Max Weber and his Methodology - Case Study Example

MAX WEBER Introduction: Renowned German sociologist and thinker Max Weber is considered as one of the greatest sociologist the world has ever produced. His innate gifted talent, in-depth analyses of society and thorough study of philosophy, law and political science won distinguished place for him in the list of the most significant thinkers of twentieth century. The great philosopher has worked on almost all institutions of society and has suggested valuable views on religion, public administration, theology, bureaucracy, sociology, economics and others. “His methodological writings were instrumental in establishing the self-identity of modern social science as a distinct field of inquiry; he is still claimed as the source of inspiration by empirical positivists and their hermeneutic detractors alike.” (plato.stanford.edu) Max Weber is the first theorist to define the concept of the ideal type in his work, where he is of the opinion that scientific methods are unable to replicate the concrete reality existing in a society; consequently a conceptual apparatus does not contain sufficient strength to measure or assess the diversity of a natural or social phenomenon. In simple words, Weber looks for extracting some of the best or ideal points from the characteristics a social phenomenon contains, which are supportive and helpful in order to understand the social whole as an organism. In his words: “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.” (Shils & Finch, 1997) The concept of “ideal type” is of central importance in the Weber’ theoretical framework “Ideal types”, Hekman views, “are not the product of the whim or fancy of a social scientist, but are logically constructed concepts.” (1983: p 32) A social phenomenon requires the comprehensive interpretation of its all aspects for comprehending it thoroughly, which is, according to Weber, dependent of past traditions that are considered as the exemplary ones or ideal type. The critics divide Weber’s ideal type into two parts, which they view, as described by him, at two different occasions. “The initial formulation of the concept was rendered when Weber took over the joint editorship of the Archiv fur Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik in 1940 and formed a part of the editorial titled "Objectivity in Social Science and Social Polity." The other essay formed part of the "Introduction" to his seminal work Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, published posthumously, almost twenty years later, though there is reason to believe that the work on the second essay was taken up much earlier and was revised by the author before his death in 1920.” (Retrieved from bangladeshsociology.org) Max Weber lays stress upon the application of some research techniques and methodology in order to examine social phenomena. By close investigating all the works and theories, produced and presented by Weber, it becomes evident that Weber appears to be revolving round his theory of ideal type while describing all his concepts including religion, bureaucracy, administration, capitalism and others. Taking the example of his rationalisation theory, it is apparent that Weber has closely estimated the structure and functioning of different social and economic institutions. He has involved into a comparative study of all institutions existing in the social establishment and compare and contrast the working of these institutions in western societies with those of eastern cultures and civilizations with a historical perspective. “Weber was”, Ritzer submits, interested in the general issue of why institutions in the western world had grown progressively more rational while powerful barriers seemed to prevent a similar developments in the rest of the world.” (1988: p 25) Weber is of the view that though social norms, cultural values, religious teachings and statutes of law are almost one and the same in all parts of the globe, yet the strength of the bureaucratic network is more prominent and organised one in the western societies because they perform their duties and obligations in an organised and dutiful manner. On the contrary, the eastern countries and states remain the victim of disorganisation, deficiency, corruption and malpractices. Weber witnessed bureaucratic system of Germany, England, France, Russia and other European countries and came to know that the entire bureaucratic system in Europe works on the concrete foundations of the statutes of law devised for the welfare of people and public works, while the same is misused and mishandled in Asian and African countries due to prevailing nepotism, favouritism and other malpractices. Consequently, social institutions got significant boost and growth in Europe, while its foundations remained weak in Asia and Africa. The reason behind the entire development was the rational approach of the European regarding imitation of ideal type and the best aspects of social phenomena, which, according to him, bring progress and prosperity in societies. Like his predecessor thinker and father of socialism i.e. Karl Marx, Weber is also a great critic of capitalism. Marx considers capitalism as the source of exploitation of the proletariat or haves-not at the hands of the bourgeoisie or the haves. Consequently, there starts taking place the situation of permanent conflict between these two strata of society. On the contrary, Weber treats capitalism quite differently. Marx has always been the torch bearer of human rights and vehemently demanded for the equal status and rights for the individuals belonging to divergent classes of society. “The Marxist conflict approach emphasises on a materialist interpretation of history, a dialectical method of analysis, a critical stance toward existing social arrangements, and a political programme of revolution or, at least, reform.” (Theda, 1980)Though he does not see eye to eye with Marxist perspective, Weber interlinks capitalistic economic system with that of religious beliefs. Taking the example of Calvinist sect of Christianity, which emphasises upon the fact that the concept of rewards and punishments from heavens are not based on good or bad deeds or performances. Rather, God blesses and curses His creatures according to His will only. The same is applied with the capitalist economic system. In capitalist economy, the reward or remuneration is not granted on the basis of the efforts made by the individuals. On the other hand, the wealthy industrialist allocates resources and takes complete rest rather making efforts in the production activities. On the contrary, labour class or the proletariat makes hardest efforts and spends many hours a day with machines, and earns very little in return of the labour made by it. “Hence the Protestant ethic - the famous work ethic -, the drive for economic success, the will to work hard, the habit of not spending on frivolous self-indulgence - all this, originating in theology, provided a spirit for capitalism, the set of motivations and attitudes that led to rational investment of profits continually ploughed back, and to the modern world.” (Kilcullen, 1996) Weber’s words and statements reveal his deep observation of the societies of the world on the one hand and his thorough study of history, geography philosophy and theology on the other. He has divided rationality into four categories, including formal rationality making right choice in respect of the allocation of means and resources. By formal rationality, Weber never means observing of ethical values and morality; rather, by this he simply means the application of ideal administrative and management situation within every social set up, according to its professional requirements, and this institution may even be a betrothal house, a restaurant and departmental store. Here again there comes the question of ideal type due to the very fact that swift and efficient production and availability of the products and services satisfies the customers, clients and end-users on the one hand, and supports in the progress of the place of work on the other. One of the most imperative concepts developed and articulated by Max Weber is bureaucracy, which lays stress upon authority system and proper functioning of an institution. Weber divides bureaucratic system into three types, which include traditional, charismatic and rational-legal. Weber associates traditional bureaucratic system with the primitive religious sets of belief and states that since the family of a religious personality or priest has been leading the community in the performance of religious activities, the religious leader inherits the same according to the traditions. He looks after his community as well as general public in the same patterns as he has found his ancestors doing so and is adored as the authority appointed by the Supreme Being. This type exists in some tribes and clans of Africa. The second type of bureaucracy is the charismatic one, where the religious leader has innate charismatic traits, unites the people under one banner and implements religious practices and values with extreme commitment and dedication. People do not elect him according to the provisions of law; rather, his extraordinary personality attracts the people in such a way that they ignore the people’s choice and he enjoys his authority without any hurdle. The monarchic political systems of Medieval Russia, India and China are the examples charismatic type of leadership. The same is applied in the bureaucratic system, where the authority or leader keeps the institution in perfect array and does not let the performance and activities of the institution in a perturb state. In the modern western political system too the authority renders his services in such a way that it gives birth to isms like Marxism, Leninism, Maoism and others. The third type of bureaucratic system is the rational-legal that devises new sets of laws according to the needs and requirements of the people and implement them for their welfare. Weber declares the election of the President of the USA as the ideal type of political leadership that not only leads his people in an exemplary way, but also his rule is strictly on the basis of the prevailing laws of the society. “Only in the modern Western world can a rational-legal authority system develop, and only with that system does one find the full scale development of the modern bureaucracy.” (Ritzer, 1988: 29) Hence, Weber accentuates the best characteristics or ideal type in every aspect of social phenomenon and his notion of ideal type dominates in all his theories and concepts. Weber searches for the ideal type in all societies of the globe particularly after the arrival of industrial revolution and its effects on different classes of society. He presents the concept of an ideal type of authority for the uplift of every stratum of society as the matter of first and foremost significance. “Weber supposes”, Zaidi notes, “the Industrial Age has accelerated the need for a more organised and devoted leadership in private and public sectors, so that the working classes can be benefited and promoted within a public sector under the highly centralised and rule bound hierarchist systems.” (2002: p 131) Though he vehemently criticises and condemns many of the aspects present in capitalism, stating it a system that exploits the working classes, he certainly discovers some elements from this social phenomenon in order to highlight his concept of ideal type. Two of Weber’s predecessor philosophers i.e. Karl Marx and Engels were to counter the social hardships stemming from the rise of capitalism. Appropriately, their theories are formulated specifically to analyse how society functions in a state of upheaval and constant change. On the contrary, Weber is not afraid of the existence of the clash of interests between the classes. Instead, he welcomes the changes taking place in some specific society. Weber is well aware of the very fact that since no society can observe the social, economic and political systems according to the exact provisions of law, so it is not possible to witness the ideal type in its real sense. It is therefore no society can claim to be free from crimes, delinquencies, perversions and other disturbances. It is therefore crimes and abnormalities find their way as an essential part of a social establishment and the theorists have declared crime as a social phenomenon. Actually it is not the fault of the system only; rather, weaknesses and deficiencies of the leadership bring abnormalities in societies. Hence, looking for ideal type remains a dream in most of the human societies. Another important speculation devised by Max Weber is the theory of religion, which also displays his ideal type in its fold. He has associated the religious beliefs with the economic activities. He is of the view that all economic systems, including socialism, Confucianism and capitalism are the by-product of religious sets of belief, which leave indelible impacts upon all aspects of human life. While describing the economic system of China, Weber submits to state that the Chinese population maintains kinship and blood relationship. Consequently, they elected one of their kin as their ruler or king. Since the Chinese kings never desired to exploit or crush his kinsmen, there never appeared slightest feelings of conflict or rivalry among the masses. Rather, they worked as one family and capitalistic economy could not establish its foot in China. But he does not declare it as the ideal type of economy due to the very reality that China has never been the leader of the world in any field of interest since ever. “Ideal types enable one to construct hypotheses linking them with the conditions that brought the phenomenon or event into prominence, or with consequences that follow from its emergence. If we wish to study the religious roots of modern capitalism, it may be advisable to construct an ideal type of Protestant, based on the distinct features of sectarians as these emerged during the Reformation.” (Coser, 1977: p 223) In the same way, the religious differences between Catholic and Protestant sects also gave birth to class discrimination in the capitalistic societies. Max Weber views all social phenomena with the historical and cultural perspective. He always analyses social actions and reactions according to his scale of ideal type. He does not insist in condemning the capitalistic system; rather, he admires and appreciates some of the positive points capitalism contains. It includes aspects “appropriation of the goods of production, free market, a rational technique of production, rational, dependable law, free labor, commercialisation of business, separation of business from household, accounting systems and spirit of capitalism.” (Retrieved from ualr.edu) Weber does neither accepts nor refutes the traditions of any religious belief or a political system. On the other hand, he looks for the analyses and estimation of some positive aspects from every social phenomenon in order to define and explain his ideal type from everyday human life. REFERENCES: Coser, Lewis A. (1977) Masters of Sociological Thought: McGraw Hills pp 223-224 Hekman, Susan. (1983) Weber, the Ideal Type, and Contemporary Social Theory University of Notre Dame Press p 32 Kilcullen, John. (1996) Max Weber: On Capitalism (Retrieved from http://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/Ockham/y64l10.html) Ritzer, George. (1988) Sociological Theory. McGraw Hill Publishing Company pp 21-33 Shils, Edward A. & Finch, Henry A. (1997) The Methodology of the Social Sciences. New York Free Press p 88 Turner, Jonathan H. (1978) The Structure of Sociological Theory Dorsey Press pp 309-331 Weber, Max. 1895/1994. “The Nations State and Economic Policy (Freiburg Address)” in Weber: Political Writings. ed./trans. P. Lassman and R. Speirs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press p 108 Zaidi, M. H. Contemporary Sociological Theorists Moosa Publishers Urdu Bazaar Lahore pp 128-133 Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (2007) (Quoted in http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/weber/#IdeTyp) http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/socsi/undergraduate/introsoc/weberw3.html http://ualr.edu/jdrobson/idealtype.htm Weber’s ideal type is central to his methodology; using examples from social science demonstrate how helpful you think his ideal type is. Read More