Modern and Traditional Societies in Social Action Theory by Weber - Assignment Example

Running Head: SOCIOLOGY Modern and Traditional Societies in Social Action Theory By Weber Name: Institution: Course: Instructor: Date: Thesis Statement The social action theory emphasizes the capability of people to exert control over their actions. The individual is not an inactive holder of society's directives, but a dynamic creator of social behavior. So it is society which is built by the individuals, and not otherwise, as the social system theory believes. Individuals are capable of rational thought and this makes them to be aware of themselves as well as others as social beings. They have their own beliefs and motives, and their own understanding of the significance of a situation; they take control of their own actions. Social action standpoints are so called because of their stress on people taking action, on regulating their own behavior. This essay explores the theory of social action by Max Weber. It comparatively explains the traditional and the modern societies in relation to this theory. Weber, as it is often said, contributed to the realization of sociology as an inclusive science of social action. His primary theoretical center of attention was on the subjective significance that people attach to their actions in their relations with one another within particular collective contexts. Major types of social actions In this correlation, Weber makes a distinction between four most important types of social action. The work of Secher (1962) Cleary provides an overview of the four major social actions that were proposed by Max Weber. The first social action is known as rational action. It is well known as value-rational actions or wertrational actions. These are actions that are taken for they lead to a value goal, but with no prior thought of their impacts and frequently without taking in to account the suitability of the methods chosen to achieve it. The value rational social action is usually divided into two groups: rational orientation and rational consideration. The former comes into account if the secondary results are rationally considered. This is as well considered as a substitute means when secondary impacts have ended. Rational orientation is being able to understand and recognize certain mediums under general conditions. Heterogeneous actors and groups that are competing, according to Weber, find it hard to reconcile on a certain medium and understand their common social action. The second social action is instrumentation action commonly known as zweckrational action. According to the work of Ritzer (2005), these are actions that are planned and they are executed after relatively evaluating a goal and consideration of various means and consequences of achieving it. Ritzer gives an example of a high school student who prepares to become a lawyer. He states that the students know what is required of him while in school so as to achieve his ultimate goal. Therefore the student must take the appropriate measures to achieve his ultimate goal. The third action is emotional action known commonly as affective action. According to Barbalet (2001), these actions are taken to express feelings due to ones emotions. For instance, crying in a funeral and cheering in a football match is a form of emotional actions. This action is divided into two; emotional tension and uncontrolled reaction. In the latter, there is lack of control, there is no restraint and it lacks discretion. An individual with a reaction that is not controlled declines to consider other peoples’ feelings the way he would consider his own feelings Emotional tension comes from a fundamental belief that an individual is powerless or unworthy to get hold of his/her earnest desires. When desires are not satisfied there is internal instability. It is therefore easier said than done to be prolific in society when there are unfulfilled desires. Emotion is regularly ignored because of concepts at the hub of exchange theory. From the behavioral point of view, emotions are often always together with punishments. The final actions are the traditional actions that are believed to be guided by norms and customs (Tilman, 2004). To summarize the social actions, Zweckrational can be interpreted as "technocratic thinking." It can be presented as an action in which the ways of obtaining a specific goal are chosen rationally. It is related to an engineer who constructs a bridge as the most capable way to cross a river. Wertrational, well known as value-oriented rationality, is exemplified by striving to achieve a goal, which in itself is not necessarily rational, but which is achieved through rational ways within a religious, ethical and a holistic context. An illustration would be a person seeking salvation through following the wisdom of a prophet. Affective action is fixed in the emotional state of an individual person rather than weighing the means and the ends rationally. Traditional action is steered by habits of thought, through relying on what Weber referred as "the eternal yesterday." The categorization of various forms of action offers a basis for Weber’s study of western historical development, on top of his theory of human societies. MODERN VERSUS TRADITIONAL SOCIETIES (CRITIQUE) Weber was mainly concerned with modern society, in which, as he envisaged it, behavior had come to be gradually subjugated by goal-oriented rationality. He held that more and more of our actions were being guided by zweckrational, less and less by values, emotions or tradition. His entire work attempted to identify the social factors that have lead to the "rationalization" of the West (Kenneth & Morrison2006). While his sociology starts with the single energizers of social action, he did not stay solely focused on the micro level. Weber proposed that the fundamental distinguishing feature of modern society was best only if viewed in terms of characteristic shift in motivation. However, he held that the characteristic shift is based on historical and structural forces. Irrationality of Zweckrational: Since it is obvious that modern societies are subjugated by bureaucracy it is critical to comprehend why this massive power is frequently used for ends that are opposed to the needs and interests of people. Secondly, the rationalization process is the escalating supremacy of zweckrational action over rational action based on actions motivated by traditions, values, and emotions. Zweckrational can to some extent be termed as "technocratic thinking," where the goal is basically to uncover the most capable means to those ends that are recognized as significant by those in authority. A severe case of rationalization was the massacre camps of Nazi Germany. The aim was to kill as many human beings as possible in the most efficient approach, and the consequence was the murder of millions of people. The men and women who ran those camps were ordinary human beings. The extermination camps are examples of bureaucratic efficiency using the most likely efficient means on hand at that time to achieve the aim of the Nazi government. Zweckrational (technocratic thinking) can be contrasted with wertrational, which engrosses the appraisal of means in terms of human values such as peace, human happiness and social justice. Wertrational is what can be termed as means used by the traditional societies. Even though bureaucracy as used in the modern society is highly rational in the official sense of technical efficiency, it ignores the moral acceptability of its goals and ways of achieving them (Jeong, 2006). In a modern bureaucratic society, everything including human beings becomes part of the expanding Machine. This is not the case in the traditional society where the moral repercussion of the general operation of the organization is considered (Sica, 1988). The prominence of bureaucracies involves doing work in the most efficient manner without consideration of the consequences on the social behavior on the society, consumer and the environment. According to Sica (1988), on his work about “Irrationality of Zweckrational” it is stated the modern societies have done away with very important traditional institutions such as religion, families and community which previously served linked the pre-industrial man to the society’s interests. Bureaucracy causes the deterioration of religious and traditional moral authority (secularization); the values of calculability and efficiency predominate. Protestant Ethic: Weber held that rational action in a system of rational-legal authority is at the spirit of modern society. His sociological work was first and foremost geared to explore and explain the change from traditional to rational action. Weber argued that the rationalization of action can be realized when traditional ways of life are discarded. Modern society has a hard time because of the traditions of the pre-industrial people. The tradition was the main thing that was overpowering the modern societies. Weber's main task was to find out the forces in the West that made people to discard their tradition and value orientation. These were the forces that made people to develop a desire of acquiring wealth and goods. Britannica (2010) ascertains that the Protestant ethic broke the reliance on tradition while it heartened people to shift rationally to their work. The Protestant ethic is therefore believed to have provided a religious sanction that promoted a spirit of thorough discipline, motivating people to apply themselves rationally so as to acquire wealth. Weber carried out a study on non-western cultures and found that a number of these societies had the technological infrastructure and other essential conditions to embark on capitalism and economic expansion. The only force that was missing was the positive motivation to abandon the traditional ways. Weber held that protestant ethic was not the sole reason for the rise of capitalism for there was another powerful force that fostered its emergence (Britannica, 2010). Noting from the literature, there are various differences between the modern and the traditional societies as according to the theory of social action by Max Weber. To start with the economic difference, the modern society has led to coordination, efficiency and control over both social and physical environments. In the modern society the rationalization is the fundamental principle behind escalating division of labor and bureaucracy. This has resulted to extraordinary increase during the production and distribution of goods and services. The modern society is characterized with secularization, oppression and depersonalization. On the other hand, the traditional society upholds traditional values and norms, no oppression and depersonalization. In the political sphere of the traditional society, there was a consistent brotherly of religions. People lived together as a household, tribe and a community. They believed in gods and magic. Up to date there is a generation commonly known as generation x which still holds the human values and norms. On the contrary, generation y which comprises of the younger generation disagrees with this idea of brotherhood. Conclusion Social actions are mainly significant within the context of the intentions and purposes of individual agents or subjects. However, such intentions and purposes are understood in context of the setting of social structures and historical Social Action Theory explains how society interacts with the actors. Society is mainly the effect of individuals acting in the direction of their own independent ends. Nevertheless, since society has a role in determining what types of things are deemed significant to those actors; people are regarded as both constitutive and partly constituted by their societies. Weber's approach to this theory is referred to as "interpretive sociology." It explains how an observer who is external to a society can come to be aware of individuals within the reference society understanding their first-person and subjective experiences. Nonetheless, a person’s actions are irreducibly subjective. Consequently, the knowledge is considered as a model, which the sociologist struggles for without any assurance of ever achieving it in full. Criticisms in opposition to Social Action Theory have come from two limits. Weber tried to merge the ideas of a rational person who takes determined action towards a significant end, and a view of society and history that holds down and largely informs the significance of the actions that the person can take. Conversely, some people claim that the person has more influence than Weber gives him, while other people claim that society and history are much more influential than Weber claims. More persuasive critiques argue that the problem is not with his ideas, but with his methodology. If social action can be subjective and culturally relative, and if an observer really can't comprehend the social ends towards which a person outside of his own culture acts, then there is no reason for trying to apply interpretive sociology. However, supporters of Weber say that nothing prevents us from a partial understanding the social actions taken by people even if there is no complete understanding. References Barbalet, J. M. (2001). Emotion, Social Theory, and Social Structure: a Macro sociological Approach . USA. Cambridge University Press, p.51. Britannica (2010). Protestant Ethic. Retrieved October 12, 2010, from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/479867/Protestant-ethic Jeong, H.W. (2006). Max Weber-Social Theory. George Mason University. Par 1-5. Kenneth, L. & Morrison, P. (2006). Marx, Durkheim, Weber: formations of modern social thought, Forge Press, p.33. Ritzer, G. (2005). Encyclopedia of social theory, Sage Press, p. 422 Secher, H. P. (1962), Basic Concepts in Sociology. Contributors: Max Weber, New York: Citadel Press, Sica, A. (1988). Weber, irrationality, and social order. USA. University of California Press. Tilman, R. (2004). Karl Mannheim, Max Weber and the Problem of Social Rationality. Journal of Economic Issues, 38(4): 32-36. Read More