Max Weber:

Politics, Science and spiritual ideals

(An application of Webers analysis to the political
control of culture)
Max Weber delivered two lectures concerning the nature of what
he termed Politics and Science as two ways of viewing and dealing
with issues in society.
He uses the terms politics and science in very specific ways to
create a distinction between the rational and the !ideal"spiritual#.
$o explore this% the first thing we need to do is establish Weber#s
understanding and approach to !politics#. He points out% that the
!political# way of viewing and dealing with issues can be defined thus&
We wish to understand by politics only the leadership%
or the influencing of the leadership ' of a state ' ($)he
state is a relation of men dominating men% a relation
supported by means of ' violence. *f the state is to
exist% the dominated must obey the authority claimed
by the powers that be. +Weber% ,--,% p% ../.01.
Weber therefore has a very pessimistic view of politics% this is
made apparent through his use of terms such as !power#% !violence#
and !domination#.
' politics operates with very special means% namely%
power bac2ed up by violence. +ibid% p% ,,-1.
Weber argues that politics is in no way concerned with the pursuit
of high ideals and truth& on the contrary it is only concerned with
the manipulation and !play# of words& carried out by power/mongers
in the search for !power#.
1
3s far as he is concerned% the development of !4aw# and its close
alignment to politics is no mista2e% as this relationship allows for a
!violence# of language to ta2e hold where certain powerful people
manipulate the means of control.
Politics in this sense is exclusively concerned with the mundane and
functional organisation of physical and economic life in society.
Political society re5uires regulation% discipline and organisation in
order to function.
6or Weber politics is a !soulless# entity that serves simply to
manipulate% regulate and control.
He is careful to point out that this is the only way that politics can
be7 he has no belief in idealistic or utopian solutions unli2e the
Marxists. (for Weber a revolution would only lead to a different
type of control).
His lecture on !science# ta2es on a different guise to that of politics&
Weber presents the argument that science can and should be of a
!higher# calling to political vocation.
$he distinction created by Weber between politics and science
appears to be that politics is concerned with the en/masse/mundane%
science is presented as something as having the potential to be a
!deep# and personal calling.
Weber ma2es an important distinction between a mediocre !low#
science% whose area of concern is similar to that of Politics7 and the
idea of a !high# science% which is inspired% soulful and !artistic#
having the potential for the highest pursuit of !truth and beauty#.
Weber develops the idea of a 2ind of scientific/philosopher hero%
who pursues ideals 8ust for the sa2e of doing so.
2
$o put across his idea of !high# science% Weber refers to Plato#s cave
/ in the cave% men are !chained# and positioned in such a way that
they can only face the rear wall of the cave7 and as such are only
able to view shadows on the wall created by the sun.
However% one man is able to brea2 free of the chains% and he turns
round to loo2 at the source of the light% but he is blinded by its
truth and beauty% and in his frantic attempts to relay what he saw
to the others he is branded as !mad#.
With this then% we are able to attain a brief glimpse of the 2ind of
science which Weber has in mind something which is strenuously
set apart from the political.

$owards the end of this section on science% Weber again paints a
5uite blea2 and pessimistic picture of the !actual# ability of people to
effectively enter into this realm of !high# science.
Weber leaves us with the following scenario7 either& the
abandonment of !truth# and a life of soulless mundanity in the
!political#7 or% a return to one of the established paths to spiritual
!freedom#&
$he ' love of humanity and goodness% whether
stemming from 9a:areth or 3ssisi or from *ndian royal
castles% have not operated with the political means of
violence. $heir 2ingdom was !not of this world# and yet
they wor2ed and still wor2 in this world ' He who see2s
the salvation of the soul% of his own and of others%
should not see2 it along the avenue of politics% for the
5uite different tas2s of politics can only be solved by
violence. +ibid% p% ,;<1.
How can this theoretical fraewor! be applied to "ew #abour
politics and their in$ol$eent in faily %culture&
3
Within the lecture% Weber ma2es reference to the writer =oethe
whose boo2 !6aust# +=oethe% ,-->1 accurately and poetically uses a
similar framewor2 to that of Weber#s !politics vs science#.
$he play"story of 6aust / starts with an argument between a Play
House manager% and a Poet. $he comparison between 6aust and
Weber#s lectures highlight similarities&
=oethe#s playhouse manager !manager# is concerned with the menial
the organisational and mundane aspects of theatre life& dates%
times% audiences% prices% deadlines% profits etc. * feel that this is an
apt analogy to ma2e to Weber#s notion and concerns of the political.
=oethe#s !poet# on the other hand% is affronted at the thought of
such !base# and trivial concerns. 3s the manager puts pressure on
the poet to wor2 or !create# on demand% the poet responds&
?epart@ Alsewhere another servant choose7
What@ Shall the bard his godli2e power abuseB
Man#s loftiest right% 2ind natures high be5uest%
6or your mean purpose basely sport awayB
Whence comes his mastery o#er the human breast%
Whence o#er the elements his sway%
Cut from the harmony that% gushing from his soul%
?raws bac2 into his heart the wondrous wholeB
+ibid% p% .1.
$his brief excerpt wonderfully encapsulates the !travesty#
expressed by the poet (scientist)% at the base and trivial demands
made by the manager (the politician) attempting to impose
!technical# shac2les upon the soulful creativity and freedom of this
spiritual process.
3lso% in Plato#s !Phaedrus# we can see a vaguely similar discussion
with the notion that the non/lover (rational D practical) should be
accepted as opposed to the lover (ideal% spiritual% erratic D !mad#).
4
Weber#s authentic idea of !high# science is indeed comparative to
Plato#s !lover/of/the/beautiful# in the sense that a science of
Weber#s 2ind could only be carried out by a scientist who is also
(and above all) a lover/of/the/beautiful.
Maybe !science# in a Platonic sense alluded to by Weber% is not and
never can be some/!thing# that can be reduced down to the crude%
restricting and !violent# organisational principles of politics.
3rguably% Weberian utopian science inspired by beauty% hope and
love in search of !truth#% is nothing whatsoever to do with the boring
and practical aspects of physically organising the mundane or
political routines of everyday life.
*t appears to me that this may well be the stuff of Weberian/
Platonic science something of another realm% something deeper
and older7 more profound% universally personal and illusive than
anything tangible modern society (en/masse) has or can politically
create.
How i'ht Webers idea of science be applied to culture&
(iblio'raphy
=oethe% E. W. +,-->1 6aust
$rans. 3nna Swanwic2
?over $hrift Aditions
Plato% +,---1 $he essential Plato
$rans. Cen8amin Eowett
Ad& 3. ?e Cottom
$he Soft Cac2 Preview
Weber% M. +,--,1 Politics as a Focation7 and Science as a Focation
*n& 6rom Max Weber& Assays in Sociology
Adited by H. H. =erth D G. Wright Mills
5