Contribution to the Development of Social Thought Marx and Weber - Coursework Example

For Any Two of the Following Thinkers Outline Their Key Ideas and Assess the Extent to Which Their Work Has Contributed To the Development of Social Thought Marx and Weber Table of Contents Introduction 3 Marx’s Contribution to the Development of Social Thought 3 Driving Force of Social Change for Marx 4 Attitude of Marx towards the Bourgeoisie 4 Marx’s Meaning for the Forces of Production and the Relations of Production 5 Central Feature of Marx’s Materialist Approach 6 Weber’s Contribution to the Development of Social Thought 6 Weber’s Meaning for the Spirit of Capitalism as Illustrated by His Quotations from Benjamin Franklin 6 Protestant Ethic and Its Applicability to Today’s Society 7 Weber’s Meaning of the Widely Quoted Metaphor of the "Iron Cage" Towards the End of the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism 7 Weber’s Definition of Bureaucracy 8 Features of Bureaucracy According To Weber 8 Bureaucracy an Inescapable Feature of Modern Life 9 Comparison and Contrast of Social Thought of Marx and Weber 10 Conclusion 11 References 12 Introduction Karl Marx was born in the year 1818 at the town of Trier in German Westphalian. He started studying humanities at Bonn University and then later studied philosophy and law at Berlin. At that particular time, he did not have any concern towards sociology but his interest towards sociology developed later in his life. Marx started believing that the rise in capitalism was due to the historical progress on the substantial basis of society (St Crispin’s, n.d.). Correspondingly, Max Weber was born in the year 1864 in a German town called Erfurt where he spent most of his life. He got influenced by society, economy and philosophy in Germany. He took concern for the rise in capitalism as this issue affected him closely. He wrote several issues that were related to society and history (St Crispin’s, n.d.). The key objective of the essay is to outline the key ideas presented by the two globally renowned and pioneering thinkers i.e. Karl Marx and Max Weber. The discussion will further aim to exemplify the extent to which their work has made a decisive contribution towards the development of social thought. Marx’s Contribution to the Development of Social Thought Karl Marx wanted to develop physical environment to enhance the standard of living and raise the standards of humanity. Therefore, in order to change history, Marx provided a materialistic thought of history to the humanity. He achieved his desire to change history through transformation of idealistic thought of history and development of modernised social theory (Oluwasegun, 2012). Driving Force of Social Change for Marx Karl Marx observed the evolution of society through various stages. His central focus was on dialectical class conflict in order to control the various ways of production which acted as a driving force for social evolution. According to him, the evolution of society is through distinct modes of production wherein the upper class of people is in direct control of the production means and the lower class of people is enforced for production. Marx criticised capitalism and looked forward to the communist revolution (Boundless, n.d.). Attitude of Marx towards the Bourgeoisie According to Marx, bourgeoisie (the capitalist class) tried to protect capitalism through promotion of misrepresented ideas and false perceptions that kept the proletariat away from protesting against capitalism. Marx felt that due to the disputes arising amongst the bourgeoisie class and the proletariat class, there would be a downfall of capitalism which would lead to the revolution of capitalism. He also stated that the bourgeoisie ended all medieval, patriarchal and peaceful relations. He believed that bourgeoisie had stripped off the aura from every occupation that converted the lawyer, poet, priest and man of science into labourers who were paid wages (Korsch & Marx, 1938). Moreover, he felt that the bourgeoisie destructed the sentiments of many families and changed the relationship of the family members into just a relationship of money. Bourgeoisie according to Marx had been an obstacle for the emancipation of proletariat class of people wherein the proletariat class who were employed as labour class was controlled by bourgeoisie through the means of production (Marx & Engels, 1848). Marx’s Meaning for the Forces of Production and the Relations of Production It can be ascertained that from the viewpoint of Marx, forces of production comprise techniques and machineries along with individuals having required skills and an organisation to perform their function due to which the development of production was just viewed in economic and technical terms. Marx asserted that “Of all the instruments of production, the greatest productive power is the revolutionary class itself” (Sayers, n.d.). In accordance with Marx, the relations of production equate with the legal system of relationship. Ownership is viewed merely not as a legal expression of the prevailing production relations but also as a sole trait. As quoted by Marx, “socialism is the declaration of the permanence of the revolution, the class dictatorship of the proletariat as the necessary transition point to the abolition of class distinctions generally, to the abolition of all the relationships of production on which they rest, to the abolition of all the social relations that correspond to these relations of production, to the revolutionising of all the ideas that result from these social relations” (Sayers, n.d.). With regard to Socialism, the evolution to dominated class in society includes the change of all aspects of production relation. Moreover, the rise of bourgeoisie in the society was due to the continuous and persisting dictatorship done to the proletariat within the society. Marx believed that initiative for creativity and the workforce energy would be the most enormous force of production (Sayers, n.d.; Burke, 2000). Central Feature of Marx’s Materialist Approach The major concepts used by Karl Marx in his sociological thought involved dialectical materialism and historical materialism. The approach used by Karl Marx is called dialectical materialism as the approach refers to the natural phenomena, process of studying along with its apprehension which is dialectical, whereas the interpretation of the natural phenomena and the concept of this theory are materialistic. Historical materialism is another approach used by Marx which is an addition to the dialectical materialism in relation to the social life study and its history (Stalin, 1938). Weber’s Contribution to the Development of Social Thought Weber’s Meaning for the Spirit of Capitalism as Illustrated by His Quotations from Benjamin Franklin According to Max Weber, spirit of capitalism can be termed as an ‘historical individual’ and the combination of various components that were correlated to historical reality which is unified into conceptions in relation to the viewpoint of cultural importance (Weber, 1905). The dimension of capitalism is similar to the quest of profit and the profit is renewed endlessly through constant rational capitalistic company. Weber explained that the capitalistic action of the economy is the one that expects for profit through utilising exchange opportunities. With regard to Weber, the most vital fact for capitalism was that it was calculated based on capital or money that was made (Sacawa, n.d.). Protestant Ethic and Its Applicability to Today’s Society In the contemporary purview, the capitalist economy is a vast space wherein an individual is born who adopts himself to the economy which cannot be altered. In today’s society, capitalism overlooks economic life, teaches and selects the economic matters which are required for the economic survival of the capitalist market. However, the spirit of capitalism was in existence far before the capitalist order. It is worth mentioning that capitalism was not much developed in the southern parts of the United States of America which was later initiated by big capitalists for their business motives. The spirit of capitalism had to face a difficult time to get supremacy in a world of aggressive forces. Moreover, capitalism is viewed by those social groups which are not much involved and have merely adopted the modern capitalistic situations (Weber, 1905). Weber’s Meaning of the Widely Quoted Metaphor of the "Iron Cage" Towards the End of the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism According to Weber, people who are born in today’s situation are directly influenced by the capitalistic mechanism. He mentions that people’s care for the exterior goods have become an iron cage. In addition, he states that material goods have gained control over various individuals. Capitalism does not require support through any aspect because in accordance with Weber’s understanding, the religious spirit asceticism has fled away from the iron cage (SparkNotes LLC, 2013). Thus, it can be affirmed that the attitude of Weber towards the system of modern capitalism has been uncertain. He uses the iron cage in order to describe the current situation of the people in the modern world, wherein the people are literally trapped in the capitalistic system that determines the opportunities of those people in their life. Weber believed that development of capitalism was dependent on historical situation of transformation (SparkNotes LLC, 2013). Weber’s Definition of Bureaucracy The expression ‘bureaucracy’ was derived from the word “bureau” that was used in the Western Europe during early part of 18th century. With reference to an office, bureau is a work place wherein various people work. The word ‘bureaucracy’ came into existence in the year 1789 before the French Revolution after which there was a rapid prevalence of the term in many nations. Weber defined bureaucracy as technically superior aspect to all forms of enterprises which is indispensible to the large and composite enterprises. It is a concept in political science and sociology that refers to the manner in which the managerial execution law enforcement is organised socially (Whimster, 2004; Grigoriou, n.d.). Features of Bureaucracy According To Weber According to Weber, there are six major features of bureaucracy which include firstly, formal structure of hierarchy wherein each level is controlled by the level above. This structure is on the basis of centralised planning and decision making. The next feature involves rule management wherein the rules made by the higher level are executed by the lower levels. The third feature includes organisational speciality of function wherein the work done by the people is based on their speciality. The fourth feature includes upward focus and downward focus which decide that the purpose of the organisation is either to satisfy the expectation of the stakeholders or to produce higher surplus. The fifth feature includes impersonal purpose wherein all the customers and employees are treated equally. The sixth feature includes qualification based employment wherein the employees are recruited based upon their qualification (Visionary Publications, Inc, n.d.). Bureaucracy an Inescapable Feature of Modern Life Bureaucratic regulation has been surrounded with an aura of negative tendencies which has been regardless of the critical and inescapable application of bureaucracy in modern life along with its contribution expected and responsible ways essential to the economic and party-political institutions in the modern world. The prevalent negative aspect of bureaucracy tends to reflect a twisted and interesting historical course that has been engraved by the conditions of the society and culture that transverse the whole political and ideological scale of the prevailing society. The importance of bureaucracy is thematically comprehensible and consistent irrespective of the inescapable types of combined volume that is assured to exhibit (Visionary Publications, Inc, n.d.). Comparison and Contrast of Social Thought of Marx and Weber Marx and Weber in the 19th century were considered as the most prominent sociologists. Both the sociologists gave an explanation of social change in the society which had lot of resemblances and differences. Marx’s social thought was focused on the economic issues which had a belief that issue is a central force for societal change whereas Weber focused on the phenomenon of macro-sociology. Marx believed that the societal changes occurred through the transformation in the thought of the people that was created through the mode of production. However, Weber believed that the altered minds of people led to the societal change. Marx and Weber’s thought on the modern capitalism rise appeared to be substantial however both the theories do not give full explanation on the occurrence of capitalism rise (St Crispin’s, n.d.). Conclusion Karl Marx believed that enhancement in the standard of living and improvement of human standards would develop the society. He then developed the theory through conversion of idealistic theory of history to the modern social history. Both Marx and Weber contributed to development of an understanding about the socialistic change in the society wherein their beliefs were quite similar in certain cases which also had some distinctions. Marx’s theory was concerned to the economic matters in which he believed that that this matter was the driving force for societal change. Nonetheless, Weber in his theory for change in society concentrated on the aspect of macro sociology. Marx’s theory is ascertained to be built on the belief that the change in society was due to modes of production that resulted in the change in people’s thoughts conversely Weber believed that change in the perception of the people brought about the changes in society. References Boundless, No Date. Key Points. Class Conflict and Marx. [Online] Available at: https://www.boundless.com/sociology/sociology/the-development-of-sociology/class-conflict-and-marx/ [Accessed February 12, 2014]. Burke, B., 2000. The Communist Manifesto. Karl Marx and Education. [Online] Available at: http://infed.org/mobi/karl-marx-and-education/ [Accessed February 20, 2014]. Grigoriou, P., No Date. Definition of the Bureaucracy: New Political and Technical Aspects. Bureaucracy: Administrative Structure And Set Of Regulations In Place To Control Organizational Or Governmental Activities. [Online] Available at: http://www.balcannet.eu/materiale/research2.pdf [Accessed February 12, 2014]. Korsch, K. & Marx, K., 1938. Chapter 3. From Political Economy to Marxian Critique of Political Economy. Art II: Political Economy. [Online] Available at: http://www.marxists.org/archive/korsch/1938/karl-marx/ch02.htm [Accessed February 20, 2014]. Marx, K. & Engels, F., 1848. I. Bourgeois and Proletarians. Manifesto of the Communist Party. [Online] Available at: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf [Accessed February 12, 2014]. Oluwasegun, A. M., 2012. Marx and His Contribution to Modern Social History. Marx’s Contribution to the Development of Modern Theory: Understanding the Fundamental. [Online] Available at: http://www.academia.edu/4911587/MARXS_CONTRIBUTION_TO_THE_DEVELOPMENT_OF_MODERN_SOCIAL_THEORY_UNDERSTANDING_THE_FUNDAMENTAL [Accessed February 12, 2014]. Sacawa, P. No Date. Weber’s Introduction to the Protestant Ethic. An Introduction to Max Weber and Summary of the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. [Online] Available at: http://vichistory.com/database/vuhs-database-3/essays/weber-patricia-sacawa/ [Accessed February 12, 2014]. Sayers, S., No Date. The Relations of Production. Forces of Production and Relations of Production in Socialist Society. [Online] Available at: https://www.kent.ac.uk/secl/philosophy/articles/sayers/forces.pdf [Accessed February 12, 2014]. SparkNotes LLC, 2013. Asceticism and the Spirit of Capitalism. The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit Of Capitalism. [Online] Available at: http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/protestantethic/section7.rhtml [Accessed February 12, 2014]. St Crispin’s, No Date. Compare And Contrast Marx’s And Weber’s Theories About The Rise Of Capitalism. Which Do You Prefer And Why? Capitalism. [Online] Available at: http://stcrispins.hayko.at/gisela/capitalism.htm [Accessed February 12, 2014]. Stalin, J. V., 1938. Dialectical and Historical Materialism. Archive. [Online] Available at: http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm [Accessed February 12, 2014]. Visionary Publications, Inc, No Date. Bureaucratic form according to Max Weber — His Six Major Principles. Busting Bureaucracy. [Online] Available at: http://www.bustingbureaucracy.com/excerpts/weber.htm [Accessed February 12, 2014]. Weber, M., 1905. The Spirit of Capitalism. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. [Online] Available at: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/weber/protestant-ethic/ch02.htm [Accessed February 12, 2014]. Whimster, S., 2004. The Essential Weber: A Reader. Routledge. Read More