Laws are premises that are heuristic generalization, used in stimulating interest in further investigations stated as a suggestion emphasizing something to be true, characteristically observed flow of behavior. This behavior is understood as plausible quest of aspirations.

Theory a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena. Theory is a working model that organizes our concepts of the empirical world in a systematic way, to help us guide further research and analyze the findings. All theory is based upon empirical variable facts. The strength of a theory is the skill in which it arranges information that can explain complex information in manageable form. It must contain empirical statements that can be tested, and explain a complex interaction of observable phenomena. Theory is not a guess that is a hypothesis. Theory is a factual statement.

Weberian Sociology

Explanatory understanding includes understanding of background materials and motives.

Rational understanding of motives both sentimental awareness and motivational perception.

Understanding involves the interpretive grasp of history, of the intended meaning for concrete action, or sociological mass action and phenomena with the over all typical or average meaning.

Ideal types or according to Weber scientifically formulated pure types created by the researcher to better understand the commonality in formulating intellectual concepts called laws. Model categories are conceptualized to better systematically verbalize those abstract categories shaped by the scholar to gain a wide-ranging knowledge of the shared aims in expressing academic ideas termed values.

Learning is initiated upon concepts initiated upon activated widespread invented arrangements of ideas. Science is built upon theory construction based upon generalized conceptual schemes. This works for both natural and social science. Generalized theoretical categories are valuable and important in understanding proof of causal relationships between experiential empirical data of the various parts of the study. Comprehensive theoretic groupings are important proof of causal relationships. The empirical knowledge is framed as abstract statements. Theory acts as a filter selectively arranging some facts, not all facts. Deciding which set of facts and only those facts that are relevant to the study.

This brings up the issue of value free. Valid questions begin with propositions that are logically distinct from why the problem was chosen to begin with. According to Weber the researcher holds their personal values in abeyance while collecting and analyzing the data. Many, not all, Marxist find value free not only unattainable, but not even desirable. Some would go so far as to say the attempt is deeply immoral. The choice of the topic of research is political and how the final results will be used is also political. A few Marxist would agree with Weber and hold your values in check until you know you have strong data to support your position.

Proof of causal relationships in reference to a logical schema is the goal of research. Those proof including a description the phenomenon to be explained. By keeping as precise as possible the descriptions arranged through a detailed statement of facts using generalized theoretical categories establishes the framework for a specific theory. This allows for comparison to other studies creating new and more complete generalizations.

By carefully noting of what is described and then comparing this to other descriptions that are about different phenomena while using similar generalization categories we can establish the boundaries of our categories.

This can now be defined in specific terms. These sets of abstractions are intellectual tools. These tools create categories that do not reflect reality perfectly but gets closer to a specific reality. This is what Weber calls ideal types. Most categories used in social science are ideal types. This is a more fruitful and well-organized way of doing research. When more efficient ideal types are created they will replace the older ones.

Theoretically we work with the juncture between subjective meaning of the people being studied and the actual concrete meaning of the objective studies of the research. Ideal types are generalized abstract concepts, while meeting the logical requirements of schemes of proof.

Normatively oriented action. Simplified hypothetical groupings are concerned with achievements of actors being studied. These participants both respond to stimuli and make an effort conform to certain ideal patterns. Faith plays no part in reality. Probability is all there is, the best the actors can hope for is partial success. That is a win.

Rational action is an ideal type. In reality is influenced by irrational factors. The guide to our research takes seriously that the use of abstract generalization in specific studies leave open the need for further research.

The unity between rational and irrational is influenced by illogical factors. The union concerning normal and thoughtless is shaped by meaningless influences. Often functioning below the surface at the subliminal and unwitting level of thinking. This creates a set of deviations that can be observed. Normative patterns can now be defined. These are general and abstract in which many unique differences are close enough to fall within the category of a particular ideal type.

Choice of means to achieve goals is tied closely to a plurality of values. This is limited only by excessive costs forcing a reinterpretation of values. This is an affectual vs. rational type of actions in the decisions being made.  Where traditional actions are based upon emotion and a deep commitment to established beliefs. An act is rational if it is oriented to establishing clear goals.

With the rational are chosen and adapted to realize a specific goal. Effectiveness is important. Efficiency requires from the environment, personalities, culture and social system a plurality of data. The varieties of particulars of intermingling portions outline the limits of behaviors, attitudes and common organization within a range of information. Within this social system being studied as a single unit is made up of smaller parts, each as an adaptation to survival in a specific environment.

Social actions carried on in a particular political arena have several actors coming together forming an alliance in which the groups act as a single unit.

Verstehen the subjective states of mind including the use of logic, symbols and meaning attached to events and arranging them into subjective categories.

The common underlying belief system acts as if everyone agreed on common terms and values giving the behavior a constant meaning.

The Bureaucracy

Social institutions of modern industrial and global commercial society are of course historically unique. Other societies continued to evolve their own set of institutional arrangements, until violently overwhelmed by the spread of capitalism from Western Europe. Each evolutionary path while influenced by other systems, has its own historical particulars until conquered by the needs of capitalist expansion. Beginning first in Britain followed shortly in Western Europe then it spread rapidly over the globe with the capitalist centers reducing the outlying areas to mere dependencies.

Because any society is always changing to begin with, history is always with a future. Because culture is an adaption to a changing and evolving environment narration is continuously with the vision of options. These two factors translate into the proposition are unstable to begin with the impact of capitalism being brought in from the outside only intensifies the internal tensions, with new sets of contradictions. (Cultural Ecological Marxism)

Rationalization is to make a social organization operate more efficiently. Decisions are made to achieve goals as effectively as possible. There is an attempt to keep minimum secondary consequences this using rationalization in the Weberian sense.

Rationalization is an ideal type, to be approximated but never fully achieved. Capitalists try to value those decisions that are rational in the short term for profits. Given the importance of accumulation of wealth for wealth’ sake, investment decisions are judged rational if they bring short-term profits. Often such actions can lead to long-range dire consequences. These future tragic outcomes Weber would call unforeseen consequences.

At this point Weber examines formal and substantive rationality. Where both formal and substantive rationality exist together, which happens more common than not, the conflict between the two is as important as how they mutually support each other.

Formal rationality

Substantive rationality

Rational calculations are analyzed in terms of quantities. Quantities necessary to secure a given desired outcome and a certain set of values are defined. This also requires that the basic material needs for the members of the community are met. The one define the goals, then we describe the agreed upon ethical requirements this is the source of the conflict.

Market competition is established with a set of norms defining a market economy. Price reflects these kinds of decisions. In non-market exchange, value is determined according to social relations based upon respect rather than profit.

Sometimes an ethical code may guide these actions. Sometimes the claim would be value free, more pragmatic than ethical. With the first the claim is that the rational is secondary.

Ethics are important because actions are carried out because it is the right thing to do. Attempts are made whether or not we succeed. Other times actions are guided by deeply felt emotions. Finally actions may be carried out because of a strong commitment to tradition. Traditional behavior is almost always an automatic response or habit. In fact of our daily action are on the level of habit.

Rational social action asserts to be having a more clear expectation of outcomes.  Rational the way Weber uses the term would be limited to a value free analysis of possible approaches to achieve preferred purposes. Rational then would be independent of ethics. Similar strategies could be used to achieve opposing ends.

But, rational action becomes possible only by choosing the most practical way to achieve the desired goals. This can be carried out for ethical reasons. It may be simply embraced for private enhancement or empowerment. Short-term profit or social movement for equality both requires a plan.  Self-enrichment is often merciless, narcissistic, self-seeking and amoral. Ethical action is made from self-conscious choices based upon higher sets of values. Such action is decided upon because it would be wrong not to.

If it is truly ethical ulterior motives or personal ambition play a minor role if at all. If underlying motivations and private aims play a role then the moral cause is often tainted by contamination. Individual desire and factions of the particularized understanding of canon become a thin cover power struggles.

Rational action carefully looks at the effects of such actions and makes decisions accordingly. This says nothing of motivation at this time. We must generate an experiential instrument added to our observation of social behavior recognize how ideology molds behavior. Clearly rational decisions while claiming to be independent of ideology are never even close to being so. Again we take Weber and Marx as additions to each other. Social relationships, necessary for carrying out collective actions, have groups of people behaving in a way that shows notice about what other people are doing. Action then is in part decided upon by the actions of others. In spite of claims of rational value free decisions, economic decisions whether for individual short-term profits or ethical concerns about expanding freedom and equality are value laden political decisions.

People in making these political decisions react to external stimuli existing prior to any interpretations. Through human actions meaning becomes attached. Given past experience, cultural history, physical and mental fatigue our political actions can greatly alter these interpretations.

As historians we needed to look at the collective interaction governing these public activities. Methodological materialism added to the study of ideas. Dialectical interaction between the social, economic and physical environment on the one hand and the evolution of ideology and culture on the other leads to a deeper understanding. Historical analysis including direct observation with a sympathetic investigation understanding of behavior will help gain a deeper grasp of the distinctive feature of that historical behavior. This gives us a deeper understanding of the actors being observed. (Weber and Marx)

Marxian and Weberian sociology is at its core historical i.e. historical sociology. This needs to be remembered when studying social actions over time.

Social actions carried on in a political arena have several actors coming together forming alliances in which the group of diverse groups act as a single unit. The common underlying belief system acts as if everyone agreed up on common terms and values giving the behavior a consistent meaning. While this works in the short run in fact their remains a diversity of interpretations of the integrating ideology. When left alone this alliance threatens to fall apart. What is needed to maintain unity is a clear and present danger from a common enemy. For this to work there must be belief we are in fact on the same side, as if the terms are broad enough and emotionally grounded it allows the diverse groups to act as a unit.

Unity within the movement is built upon the recognition of the diversity required of both the discipline to sacrifice some of their differences for a common goal. This in turn, requires not just compromise but also willingness to integrated both long term and short term goals.

Working for the short-term goals, while using these smaller victories as raw materials in the longer-term struggles. The defeats can become more manageable and in turn become motivations for a renewed vigor in the immediate future.

Authority

Rational legal authority is formal in Weberian terms. Traditional is substantive or an emotional commitment to duty. If Weber is right then charismatic authority is a direct challenge to legitimacy of an established order. Routinization of charisma then will re-establish legitimate authority.

The charismatic leader is a revolutionary in opposition too and emancipation from the routine. Charismatic authority establishes a new pattern of conformity that becomes a new duty. In the beginning the authority is amoral authority before it becomes routine. Obedience is morally correct and the duty of the followers. They must willing follow, i.e. loyalty. Then when the leader dies routinization set in around his or hers teachings and the new leader rules in the name of the old leader.

Chapter Three: Weber on Sociology

Describing Notions and Vocabularies by Max Weber

Rational proof is empirical and logical.

Rational proof can be achieved within the context of meaning.

Lucidity, clarity, eloquence with verifiable proof that is logical in a clear intellectual grasp of the subject matter

Contingent upon reexamination of past studies, the validity of any study is the possibility duplicating the results in another examination, i.e. replicable.

Empathetic proof comes from participation directed by sympathetic emotional understanding. This is an expressively vital in creatively favorable approach allowing for participation in the everyday life of the subjects being studied. This leads to participant observation and sympathetic understanding

Sympathetic understanding or “verstehen” again a sociologist can reflect on the meaning an actor attaches to her actions. In doing so, the sociologist takes on the role or view of others by looking at the actor’s motives, how the individual perceives objects and others, considers these, and acts in response.

Verstehen is the empathic in the s historical sociological understanding of human action and behavior

The ability to gain an understanding to gain a sympathetic understanding requires an understanding of a value system of the culture being studied.

Weberian Sociology Important Impressions and Vocabulary

To understand behavior, it is necessary to understand the cultural and historical context in which that set of behaviors takes place. To understand the reaction to those behaviors it is necessary to understand how the actors in the environment in which those behaviors are taking place perceive the behavior.

Behavior is all we can observe yet behavior is set in a cultural context, value-relevance as the foundation of historical knowledge.  This can lead to a rational empirical observation of behavior, becoming aware of the most important to balanced investigational scrutiny of performances of people in their everyday life.

Through direct empirical understanding with rational understanding we gain an explanatory understanding. From this understanding we can act more intelligently with fewer unforeseen consequences.

To develop a science of behavior our working explanations requires a grasp of the context of meaning used by the actors within the course of those actions within a historically specific social setting.

Within emotionally charged sets of behaviors the subjective meaning of that behavior exists within the relative social context of its meaning. Connotation is described and contained by this emotive milieu. 

This sets up an interpretative understanding of serving to interpret with an explanatory understanding of events.  Concrete individual cases with the use of fairly accurate approximation within a sociological mass analysis of the social setting we are looking at. This allows for a clarification a recurrently phenomenon as a formulated system. We can now investigate the origin, nature, and limits of human knowledge.

Any decisively noteworthy sufficient concentration of understanding must refer at some point to the subjective interpretation of a plausible direction of behavior whose elemental components parts organized into a coherent whole. These come together in familiar process of thoughts and feelings. Representing distinctive multifaceted sets of meaning.

Causal links are not flawlessly assured, what is certain are when strong correlations of events can be shown in which there exists a relationship of one event leading to another than when the process is reversed there is an argument for cause. If this can be established empirically, the interpretation is meaningful and adequate. This style of research can be used in formulating studies using statistical uniformities and eventually establishing sociological generalizations. Before this can be firmly set up the use of subjective understanding as a source for generating testable hypothesis is very helpful.

What is studied is behavior. Behavior is the behavior of individuals.  This is set in a larger social context of having meaning for actors engaged in those sets of actions. From careful observation the historical sociologist can group together of similar concepts and to be able to establish usable terminology. The sociologist can now arrange these collective concepts to be able to study modes of social behavior. These interpretations represent behavior that is meaningful to the actors. The study social behavior is guided by an understanding of underlying variables that influence their actions. 

Behavior that increases chances of survival leading to the continuation of cultural distinctiveness and continuous connected comprehensive collective of equivalent categories of social behavior that will have an effect on choices made by the actors. This has long-term consequences only if these sets of behavior become typical for any social group.

Generalizations are understandable if we look at social behavior as rational and related to some socially defined goals and values.  This is a methodological decision to avoid unverifiable and unobservable psychological speculation.  Defiant behavior has fundamental plausible and rational ancestry given the specific cultural worldview.

The behaviors we observed could by classified and categorized into useful tools we call laws, which are nothing other than statistical probabilities confirmed through empirical observation. These laws are artificial tool created by us to understand empirical regularities that we observed.

Laws are premises that are heuristic generalization, used in stimulating interest in further investigations stated as a suggestion emphasizing something to be true, characteristically observed flow of behavior. This behavior is understood as plausible quest of aspirations.

Theory a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena. Theory is a working model that organizes our concepts of the empirical world in a systematic way, to help us guide further research and analyze the findings. All theory is based upon empirical variable facts. The strength of a theory is the skill in which it arranges information that can explain complex information in manageable form. It must contain empirical statements that can be tested, and explain a complex interaction of observable phenomena. Theory is not a guess that is a hypothesis. Theory is a factual statement.

Explanatory understanding includes understanding of background materials and motives.

Rational understanding of motives of both emotional and sympathetic leads to awareness and incentive of responsive lucid interpretation of aims in both affective understanding and motivational understanding.

Understanding involves the interpretative grasp of history of the intended meaning for concrete action or sociological mass action or phenomena with the overall typical average meaning. This is important to creating ideal types. According to Weber these are scientifically formulated pure types, to understanding commonality in formulating concepts called laws.

Science is built upon theory construction based upon generalized conceptual schemes. Generalized theoretical categories are important in arranging proof of causal relationships. Comprehensive hypothetical groups are significant validation of developing explanations of underlying associations.

The above not works for the natural sciences, but also social sciences.  Theory acts as a filter selectively arranging some facts, those relevant to the study, while dividing out other facts not relevant. In this way empirical knowledge can be framed as abstract statements.

According to Weber valid questions begin with a propositions that are logically distinct from the why problem was chosen to begin with. Weber calls this value free sociology. To Marxist this is only in the data gathering stage, beyond that we find it not only unattainable, but not even desirable and even immoral.

Proofs of causal relationships are in reference to a logical schema. This mention of a plausible diagram outlines the probable. The proof including a description of the phenomenon to be explained by keeping as precise as possible the categories is the forerunner of the study. By maintaining as detailed as achievable the types and descriptions arranged in generalized abstract categories keep the simplified conceptual groupings workable.

This is arranged through a detailed statement of facts using generalized theoretical categories. This allows for comparison to other studies creating new and more complete generalizations.

Practical accomplishment is an ethical category. In real experience often-absurd issues sway logical performance.

By Careful noting of what is

Economy and Society Max Weber

Max Weber An Intellectual Portrait Reinhard Bendix Part Three Domination Organization

The Methodology of The Social Sciences

Book by Max Weber

Chapter Four: Theory subjective and objective

Theoretically with the juncture between the subjective meaning people being study carry with them and the actual concrete structures that are embedded in the objective physical specific arrangements that are unified into a historical organization of definite well-defined groups. The objectives exist before and separate of the individuals in those groups. People born into that situation. Yet this not essentially or entirely all there is.  The objective is part of a dynamic interaction that is embedded in an active crossing point of transformation. The world of ideas defines people action and people’s action modifies the objective environment. The objective environment creates what is possible in the setting in which this effective interaction is taking place while being modified and altered by such action.

The ideal type is generalized conceptual tool functioning as a simplifying abstract concept, while meeting the logical requirements of schemes of proof. Also connecting rational conditions for creating basic outlines of evidence to be used in our studies. It summaries broad averages even no single example fits perfectly.

To set up any study we certain comprehensive summaries and measures for the items under study both its limits and its delineating traits. Boundaries between ideal types are necessarily arbitrary being explained by the requirements of the enquiry under review.

Rational action is an ideal type. In reality rational action is influenced by irrational factors. This creates a research strategy that brings the use of abstract generalization in specific studies to be utilized in ways that helps make clear the dynamics and changing relationships of topics being studied set in their larger environment.

By careful noting of what is being described and then comparing this to other descriptions we have about other studies affecting dissimilar occurrences concerning different phenomena while using similar generalized categories we can establish boundaries of our categories. This can now be defined in specific terms. This set of abstractions are intellectual tools categories that does not reflect reality perfectly but gets us close enough for us to arrange our information in such away that gets us closer to a specific understanding of reality. This is what Weber calls ideal types. Most categories used in social science are created this way. Many sequences in sociology are used to do research to make our efforts effectively more resourceful and operatively effective.

The unity between the rational and irrational is influenced by irrational factors. This creates a set of deviations that can be observed. Normative patterns can now be defined. These are general and abstract in which many unique differences can be observed but are close enough to fall within the category of a particular ideal type.

Social actions are carried on in a political arena having several actors coming together forming an alliances in which the group acts as a single unit. With rational means are chosen and these are adapted to realize specific goals. Efficiency is important. Competence is vital because effectiveness requires a plurality of data on environment, personalities, culture, historical awareness of social systems. With this set of data, the particulars are studied as a unit, which in turn is made up of smaller elements. Examining the adaption to survival in a specific environment by which the adjustment to existence in a particular situation becomes central.

Choice of means to achieve goals is tied to a plurality of values. This is limited only by excessive costs forcing a reinterpretation of values. This is affectual vs. rational type of actions in the decisions being made. Affectual arises from unconscious feelings influencing emotions, were as rational where ends were "rationally pursued and calculated." Traditional actions are based upon on emotion and there will be a deep commitment to established beliefs. An act is rational if it is oriented to establishing clearly defined goals.  The fruitfully applied actions even if traditional need visibly distinct ends or they become psychologically directed activities founded upon publicly exhibited animated relief similar to mob action.

The Methodology of The Social Sciences

Book by Max Weber

Chapter Five:

Historical Sociology is More Than Historical Storytelling

Historical Sociology Is Meticulous Discourse

Historical Sociology is Sympathetic Understanding of Atmosphere of Change

Both Weberian and Marxian Sociology is a dynamic interdisciplinary approach to the study of history. Marxism is more than a revolutionary way of life. It is a detailed and rigorous application of historical sociology. Marx was also a scholar. We have to know what is wrong and what are our options before we can fix anything.

Verstehen also known as the empathic and affected understanding of human behavior is core to Weber and eventually indirectly central to Marx. . Sociologists of this school use some aspects of science in some specific situations. Science is not a single package, but an aggregate of specific methods to be use only under specific circumstances. Statistics can be nominal, ordinal and interval or ratio level. To use ordinal level data and interval or ratio level statistics happens but we are on very shaky grounds. Then there is Multivariate statistics is a subdivision of statistics encompassing the simultaneous observation and analysis of more than one outcome variable. Not appropriate under all circumstances. My point sciences, any type of science has very specific applications and can never replace the collective assemblage called historical methods. Science is a set of specialized tools and not a religion.

Theses/conclusions with predictive power, at best is flawed, because of unforeseen consequences. The scientific method is never used to the exclusion of what historians do, but is supplemental to add more insight to long-term trends. Most we can do is talk about probabilities with all its flaws. Probabilities add some insight but are never taken as absolute or final. Why I was attracted to first sociology and the anthropology was they were openly and defiantly interdisciplinary.  Not so history at that time. It can be said the disciplines were artificially divided as not to undermine their threat to the ivory tower, which does not threaten the larger power relations of the University to larger social autocracy. We said, pardon the dated rhetoric, the separation between the social sciences and social science and history is bourgeois academics and not really real.

Historical Sociology uses historical methods, scientific methods, oral histories, ethnography; we have a toolbox that we use that does not define us. We are scholars, not religious missionaries. Both sociology and anthropology because they are much better historian than the historians because of both the environmental approach including both social and natural environments and being embedded in a rooted societal and cultural setting.

Max Weber, and Karl Marx are the best of historians and the fathers of sociology. Making history lived day-to-day experience that is like the air we breathe or the blood that flows through our veins. Both rigorous and real as well as a scholarly works can do if nothing else strengthen sociology.

Rational discourse is founded upon value free sociology. Rational sociologists have been a minority for 50 years. Critical discourse falls roughly into two camps both reject value free sociology. Max Weber talks a lot about interpretive sociology with rational sympathetic understanding. This means we use rigorous studies to learn as much as we can about the people we are studying within their own historical setting to understand the world both the world they live in and how the people interpret their world from inside the skins of those people. Thus ultimately value free is only an open door that ultimately impossible. Marxist would go along with this but add value free is both impossible, but also immoral. Karl Marx and Karl Polanyi father of economic Anthropology, would are their studies are a guide action in a real historical setting. Add this is the position we are all on shaky grounds. All Sociologist claim unforeseen consequences make prediction impossible, the best we can do is take our chance with a little more knowledge.

Having said that we can now begin. Social actions are carried on in a political arena having several actors forming alliances in which groups of diverse groups act as a single unit. The common underlying belief system as if everyone agreed upon on common terms and values giving the behavior consistent meaning. While this works in the short run in fact there remains a diversity of interpretations of the integrating ideology. When left alone this alliance threatens to fall apart.  What is needed to maintain unity is a clear and present danger from a common enemy. For this to work there must be a belief we are in fact on the same side. We act as if the terms are broad enough and emotionally grounded enough to allow diverse groups to act as a single unit. The common underlying set of beliefs as if everyone agreed on common terms and values giving social behavior a continuous and coherent meaning.

Unity within the movement is built upon the recognition of the diversity requires both discipline and willingness to sacrifice some of their differences for a common goal. This in turn, requires not just compromise but also a willingness to integrate both long term and short-term goals. While working for the short-term goals, while using these smaller victories as raw materials used to keep alive the long term struggles. The losses can become more manageable becoming motivation for a renewed inspiration for repeated potency in the future.

Rational legal authority in Weberian term is formal authority with objectively defined criteria to use as its rules.  Traditional authority is substantive with an emotional commitment to duty.

The magnetic appeal of charismatic authority begins with the charismatic leader as a revolutionary opposition from the routine offering emancipation from the monotonous. With charismatic authority there is established new patterns of conformity that become a new type of duty. In the beginning the authority is a moral authority. When it becomes routine it becomes traditional. When the moral leader is still alive obedience is morally correct because the leader says so. It is the duty of the followers to follow. Moral authority becomes formalized into tradition when the leader dies and followers try to keep the inspiration alive.

Very often authority existing within the group becomes formalized certain individuals become separated from he rest of the group because of their knowledge of the generally accepted rules. They become the coordinators of other people’s behavior. In a truly egalitarian group the leader in one area will not ne a leader in another. Leadership is at time fluid based upon acquired knowledge. In nondemocratic societies leadership is more stable, but not always more knowledgeable.

In band level society leadership is founded on persuasion passing and changeable. Within the Chiefdom leadership is hereditary within the primary clan. But, command is established on persuading rather than coercion, as coercive use of power is impossible, as the chief does not have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Chiefdoms are characteristically changeable in that individual holding the office must have the good of most of the tribal members.

Authority existing within corporate groups, even if democratic, there will be a certain group that sets themselves from the main group. This influence available within community assemblies is set aside because their knowledge of becoming coordinators of other peoples behavior. Whether rotating or permanent positions of authority success or failure is determined along these lines. In truly egalitarian groups an expert in one area will not be an expert in another area. The same is also the case in a modern professional administrative bureaucracy, though no one would claim a modern specialized expert managerial administration is remotely democratic.

Within a genuinely self-governing autonomous republic then all positions of authority would be fluid. Within an autocratic or despotic, and nondemocratic state power is more stable, but expertise is secondary.

In egalitarian groups, with nearly equal distribution of weapons influence and management is originated on attitudes of influence. In nondemocratic situations whether appointed, assumed, or elected those in authority have something other than philosophy as a bases for that authority beyond ideological support for their position of influence. Persuading, compulsion, ideological certainties are part of a continuum. Bands, tribes, chiefdoms, states or worker and locality councils, participatory democracy, representative democracy, republics, autocracy, a portion of a range of distribution of power.

In all societies some people have more influence than others. In band society this authority is temporary and situational. However, leadership forms a distinct crew within the larger assemblage. Even with term limits and rotation of officers, even in impermanent arrangements of influence in band society. The leader or expert has a unique role to play.

Economy and Society Max Weber

Basic Concepts in Sociology Max Weber

The Methodology of the Social Sciences Max

Weber

Lewellen, Ted C. (2003) Political Anthropology: An Introduction Third Edition Westport Connecticut: Praeger

Max Weber ́s Theory of Bureaucracy and it’s Negative Consequences Felix Merz

Chapter Six: Authority

With Weber rational legal authority have generalized rules that are logically consistent, defining the limits of any authority, its jurisdiction. Both its arrangement of procedures and administrative limits are a matter of public record. Rules are universal, impartial and impersonal. Individuals are covered by these guidelines that are extensive, dispassionate and objective.

With rational legal authority the power of control is fixed within the office and not the individual holding that office, the officer exercises that power only a representative of that office. Eligibility to occupy that office is delineated in that agency by a job description that outlines what is described as competence as defined by the occupation clarification that summaries the criteria for performance evaluation. The expert authority expresses the control that is regulated to a sphere of competence as delineated by the office itself. Outside the office the office holder is a private citizen.

Property of the office belongs to that specific office and not the office holder. Administrative staff is trained professionals forming a bureaucratic structure. Within each office having powers partitioned into strata separates the office holders authority in a professional capacity of the office in question from her private life as a citizen. Salaries are fixed and are a matter of public record.

Lines of authority are carefully defined separating one office from another. Each of the related offices is under the authority of the office just above it. Fitness is determined by technical competence based upon objective criteria. The job description again is a matter of public record. Formal education is a condition for eligibility.  This recognized instruction is focused in preparation of a certain collection of abilities and overall analytical reasoning.

Having outlined rational legal authority, we can now compare it to traditional authority. Traditional authority is requisite on the whole community based upon past traditions. Traditions while continually being reinvented operate under the myth that it has always been this way.

New guidelines can only happen if it is presented as this the way it was in the past we returning to tradition. Rules need to be expressed and defensible according to custom. Rank and status are defined also according to custom, including who can hold office.  The office cannot be separated from the officeholder. The office exists as part of the person holding office private life.

Authority is a personal possession.

The individual in authority has more subjective spontaneity.

Patriarchs and the household are founded upon the concept that the head of the household expanded to the entire community is the patriarch. The chief is chosen corresponding to ancient rules of birthright.

Traditional rules govern the office holder and the rest of the population. The populations’ entitlements and duties are defined in relation to the patriarch. The class structure is fixed, the patriarch’s position is integrated with other ranks and authority also based on tradition. The officeholder has a degree of independence in the exercise of authority in relation to people below that office. There is no clear separation between the authority of the office and one’s private life. Property of the office is the personal property of the officeholder. This gives the officeholder authority over that property and over the private lives of the people in the region. Influence is habitually inherited.

Finally charismatic authority as "rests on unreserved devoutness and incomparable the heroism of the archetypal charm of the leader, and of the agreed upon social influence leading to conformity to the instructions revealed and proclaimed by the leader.

By definition this magnetic authority is a straightforward confrontation to the recognized arrangement of power and a direct challenge to all other forms of authority. Thus is revolutionary and because charisma is originated on an exclusive connection between a friendly associations, with people who share common concerns and a groundbreaker, charismatic leadership is intrinsically volatile. The loss of the leader is catastrophic. Succession becomes a problem. Now a compliant resolution of who officially exercises control must be decided. The two possible paths of routinization are, traditional and rational-legal. In the traditional arrangement, the new leader will inherit the charisma, with magical or supernatural authorization. In rational-legal authority a set of laws works nicely. Real world the new authority are usually of mixed character.

Basic Concepts in Sociology Max Weber

The Methodology of the Social Sciences Max

Weber

Chapter Seven

Beyond Interdisciplinary

The masters (or “Fathers,” if you will) of both Sociology and Cultural Anthropology were in fact interdisciplinary to begin with. The rigid boundaries between the various disciplines in historical studies came much later at the Universities because of budget conflicts between departments. As I will try to show, in order to further the development of the various focus areas, the Professors needed to communicate with, borrow from, and understand what other scholars were saying. Political Sociology/ Anthropology by definition is interdisciplinary. Anthropologists cannot ignore Ecology. The relationship between Economics and Sociology was at the very beginning assumed. Economic Anthropology has always asked the question, how much can Anthropology learn from Economics? The in-house debates were what economic model best offers a usable pattern with which to work.

German philosophers Immanuel Kant through Heinrich Rickert influenced Weber (the father of Sociology) particularly in the concept of value-free sociology, i.e. the purely formal-logical analysis which states as its goal the establishing of the conditions under which scientific analysis of society is even possible as opposed to the traditional study of defining before hand the priorities, the methodology and distinctions between information being used as data. Weber argued that knowledge is historically determined, and thus it is important to develop a formal empirical approach to the study of history that can be verified independent of historical circumstances. Weber said that only by establishing an objective body of historical data to work with could we begin our interpretive process in the study of history. Sympathetic understanding then combines the objective with the subjective. Weber offered a way to understand culture through the native point of view, but only with a body of data that can be reanalyzed at a later date in a different historical setting. While Weber is a father of Sociology all his academic appointments were in Economics. In fact Weber’s interest in Sociology grew out of his debate with the rising neo-classical school of Economics that studied Economics as a pure science. Weber on the other hand studied economics embedded in a historical and social setting. This was the German historical school. The neo-classical was the Austrian school.

Max Weber

On Capitalism

1.     1. Capitalism begins as an ideology of dangerous individuality, if take taken to far individualism leads to despair.  There is no one to help us deal with our failures. We all feel guilty and often not sure why. To escape guilt we all need to work harder. Hard work is it’s own virtue. This virtue is no longer tied to giving back to the larger social good. Everybody gets what she deserves. Hollowness and gloom are normal emotions and a way of life. Life has now lost all mystery and became cold and empty.

2.     Around the world capitalism has failed to replace traditional society or come up with new answers. It has brought turmoil and loneliness and has disappointed people in the exchanges transported to customary civilizations or improvement made with contemporary solutions. Capitalism was a forced fit replacing families, clans, communities, and traditions with a professional bureaucracy of educated professionals.

3.    The evolution of authority from traditional authority. Largely tied to ancient traditional customs. Charismatic authority trusting in the enthusiasm for the special wholesomeness, valor and picture-perfect charm of an unreal superhero. Bureaucratic authority a professional and professional a governing administration that is attached to lawful judiciousness, legal legitimacy and a bureaucracy of trained civil servants with authority is the office not the officeholder. Fair but very cold.

Marx, as is well known, was a Philosopher, Sociologist, Anthropologist, Historian, Economist and Political Scientist. Marx studied under the German Philosopher Feuerbach, who studied under Hegel. Marx got his start by associating with the Young (left) Hegelians. Marx’s methodology was Hegelian. Marx was equally influenced by the teachings of the ancient philosopher Epicurus and the Atomists like Democritus. Marx’s ethics were founded on Epicurean ethics. French political theorists also influenced Marx, including Saint-Simon, Proudhon and Fourier. The British Economists Smith, Ricardo, Owen and many others were also important, as were the English Chartists. Both Engels and Marx were very impressed by Darwin.

Karl Marx was the father of Sociology. He was the Political Economist who studied economics in its' historical and social setting. From pre-capitalism through the evolution of capitalism and its' contradictions to its' possible end Marx studied historical sociology. He moved socialist writings from moral arguments to systematic historical studies. Most of sociology today is dealing with Marx pro - con updating, disproving or defending. 

Marx was trained in classical and Hegelian philosophy. Soon became involved in the socialist movement of his day. He met and talks to utopian socialists. Then carried out a serous study of economic theory of his day. He found all three wanting.  Traditionally the study of history lacked the grounding in sociology, which is the study of people rooted in already existing social institutions and groups.   Sociology lacked a complete understanding of political economy, the study of the relationship of individual to a larger market economy that evolves over time. Economics lacked training in cultural anthropology, the lives of people who interact through cultural understanding, culture being the some total of idea, shared believes, attitudes, values and understandings learned in a social setting. Anthropology often lacks an education into philosophy. Philosophy was missing a connection to all of the above. Marxist hoped to correct this by establishing a single interdisciplinary to connect all the dots.

Introduction to sociology is just to interest you in sociology. It takes years to truly study it. I presented you with four examples. None of these scholars would end up where they started out. By examining the historical data over the years they would all radically alter their positions. Marx started out as a philosopher trying to replace religion with a humanist philosophy. He abandoned that goal when he studied how large grape growers were forcing family farms out of business. He became a utopian socialist, but soon saw their plan would not work because they failed to study the economic history how capitalism came about at the end of the 1700’s. He created sociology.