Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Marx looks at society form the vantage point of totality, macrosociology. Also Weber
studies entire societies/civilizations but he adds some specific dimension that was not
in Marx: International comparisons (Marx: you understand English capitalism, then
you understand the rest, the retarded forms)
Why did only the occident produce modernity, not Judaism or Islamic region?
(comparative sociology)
Marxism is about critique and practice, Weber: Science and politics do not mingle
science is NEUTRAL. Meant to be critical, tells us stuff we did not know before and
it that way enlightens us and helps us to overcome wrong conceptions and beliefs but
it is not to tell us what to do. Science can never know true reality of the march of
history.
(2) Main theme: to understand occidental rationalization. Marx said: its a capitalist
class society. Weber: it is an increasingly rationalized society. Marx and Weber agree
on main socioeconomic (Erwerbswirtschaft anstatt Substsitenzwirtschaft) conditions
that shape modern society (double free labor)
For Marx class antagonism, exploitation, and inequality
For Weber the essence of capitalism is rational calculation, wage labor -> rational
organization of labor, e.g. double bookkeeping)
Capitalism is only the economic outcome of rationalization, whereas the political one
is modern bureaucracy. You also see rationalization in modern culture, science and
technology replace religion and magic.
Stahlhartes Gehuse der Hrigkeit
Rationalisation leads to Entzauberung der Welt disenchantment of the world, spirit
of rationalization is that you can calculate everything and we have to accept it. Good
about rationalization is increase of how long you live or how well you deal with
resources
Loss of meaning and loss of liberty are the bad effects (fighting values and fighting
gods replace the system of religion in which one felt safe; loss of liberty in
bureaucratized state). However, communism makes this worse and is no replacement.
Modernity is ambivalent no alternative but he sees both the shadows (stuart
hughes 1958 consciousness and society good book).
Unifying theme: why does it only prevail in the west, even though the implications
are universal and global
(3)
summarize it in three propositions (all science is construction and therefore partial,
limited, fallible// the constructions of the sciences of nature (exakte wissenschaften)
are fundamentally different than those of the social sciences// the typical conceptual
tool is the ideal type
a) science to be overcome by better theories Marx claimed to have given us an
objective interpretation of capitalism, I tell the truth and that will be it, faithful
reflection of reality (concept and reality are identical), all what came before for Marx
was bourgeois ideology From this essentialist claim follows dogmatism and
unwillingness to accept other viewpoints and this is why Marxism could become a
political state ideology, in parareligious state. If reality and theory dont mix, then you
adjust reality with prisons and so forth.
Plakat in berlin: die lehre von marx und engels ist allmchtig, weil sie wahr ist
For Weber on the other hand there is no such thing. Knowledge and science is
constructed and has to be replaced. Science is a fundamentally meaningless
enterprise.
In philosophic terms Max followed the Hegelian line, Weber the Kantian line
(important gap between reality and concept), world as such is an infinite chaos of
occurrences. Science, to use a metaphor, is not the godlike revelation of truth, it is
more to be understood as a bush knife with which you fight your way through the
jungle.
b) science of nature seek generalizations. In the realm of social things, the more
general your laws are, the more meaningless they are and less content they have.
Social sciences the purpose is to INDIVIDUALISE capture the unique contours of
cultural phenomena.
What constitutes culture? Relatedness to values. Point is that if Weber argues that
Kulturwerte as points of study change over time, but value reference does not amount
to saying that we as scientists are allowed to produce value judgments.
We live in a world of equality then we study injustice, inequality (not abstracted
from values but derived)
c)
Proper modern science methodology is Ideal type. historical individuality of reality
grasped by ideal type.
One very simple definition from prof: an ideal type is eine einseitige steigerung der
wirklichkeit, a one sided exaggeration of reality.
(example: bureaucracy is ideal type, not elected but appointed, not bases of beauty but
skills and diplomas; the bureaucrat acts only within precisely defined scope of work
defined in constitution reality is always an approximation though)
to look at the essence of historical phenomena and then you compare reality with ideal
type you get difference and paralles (then you have to explain why it is different
here from there and why the ideal type is not fully implemented, it is the beginning of
science not the end point).
Ideal type = historical individual (but not a model)
Geldwirtschaft, Stadtwirtschaft (historical things that did not exist from the creation
of the world)