4 (c) Max Weber :

Social action,

The Max Weber’s Theory of Social Action

Max Weber conceived of sociology as a comprehensive science of social action. His

primary focus was on the subjective meanings that human actors attach to their
actions in their mutual orientations within specific socio-historical contexts. Coser
says, “In his analytical focus on individual human actors he differed from many of his
predecessors whose sociology was conceived in socio-cultural terms”.

Max Weber began with the idea of social action to make of sociology a scientific
enquiry. Thus the idea of action is central to Max Weber’s sociology. For Weber the
combined qualities of “action” and “meaning” were the central facts for sociology’s
scientific analysis.

Weber defined sociology is, “the interpretative understanding of social action in

order thereby to arrive at causal explanation of its courses and effects.” Action in
Weber’s analysis is all human behaviour to which an actor attaches subjective
meaning. According to Weber “Action is social, in sofar as by virtue of the
subjective meaning attached to it by the acting individual it takes account
of the behaviour of others and thereby oriented in its course.”

Weber was particularly interested in how social action is often conceptualized by

social actors in terms of means-ends chains. For instance, a large bureaucratic
organization will organize the activity of social individuals by assigning each worker a
particular role in a hierarchy.
 The responsibilities associated with this role are rules, or norms, that serve as means
to the ends served by the bureaucracy. These norms serve to make organized
social action possible; that is they routinize and formalize social
interaction among individuals who, for whatever reason are committed to
serving the organization.

According to Weber, there are three key terms:

 Deuten
 Verstehen
 Erklaren

Deuten:

To interpret, to grasp the significance or subjective meaning.

Verstehen:

To comprehend, to organize the subjective meaning of human actions into concepts.

Erklaren:

To explain causally or reveal the constants of human behaviour. The primary task of
sociology is the study of social action. Sociology studies the different aspects of
human behaviour particularly meaning, purpose and value of the human behaviour.
Max Weber observes that social action is that action of an individual which is
somehow influenced by the action and behaviour of other individuals and by which it
is modified and its direction is determined.

Weber writes, “A correct causal interpretation of concrete course of action, is arrived

at when the overt action and the motives have both been correctly apprehended and
at the same time their relation has become meaningfully comprehensible.”

Characteristics of Social Action:

The significant characteristics of Weber’s ideas are as follows:

1. Social action may be influenced by an action of past, present or future.

2. Social action presupposes the existence of other individual and some action by
him.
3. Necessity of subjective meaning.
4. It is oriented in its course.
Weber’s focus on the mutual orientation of social actors and on the “understandable”
motives of their actions was anchored in methodological considerations, which
account for much of the distinctiveness of his approach. Social action may be
influenced by the action of past, present and future. So social action is a result or a
modification of some action of other person or persons.

Social action presupposes the existence of other individual and some

action by him. This means there can be no social action in isolation.
Therefore social action is possible if there is another human being whose action or
behaviour is prompting to the giving individual to act in a particular manner.

In a social act it is necessary that it should have subjective meaning. A blind

imitation without any understanding of the nature of act being imitated is not social
action. Weber’s primary focus was on the subjective meanings that human actors
attach to their actions in their mutual orientations within specific socio-historical
contexts.

Behaviour devoid of such meaning falls outside the purview of sociology. “Action is
Social” Weber says. According to Weber, it is action when man assigns a
certain meaning to his conduct and the action is social when, by the
meaning he gives it, it relates to the behaviour of other persons and is
oriented towards their behaviour.

For Weber human action is social in so far as “the acting individual attaches a
subjective meaning to it.” Mere behaviour becomes action when it derives dealings
 with others and when it is meaningful; that is oriented in its course. The basic
requirement is that the actor is aware of what he or she is doing which can be
analyzed in terms of their intentions, motives and feelings as they are experienced.

Social Actions at a Glance:

1. Rationally-Purposeful action:

It is the social action that is instrumentally oriented. It occurs when the ends of
action are seen as means to higher, taken-for-granted ends.

2. Value-rational action:

It occurs when individuals use effective means to achieve goals that are set by their
values.

3. Affective action:

Emotional and impulsive action that is an end in itself.

4. Traditional action:

It occurs when the ends and means of social action are fixed by custom and
tradition. Action is so habitual that it is taken for granted. This classification of types
of action serves Weber in two ways. It permits him to make systematic typological
distinctions, for example between types of authority and also provides a basis for his
investigation of the course of western historical development.

Raymond Aron rightly sees Weber’s work as “the paradigm of a sociology which is
both historical and systematic.” Weber was primarily concerned with modern western
society, in which as he saw it, behaviour had come to be dominated increasingly by
goal-oriented rationality, whereas in earlier periods it tended to be motivated by
tradition, affect or value oriented rationality.

Stages of Social Action:

Weber has described various stages of social action relating to various

types.
 These are:

1. Rational-purposeful stage
2. Valuational stage
3. Emotional stage
4. Traditional stage

Rational-purposeful stage:

In this stage the actions covered are primarily guided by reason and discrimination.
The pursuit of goals is a corollary of the facts; the rational choice involves
consciousness of ends or goals.

Valuational stage:

Religious and ethical actions come under this category. In this stage the actions
prevailing, are pertaining to values.

Emotional stage:
 An emotional reaction to the action of others comes under this stage. Here there is
expression of love, hatred, sympathy, compassion or pity in response to the
behaviour of other individuals prevails.

Traditional stage:

This stage is characterised by long standing customs, traditions and usages. So all
those actions, which are guided and determined by customs and traditions are
covered under this category.

Raymond Aron writes the above classification of action has been argued,
elaborated and refined:

1. Weber conceives of sociology as a comprehensive science of social action. The

typology of actions is therefore the most abstract level of the conceptual system
applicable to the social field.
2. Sociology is a comprehensive science of action. Here comprehension implies
an understanding of the meaning man gives to his conduct. Weber’s aim is to
understand the meaning each man gives his own conduct, so that it becomes
essential to the comprehension of subjective meanings to proceed to a classification
of types of conduct.
3. The classification of types of action to a certain extent governs the Weberian
interpretation of the contemporary era. According to Weber the prime characteristic
of the world we live in is rationalization. Rationalization is expressed by a widening of
the sphere of zweckrational action, the rational action in relation to goals. Economic
enterprise is rational, so is the control of the state by bureaucracy.
4. The classification of action according to Max Weber may be co-related with the
relations of solidarity or independence between science and politics.

According to Weber, “Interpretative sociology, considers the individuals

and his action as the basic unit as its atom.” The individual is the upper
unit and the sole carrier of meaningful conduct. Concepts like “state,”
association, feudalism etc. are certain categories of human interaction.

Hence Weber concludes; “it is the task of sociology to reduce these concepts to
understandable action that is without exception, to the actions of participating
individual men.”

When we come to examine Weber’s substantive sociological writings i.e. those

writings in which he actually does sociology, we find that Weber is not a
methodological individualist. Turner explains the contradiction between two themes
in Weber’s work well.
 The overt emphasis is on the role of the active individual who constructs and creates
meaning. The covert theme is that the ultimate origin of the meanings of actions is
to be found in charismatic religious movements and these absolute values dig their
own graves with the inevitable logic of fate. Thus Turner suggests that, “in fact
Weber’s pessimism produces a deterministic sociology in which the intentions of
social actors are overtaken by historical fate.”

Weber coined the concept “social relationship” to describe patterned human

interaction which is intentional, meaningful and symbolic”, Abraham and Morgan
wrote, they said, there are six types of social relations designated as modes of
orientation of social action. Weber thought of these as “patterns of human
behaviour” attributable to the recognition of normative expectations.

The six types have been identified and defined by Larson:

1. Usage
2. Custom
3. Rational Orientation
4. Fashion
5. Convention
6. Law.
7. Usage:

Described behaviour performed simply to conform to a style of pattern, for example,

social etiquette.

2. Custom:

Described habitual practices with roots in antiquity.

3. Rational orientation:

Designated that variety of social action which is consequence of actors orienting

themselves to one another on the basis of similar ulterior expectations, for example
mutual self-interest.

4. Fashion:

Described social action which is the result of adherence to contemporary fad.

5. Convention:
 Designated that type of social action performed in recognition of strong moral
obligation in the manner of Sumner’s mores.

6. Law:

Described that type of social action performed in recognition of codified expectation

and restriction. Sociology concerns the rationality of individual and collective
behaviour. It is the science of human action “both comprehensive and explicative.
Weber has “a kind of existential philosophy.” He wants to know the manner men
live, here and now. According to him sociology is deeply connected with history and
with culture.

Criticisms:

Weber’s theory of social action especially his typology of social action has
encountered severe criticisms.

1. Talcott Parsons criticises Weber for stressing too much the element of
voluntary subjective meaning of the actor. For Parsons, the action of an actor is
involuntary; it is behaviour directed by the meanings attached by actors to things
and people.
2. A. Schultz criticises Weber for not providing a satisfactory account of
meaningful action since if meaning is too much divorced from the actor it becomes
an objective category imposed by the sociologists.
3. According to P.S. Cohen, Weber’s typology of social action is confusing due to
Weber’s emphasis on subjective meaning of the actor. Cohen explains with an
example of traditional action whereby a commoner pays tribute to his chief because
it is customary.

If the commoner can give no other reason for making the payment other than that it
has always been so then the conduct may be treated as non-rational. It may be
called rational, if he gives as his reason for payment that the chief is the father of
the people and hence entitled to tribute.

It may be value-rational-the goal of pleasing the chief is a valued end and the means
adopted produces the desired result. It may be goal-rational – the tribute has always
been paid because it pleases the chief and enables one to obtain the favour from
him and the failure to pay may displease the chief and induce him to punish the
offender.

To this Weber might reply that whether the commoner can give reason for payment
or not, he will make it because he has considered no alternative. Despite the above
shortcomings Weber’s theory of social action has inspired sociologists of subsequent
generations.

 Weber was one of the pioneers of discipline of sociology.

 He mainly used Interpretivist approach.
 Father of modern sociological thought.
 Advocated to focus on micro level on the individual.
 He bridged the gap between positivism and idealism.
 Favoured the use of scientific method.
 Developed the scope of sociology as the meanings attached by the actors to their
actions.

SOCIAL ACTION

 Weber used Social Action and Ideal Types as the basis of his theoretical framework.
 Subject matter of Sociology is to study Social Action.
 Social Action – Any action is social by the virtue of the meaning attached to it by the
actors, it takes into account the behaviour of others and is thereby, oriented in its course.
 Conditions for an action to become a social action:
• Action is social if some meaning is attached to it by the actor. Actor must be conscious of
his or her action. The meanings are in the form of motivation of an individual.
• Action is social if it is oriented to some other, i.e, only those actions are social which are
taken in orientation to some other object.
• Excluded imitative actions and mass conditioned actions

VERSTEHEN

 Literally means comprehending or understanding at the level of the actor.

 It is one of the tools for interpretative understanding.
 It involves the comprehension of the meaning by using simple steps of investigation:
• Investigator should reconstruct the situational choices and constraints of the actor.
• Investigator should be at the same wavelength as that of the actor.
• Investigator should not have any sympathy with the actor of the situation.
• Investigator can use primary sources of data collection to establish meanings.

IDEAL TYPE

 Verstehen cannot be used alone and should be used with other methods like ideal type.
 Ideal type is a mental construct which is used to identify certain regularities in social life.
 Used to further understand the meanings attached by the actors.

Four Ideal types

 Traditional Social Action

Meanings are drawn from certain beliefs and traditions.
Involves least conscious thinking over action.
 Affective Social Action
Meanings are generated due to emotions of an actor.
Like love, hatred, anger, etc.
 Zweckrational Social Action
These actions are end or goal-rational actions.
Actions are more logical and ends are logically defined.
It is the most conscious action.
 Wertrational Social Action
It is called value oriented rational actions.
The goal is defined by the values of the society and the actor takes logical action inorder to
fulfill that goal.

Significance
 Any actual action can be compared with this ideal types of actions and meanings can be
attached.
 Ideal type methodology provides investigator with readymade models and saves time of
the investigator.

CRITICISM

 Greater stress on individual meanings and ignores influence of social structure in the
understanding of reality.
 His claim of objectivity is also not true. Ideal types are highly susceptible to subjectivity of
the investigator.
 Collective action is ignored.
 Weber also ignore some unintended meanings and consequences of social action.
 Parsons expanded the meaning of social action by including situational choices,
constraints and aspiration of the actor as well.
 ideal types,

The ‘ideal type’ is one of Weber’s best known contributions to contemporary

sociology. It occupies a very important place in his methodology. Weber
believed, it was the responsibility of sociologists to develop conceptual tools.
The most important of such conceptual tool is the ideal type.

Definition and Meaning:

According to New Websters Dictionary ‘Ideal’ is a “conception or a standard
of something in its highest perfection.” It refers to mental image or
conception rather than a material object. It is a model. The term type means
a kind, class or group as distinguished by a particular character. So
generally, we may conceptualize ideal type as a kind, category, class or group
of objects things or persons with particular character that seems to be the
best example of it.

Weber used Ideal type in a specific sense. To him Ideal type is a mental
construct, like a model, for the scrutiny and systematic characterization of a
concrete situation. Indeed he used Ideal type as a methodological tool to
understand and analyze social reality.

Methodology is a conceptual and logical research procedure by which

knowledge is developed. Historically much of the methodological concern in
the social sciences has been directed towards establishing their scientific
credentials.

Max Weber was particularly concerned with the problem of objectivity in

social sciences. Hence he used Ideal type as a methodological tool that looks
at reality objectively. It scrutinizes, classifies, systematizes and defines social
reality without subjective bias. The Ideal types are nothing to do with values.
Its function as a research tool is for classification and comparison.

To quote Max Weber:

“The Ideal typical concept will develop our skill in imputation in research. It
is not a description of reality but it aims to give unambiguous means of
expression to such a description.” In other words, Ideal types are concepts
formulated on the basis of facts collected carefully and analytically for
empirical research. In this sense, Ideal types are constructs or concepts
which are used as methodological devices or tools in our understanding and
analysis of any social problem.

Just as an ideal model is constructed by the natural scientists as an

instrument and means for knowing nature, so the social scientist creates
Ideal type as a tool for systematizing and comprehending individual facts,
against which the investigator can measure reality. It is because of its
separation from empirical reality and difference from it.

Weber tells, the Ideal type could serve as a measuring rod of reality. The
object of constructing “Ideals types” is not to compare an empirical situation
with the ideal type, but to compare several empirical situations with one
another; through the medium of Ideal type and derive testable hypothesis
which account for the various deviations. In other words Ideal types help to
guide and structure comparative research.

According to Weber, the Science of sociology could be developed on the basis

of the concept, the Ideal type. Weber says, sociology is concerned with social
action and social behaviour. Every social action has an ideal. The ‘Ideal type’
of social action is in our mind. For example, we say that a particular man is
‘idealist’.

The term idealist is an idea and how can we call a man idealist? How can we
apply an idea to a concrete man? It is only because we have conception about
the meaning of the term idealist and this conception is an idea of the Ideal
type. It is because of these theoretical and rational concepts that we are able
to judge a man as idealist. This proves that everyman has in him certain
ideas about perfect social action or behaviour and this ideal type is subjective
that is in the mind of man.

Julien Freund writes, “by the ideal type the sociologist is able to measure the
gap between the ideal typical objectively possible action and the empirical
action an ascertain the part played by irrationality and chance or by the
intrusion of accidental, emotional and other elements.”

According to Weber:
“An ideal type is formed by the one-side 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, which are
arranged according to those one-sidedly emphasized viewpoints into a
unified analytical construct …. In its conceptual purity, this mental
construct…. cannot be found empirically anywhere in reality.”

In-spite of the above definition, Weber was not totally consistent in the way
he used the Ideal type. At its most basic level, an Ideal type is a concept
constructed by a social scientist on the basis of his interests and theoretical
orientation, to capture the essential features of some social phenomenon.
The Ideal type, one of the most important concepts of Weber represents the
logical conclusion of several tendencies of Weberian thought.

(1) It is related to the notion of comprehension. In that every Ideal type is an

organization of intelligible relations within a historical entity or sequence of
events.

(2) Moreover, the Ideal type is related to a characteristic of both our society
and our science, namely the process of rationalization. The construction of
Ideal type, Raymond Aron writes, “is an expression of the attempt;
characteristic of all scientific disciplines to render subject matter intelligible
by revealing or constructing its internal rationality.

(3) Ideal type is also related to the analytic and partial conception of
causality. It helps us to understand historical elements or entities, but it is so
to speak a partial comprehension of a total whole.

Construction of Ideal types:

Ideal types are formulated by the abstraction and combination of an
indefinite number of elements which though found in reality, are rarely or
never discovered in specific form. Therefore Weber does not consider that he
is establishing a new conceptual method. He emphasizes that he is making
explicit what is already done in practice. For the construction of Ideal types,
the sociologist selects a certain number of traits from the whole which is
otherwise and obscures, to constitute an intelligible entity.

For example:
If we wish to study the state of .democracy in India, then our first task will be
to define the concept of democracy with the help of its essential and typical
characteristics. Here we can mention some of the essential characteristics of
democracy. That is existence of multi-party system, universal Adult
Franchise, formation of Govt. by people’s representatives, people’s
participation in the decision making, and equality before law as well.

This formulation of a pure type or an Ideal type concept of democracy will

guide us and work as a tool in our analysis. Any deviation from or conformity
to it will unfold the reality. Ideal types therefore do not represent the
common or the average characteristics but focus on the typical and the
essential characteristics.

For instance in his book the Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism,
Weber analyses the characteristics of the “Calvinist Ethic.” Ideal types are
constructed from facts existing in reality. They do not represent or describe
the total reality; they are of pure types in a logical sense. According to Weber
in its conceptual purity, this ideal mental construct cannot be found
empirically anywhere in reality. This then is the way in which Ideal types are
constructed.

According to Max Weber, “An ideal type is an analytical construct that serves
the investigator as a measuring rod to ascertain similarities as well as
deviations in concrete cases.” Weber urged that the basic purpose of the
Ideal type is “to analyze historically unique configurations or the individual
components in terms of genetic concepts.” They are used as conception
instruments for comparison with and the measurement of reality. They are
indispensable for this purpose.

Ideal types are to be constructed and used with care, says Weber. Max Weber
cautions that the Ideal type is to be constructed and used with great care.
He stated:
1. The Ideal types are not hypotheses.

2. Ideal types do not state or imply an ethical ideal.

3. They do not state an average type.

4. They do not exhaust reality, i.e., they do not correspond exactly to any
empirical instances.

Purpose and use of Ideal types:

Ideal types are not formed out of a nexus of purely conceptual thought, but
are created, modified and sharpened through the empirical analysis of
concrete problems. This in turn, increases the precision of that analysis.
Ideal type, a key term in Weber’s mythological essays has been used by him
as a device in understanding historical configurations or specific historical
problems.

For this he constructed Ideal types that are to understand how events had
actually taken place and to show that if some antecedents or other events
had not occurred or had occurred differently, the event we are trying to
explain would have been different as well. For example, because of the
implementation of the land reform laws and penetration of other
modernizing forces like education, modern occupation etc. the joint family
system has broken down in rural India. This means that there is a causal
relation between the event (Land reform, education etc.) and the situation
(Joint family). In this way Ideal type concept also helps in the causal
explanation of a phenomenon.
Weber does not believe that one element of society is determined by another.
He conceives the causal relations both in history and sociology as partial and
probable relations. It means that a given fragment of reality makes probable
or improable, favourable or un-favourable to another fragment of reality.

For instance:
Certain Marxists would say that private ownership of the means of
production makes inevitable the political power of the minority possessing
these means. Weber would say that an economic regime of total planning
makes a certain type of political organisation more probable.

In Weber’s work such analysis of causal relationships was related to his

interest in worldwide comparisons or in analysis of events and establishment
of general proposition. That is he used Ideal types to build up a conception of
a particular historical case, and used the same Ideal type conceptions for a
comparative analysis. This interdependence of history and sociology appears
most clearly in Weber’s conception of the Ideal type. Besides examining any
particular historical case Weber also used Ideal types to analyze the abstract
elements of social reality and to explain particular kinds of social behaviour.

Max Weber Ideal Type

According to Weber, social laws could be generalized in the same way as the physical laws. He tried to
develop a scientific method for the development of sociological studies. The law of causality applies to social
events as to physical order of things and once we discover definite causes of social events, it is easy to
evolve definite social laws. For this purpose Max Weber has evolved the concept of “ideal-types are neither
experimental mathematical models nor theories for Max Weber the ideal type contains both conceptual and
observational materials. In Max Weber’s classification of action, the ideal type was purely rational action.
Weber wanted to develop the science of sociology. For this purpose he formulated the concept of ideal type.
According to him, the science of sociology could be developed on the basis of this concept of “ideal-type”.

So, sociology is concerned with social action and social behavior. Every social action has an ideal. The ideal-
type of social action is in our mind. For example, we say that a particular man is materialist. The term
materialist is an ideal. Thus every man has in his mind certain ideas about perfect social action or behavior
and this ideal type is subjective, because it is in the mind of man. Thus the idea of a person about an action is
called ideal type.
Characteristics of Max Weber ideal Types
Following are the three characteristics of ideal types

Ideal types are Subjective

The ideal types are subjective in character, social laws are also subjective but the physical events are
objective. Social laws pertain to human actions and behavior and human behavior is characterized by
subjective motive, intention and goal. Weber Wanted to make sociology fully objective but it is impossible.
But with the help of concepts like ideal types it may be possible to achieve the objectivity.

Ideal Types are Emotional

Ideal types are abstract and not concrete in nature. As laws of physics are abstract and cannot be perceived.
Similarly the concepts like “economic man” or “religious man” are also abstract.

Ideal Types are Changeable

Max Weber ideal types are purely human constructions. Therefore they are subjected to consideration of time
and place. There are affected by modern thinking. So, the ideal types are subjected to modification in
response to changes in social realities.

authority,
Max Weber on Authority
Max Weber’s conception of authority is a demonstration of his concept of Ideal type in action.
According to Weber, both power and authority are social in character and come into play where
relations are there. He links the concept of power and authority by using different Ideal Types. Max
Weber defined power as the chance of a man or a number of men to realize their own will in a
communal action, even against the resistance of those who are participating in the communal
action.
Authority according to Weber is a form of legitimate power –power that is considered legitimate in
society. Weber identifies three sources of legitimacy- tradition, rationality and affective or charisma
and on the basis of these, he developed three pure types or Ideal Types of authority.
Max Weber also develops concept of authority as an Ideal Type. According to him, coercion
differentiates power from authority. Power has an element of coercion in it. Power is the capability
of individuals to influence others irrespective of their will.
According to Weber there are three elements of authority or three Ideal Types of authority based
upon his conception of various types of social action.
Traditional authority- It is that type of authority that stems out from traditional social action-
authority based on beliefs, customs and values. A leader comes to power because his family or clan
has always provided the group’s leadership. Weber has used ideal type methodology to analyze
historically, the different forms of traditional authority differentiated between two very early forms
of traditional authority. Weber says structures of traditional authority in any form as barriers to the
development of rationality. Weber argued that the structures and practices of traditional authority
constitute a barrier to the rise of rational economic structures in particular to capitalism.
Charismatic authority- this is the result of personal qualities of the person who exercises it .It
corresponds to affective social action. To Weber, charisma was a revolutionary force. The rise of a
charismatic leader may well pose a threat to the system and lead to a dramatic change in a system.
This type of authority becomes more pronounced in times of crisis and turmoil when other types of
authority seem to be failing and new forms of authority are needed. According to Weber, a
charismatic system is inherently fragile. It survives only as long as the charismatic leader lives or
the crisis lasts. This type of authority is also not as effective as legal-rational authority as
organization is not done on rational criterion and members are not technically trained. An
organization based on charismatic authority has no formal rules, no established administrative
organs and no precedents to guide new judgments.
Legal rational authority- this authority is based on Zweckrational social action or total rational
action. Legal –rational authority can take a variety of structural forms, but the form that most
interested Weber was bureaucracy that he considered the purest type of exercise of legal authority.
Weber wrote about this category as it leads to the most efficient system.
Actual authority may be a combination of above Ideal Types of authority. In the real world there is
constant tension and sometimes conflict among the three bases. The charismatic leader is a
constant threat to the other forms of authority. Further a particular type of authority may change
over time and transform into another type. Weber refers routinisation of charisma and
traditionalisation of rationality as examples of such transformations.

Max Weber’s Three Types of Authority

Authority refers to accepted power—that is, power that people agree to follow. People listen to
authority figures because they feel that these individuals are worthy of respect. Generally speaking,
people perceive the objectives and demands of an authority figure as reasonable and beneficial, or
true.

Not all authority figures are police officers, elected officials or government authorities. Besides
formal offices, authority can arise from tradition and personal qualities. Economist and sociologist
Max Weber realized this when he examined individual action as it relates to authority, as well as
large-scale structures of authority and how they relate to a society’s economy. Based on this work,
Weber developed a classification system for authority. His three types of authority are traditional
authority, charismatic authority and legal-rational authority (Weber 1922).

Weber defines authority as legitimate forms of domination, that is, forms of domination which
followers or subordinates consider to be legitimate. Legitimate does not necessarily imply any sense
of rationality, right, or natural justice. Rather, domination is legitimate when the subordinate accept,
obey, and consider domination to be desirable, or at least bearable and not worth challenging. It is
not so much the actions of the dominant that create this, but rather the willingness of those who
subordinate to believe in the legitimacy of the claims of the dominant.

The philosopher and sociologist Max Weber discerns the three types of authorities-
Traditional, Legal-Rational, and Charismatic; each of which correspond to a form of leadership
that operate in a contemporary society. The one thing which is common in all the three authorities is
“legitimacy.” A legitimate authority is justified by both the ruler and the ruled. Let’s discuss all the
three authorities, given by Max Weber-:
 Types of Authority

Authority -accepted power, power that people agree to follow.

Not all authority fig'ures , elected officials or government .authorities.

Authority can aris.e -from tradition and personal qualities.

Max Weber i dentified and explained three distinct types of authority:

Traditional Charismatic Legal-Rational

Legitimized by long- Based on a leaders personal
standing custom Qualities.
Historic.personality Dynamic personality
Patriarchy (traditional Napoleon,Jesus Christ,
Position of authority) Mother Teresa.Martin Luther
King, Jr_
Authority resides in the
Office, not the person .
Bureaucratic officials
U.S.presidency
and Congressc
Modern BiitishParliament
 TraditionalAuthority

Traditional authority can be defined as the power legitimized by respect for

long-established cultural patterns. It comes from unwritten rules that are maintained over
time. Leaders in traditional authority are people who depend on an established order or
tradition. This leader is a dominant personality and the existing order in the society entrusts
him the mandate to rule. Traditional leadership is reflective of everyday conduct and routine.
People respect traditional authority because “It has always been that way.”

The right of the king to rule is never open to any kind of questions. People following a
ruler doing so in the erstwhile have bestowed the society with continuity and order. It’s not just
the tradition but also the stability of social order that is accepted. In a political system
established on the basis of traditional authority, ancient customs legitimize authority.

Examples-: Hereditary monarchies, Roman Catholic

Church, Tibetan Buddhism, etc.

DrawbacksofTraditionalAuthority:

 Traditional authority is based on some dominant power.

 According to Max Weber, all forms of authorities exhibit some kind of

domination.

 A traditional leader might exploit or rely on prevailing practices.

 A traditional authority may suffer from the lack of moral regularity in the
creation of legal standards
 Charismatic authority can be defined as the power legitimized by exceptional,
unusual, and extraordinary personal abilities which inspire devotion and obedience. Weber
identified this extraordinary attribute as ‘Charisma’ whereas Robert Bierstadt called it
leadership and not an authority at all.

Charismatic leaders are seen as people who are inspired by God or by lofty unsocial principles.
The charisma of these leaders is enough and adequate to inspire their followers and make their
authority seem legitimate.

While emphasizing the importance of tradition, Weber never proclaimed that traditions are
absolute. He only specified that the tradition is a rule and not an exception, but there are
exceptions also. Weber used the phrase Charismatic authority to refer to such an expression.
According to Max Weber, Charismatic authority believes in the personal and effectual devotion
of the follower. It encompasses the power of speech and mind and the display of heroism.

It is important to note that in charismatic authority, the leader is believed to be magical by

employing various tactics. The leader designs an army of true devotees to obtain perpetual
support from the people.

Examples- History equips us with a list of classical examples of such leaders

like Jesus Christ, Mahatma Gandhi, Napoleon, Hitler, Mao, Julius Caesar, Alexander the
Great, Winston Churchill, and many more.

Drawbacksof CharismaticAuthority
 Charismatic authority is inherently unstable and mostly short lived.
 A charismatic leader holds a mission to unite his people amidst differences and
adversities to attain an insurmountable goal.
 It has no rules or traditions to guide or monitors conduct; as it is based on the
unique characteristics of an individual.
Legal authority can be defined as a bureaucratic authority, where power is legitimized by
legally enacted rules and regulations such as governments. This form of authority is the one
that is grounded and clearly defines laws with explicit procedures that define the obligations
and rights. This is largely respected due to the competence and legitimacy that laws and
procedures bestow upon the people in the authoritative position.

Contemporary societies depend on this form of authority; as the complexities require the
emergence of bureaucracy that embodies systematization and order. Authoritarians can
exercise power only within the legally defined boundaries.

According to Weber, “Legal authority rests in the enactment and its pure type is best
represented by bureaucracy”. The basic idea is that laws can be changed and enacted by
formally correct procedures. The governing body here is either appointed or elected.

etc.
Examples- Elected Governments, Police, Courts,

Drawbacks of Legal-Rational Authority

 Legal-Rational authority manifests the power of bureaucracy

over individuals.
 Bureaucracy may not be able to completely address the concerns or problems of
everyone.
 Modern societies depend on legal-rational authority to figure out a common ground to
achieve consensus, but consensus based on agreements lack flexibility which embodies the
dominance of bureaucratic mentality for which the government services are often accused.

CONCLUSION

Max Webber created the most common typology of authority. Each type of authority is legitimate
since it involves both explicit and implicit consent of the governed. A clear hierarchy leads to an
efficient organization, comprising of a legitimate and strong relationship between the followers and
leaders.

Weber viewed the future as one where rational-legal types of authority would become more
dominant. While a charismatic leader or movement might emerge, the dominant tendency was for
organizations to become more routinized, rational and bureaucratic. It is in this sense that legal
authority can be
 interpreted. In modern societies, authority is in large part exercised on the basis of
bureaucracies.

bureaucracy,

A bureaucracy is an organization of non-elected officials of a government or

organization who implements the rules, laws, and functions of their institution.

Bureaucratic organizations evolved from traditional structures

due to the following changes:

 In traditional structures, the leader delegates duties and can

change them at any time. However, over time, this changed and
there was a clear specification of jurisdiction areas along with a
distribution of activities as official duties.
 In a bureaucratic organization, the subordinates follow the order
of superiors but can appeal if they feel the need. On the other hand,
in traditional structures, the authority was diffused.
 Rules are exhaustive, stable, and employees can learn them
easily. Further, the organization records them in permanent files.
 Personal property is separate from the office property. Also, the
means of production or administration belong to the office.
 The selection of officials is based on technical qualification and
appointment and not an election. Further, officials receive a salary
as compensation for their work.
 The official is taken in for a trial period and then offered a
permanent position with the organization. This protects him from
arbitrary dismissal.
Learn more about Classical Organizational Theory here in detail.

Max Weber’s Bureaucratic Form – 6 Major Principles

Max Weber listed six major principles of the bureaucratic form as

follows:
1. A formal hierarchical structure – In a bureaucratic
organization, each level controls the level below it. Also, the level
above it controls it. A formal hierarchy is the basis of central
planning and centralized decision-making.
2. Rules-based Management – The organization uses rules to
exert control. Therefore, the lower levels seamlessly execute the
decisions made at higher levels.
3. Functional Specialty organization – Specialists do the work.
Also, the organization divides employees into units based on the
type of work they do or the skills they possess.
4. Up-focused or In-focused Mission – If the mission of the
organization is to serve the stockholders, board, or any other
agency that empowered it, then it is up-focused. On the other hand,
if the mission is to serve the organization itself and those within it
(like generating profits, etc.), then it is in-focused.
5. Impersonal – Bureaucratic organizations treat all employees
equally. They also treat all customers equally and do not allow
individual differences to influence them.
6. Employment-based on Technical Qualifications – Selection as
well as the promotion of employees is based on technical
qualifications and skills.
While these rules have received criticisms from many corners, the
bureaucratic form of the organization continues to live on.

Why is a Bureaucratic Organization criticized?

Here are some reasons:

 The rules are inflexible and rigid. Further, there is too much
emphasis on these rules and regulations.
 Informal groups do not receive any importance. In current times,
informal groups play a huge role in most business organizations.
  Typically, bureaucracy involves a lot of paperwork which leads
to a waste of time, money, and also effort.
 The rules and formalities lead to an unnecessary delay in the
decision-making process.
 While Government organizations can benefit from a bureaucratic
structure, business organization need quick decision-making and
flexibility in procedures. Therefore, it is not suitable for the latter.
 While the technical qualifications of the employee is an
important aspect of his promotion, a bureaucratic organization
does not consider the employee’s commitment and dedication.
 There is limited scope for Human Resource management.
 Coordinating and communicating is difficult.

What Do You Mean By Bureaucracy? 

"Bureaucracy is an organizational structure characterized by many laws,
standardized procedures, procedures and requirements, number of desks,
meticulous division of labor and responsibility, clear hierarchies and
professional interactions between employees that are almost impersonal."-
Max Weber
 
Max Weber Bureaucracy Theory
A German scientist, Max Weber, describes bureaucracy as an institution that
is highly organized, formalized, and also impersonal. He also developed the
belief that there must be a fixed hierarchical structure for an organization and
clear rules, regulations, and lines of authority that regulate it. The bureaucracy
of Max Weber  has the following attributes:
Specialization of labor
A formal set of rules and regulations
Well-defined hierarchy within the organization
Impersonality in the application of rules
 
Weberian Bureaucracy 
Bureaucratic organizations evolved from traditional structures due to the
following changes:
In traditional structures, the leader delegates duties and can change them at
any time. However, over time, this changed and there was a clear
specification of jurisdiction areas along with a distribution of activities as
official duties.
In a bureaucratic organization, the subordinates follow the order of superiors
but can appeal if they feel the need.
The rules are detailed, stable, and can be easily understood by employees.
Additionally, the company registers them in permanent archives. 
Personal property is distinct from property in the workplace. The means of
production or administration therefore belong to the bureau. 
The selection of officials shall be based on professional qualification and
appointment and shall not be based on an election. In addition, for their
service, officials receive a salary as compensation.
 
Max Weber’s Bureaucratic Form – 6 Major Principles
Max Weber identified the following six core principles of the bureaucratic form:
 A structured hierarchical structure: Each level governs the level below it
in a bureaucratic organization. The level above it too, governs it. The
foundation of central planning and centralized decision making is a
formal hierarchy. 
 Rules-based management-To exercise control, the company uses rules.
Therefore at higher levels, the lower levels effortlessly execute the
decisions made.
 Organization of Functional Specialties - Specialists do the job. The
company often breaks workers into groups depending on the type of
work they do or the abilities they possess. 
 If the organization's purpose is to represent the stockholders, board, or
some other institution that motivated it then it is up-focused Up-focused
or In-focused mission. On the other hand, it is in-focused if the goal is to
serve the company itself and others inside it (like producing income,
etc.).
 Impersonal - all workers are handled fairly by hierarchical organizations.
They also fairly treat all clients and do not allow individual differences to
affect them. 
 Employment-oriented Professional Qualifications - Selection is based
on technical qualifications and skills as well as employee promotion.
Though criticism has come from several corners of these laws, the
organization's hierarchical structure tends to live on.
 
Features of Bureaucratic Organization
We may find these features or characteristics of the Bureaucratic Organization
from the concepts of bureaucratic organization as follows:- 
The high level of the Labor and Specialization Division. 
 A well-defined chain of command exists. 
 It follows Rationality, Objectively, and Continuity theory. 
  The relationship between the members of the association is formal and
impersonal. And it's focused not on personalities, but on roles.
 The rules and regulations are well defined and employee duties and
privileges are indicated. Such ideals range from the bottom of the
organization to all and must be strictly observed. 
 Professional credentials are used for selection and promotion. 
 Relevance is granted only to bureaucratic or legal authority.
Criticism of  Bureaucratic Organization
Max Weber's Hierarchical Management Approach still has several fault lines
and has attracted criticism for that. 
The focus is only on rules and laws. 
 Owing to the formalities and regulations of the Hierarchical
Organisation, there would be needless gaps in decision-making. 
 Owing to so much formality and laws, organization and communication
were hindered.
 Bureaucracy requires a lot of paperwork and has way too much
authority, resulting in a lot of time, effort, and resources being wasted.
Not optimal for effectiveness. 
 A hierarchical approach is not ideal for business organizations because
of its unnecessary formality. For government agencies, the bureaucratic
model might be appropriate.
 The professional skills of the personnel for promotion and transfers are
given too much significance. Dedication and dedication of the worker
are not considered. 
 Human Resource Restricted Scope (HR). Informal groups are not given
any meaning and no scope is given to form one.
 The hierarchical approach of Max Weber served as a solution to the
issues of conventional administrative structures. But it was not the
optimal solution or "close to perfect." 
 The bureaucratic system gives top-level management all the
significance and control. 
And there are just so many rules and degrees of authority. It gives the workers
a greater sense of security. But a window for "red-tapism" is created by
bureaucratic management.

a) protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism

Max Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism is a study of the
relationship between the ethics of ascetic Protestantism and the emergence of the
spirit of modern capitalism. Weber argues that the religious ideas of groups such as
the Calvinists played a role in creating the capitalistic spirit. Weber first observes a
correlation between being Protestant and being involved in business, and declares
his intent to explore religion as a potential cause of the modern economic conditions.
He argues that the modern spirit of capitalism sees profit as an end in itself, and
pursuing profit as virtuous. Weber's goal is to understand the source of this spirit. He
turns to Protestantism for a potential explanation. Protestantism offers a concept of
the worldly "calling," and gives worldly activity a religious character. While important,
this alone cannot explain the need to pursue profit. One branch of Protestantism,
Calvinism, does provide this explanation. Calvinists believe in predestination--that
God has already determined who is saved and damned. As Calvinism developed, a
deep psychological need for clues about whether one was actually saved arose, and
Calvinists looked to their success in worldly activity for those clues. Thus, they came
to value profit and material success as signs of God's favor. Other religious groups,
such as the Pietists, Methodists, and the Baptist sects had similar attitudes to a
lesser degree. Weber argues that this new attitude broke down the traditional
economic system, paving the way for modern capitalism. However, once capitalism
emerged, the Protestant values were no longer necessary, and their ethic took on a
life of its own. We are now locked into the spirit of capitalism because it is so useful
for modern economic activity.

Throughout his book, Weber emphasizes that his account is incomplete. He is not
arguing that Protestantism caused the capitalistic spirit, but rather that it was one
contributing factor. He also acknowledges that capitalism itself had an impact on the
development of the religious ideas. The full story is much more complex than
Weber's partial account, and Weber himself constantly reminds his readers about his
own limitations. The book itself has an introduction and five chapters. The first three
chapters make up what Weber calls "The Problem." The first chapter addresses
"Religious Affiliation and Social Stratification," the second "The Spirit of Capitalism,"
and the third "Luther's Conception of the Calling and the Task of the Investigation."
The fourth and fifth chapters make up "The Practical Ethics of the Ascetic Branches
of Protestantism." The fourth chapter is about "The Religious Foundations of Worldly
Asceticism," and the fifth chapter is about "Asceticism and the Spirit of Capitalism."

The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (German: Die protestantische Ethik und der
Geist des Kapitalismus) is a book written by Max Weber, a German sociologist, economist, and
politician.
In the book, Weber wrote that capitalism in Northern Europe evolved when
the Protestant (particularly Calvinist) ethic influenced large numbers of people to engage in work
in the secular world, developing their own enterprises and engaging in trade and the
accumulation of wealth for investment. In other words, the Protestant work ethic was an
important force behind the unplanned and uncoordinated emergence of modern capitalism

Definition
Max Weber (pronounced Vaber) was knowledgeable in a wide spectrum of topics, including
law, economics, religion and history, and he is arguably the most influential contributor to
sociology. Weber was interested in comparing societies at different times and different
places. He argued that ideas greatly impact social change. From a sociological perspective,
one of his most celebrated pieces of work is The Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of
Capitalism. The original German text was a series of essays composed in 1904 and 1905 and
was translated into English for the first time by sociologist Talcott Parsons in
1930. Protestant ethic, in sociological theory, is the value attached to hard work, thrift, and
efficiency.

Calvinism and Predestination

Weber claimed that the key to the spread of industrial capitalism lay in the ideas of
Protestantism (specifically Calvinism). Calvinism is a branch of Christianity that was
founded by John Calvin and other Reformation-era theologians.
One of their most important ideas was predestination - the idea that an all-knowing and
powerful God had predetermined some people for salvation and others for damnation. The
earliest Calvinists took this at face value and accepted that this was their destiny - that there
was nothing they could do to change it.
As the years passed and Calvinists started thinking in more rational terms, they came to the
agreement that those chosen for salvation would see some signs of it in this life. Eager for
reassurance, many Calvinists threw themselves into hard work and reinvested their profits for
still greater success and reassurance. They were not likely to share their profits with charities
or the poor because it was believed it was destiny for those living in poverty to be living that
way.

Spirit of Capitalism
Capitalism is a way of organizing economic life in a society based on a free market, open
competition, profit motive and private ownership of the means of production. Capitalism
encourages an economy of privately-owned investments and businesses as opposed to a
government-owned and controlled economy. While Weber acknowledged that industrial
capitalism had many causes, he believed that capitalism flourished because of Calvinistic
ideas about hard work.
Calvinists did not pursue wealth for its own sake but viewed the accumulation of wealth as a
calling from God. As a result, many reinvested their profits for even greater success. It is easy
to see how such activities - saving money and reinvesting profits - became the foundation of
capitalism.
As decades passed and religion was replaced with more scientific ideas, many Calvinists lost
their religious enthusiasm. One thing that remained was their drive for success, and
the religious ethic was transformed into a work ethic.

Max Weber was a German philosopher. He was deeply influenced by many other
sociologists and thinkers such as Karl Marx, Immanuel Kant, etc. The Protestant
ethic and the spirit of capitalism was regarded as the most important work of Weber.
PART 1 – The Problem Religious Affiliation and Social Stratification   
According to Weber, if we look at the occupational statistics of any country
(especially Germany), we would find that Businessmen, skilled owners, other
technical and trained personnel of the modern enterprise, in a large number would
be PROTESTANT. When capitalism is present without social differentiation of
people, and when there is more freedom, it results in the participation of protestants
in economic fields, management, and industrial enterprises etc. Participation in the
economic fields requires a wealthy background and an excellent education. So, in
the 16th century, many sections of the wealthy old empire that were developed
economically turned to PROTESTANTISM.

The percentage of Protestant students studying and graduating from technical and
industrial jobs was far more than Catholics. Catholics had more interest in crafts,
thus they become craftsmen, on the other hand, protestants become upper-rank
skilled factory labor. The differentiation in the occupation comes from the
environment one life in as well as the type of education which one gets from the
religious atmosphere. Protestants have shown more economic development as
compared to Catholics, this difference can be perceived through their religious
beliefs rather than historic situations. Catholics believe in asceticism, piety, a life of
greatest security, even with a low economic condition, whereas Protestants believe
more in participation in capitalism and economic fields.

SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM   

The phrase SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM can be understood in terms of historical reality. Weber
explains SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM through BENJAMIN FRANKLIN examples and
sentences, that it is the attitude towards the work, whether it is through traditional or
modern capitalism, the correct usage of capital, keeping an eye on profit, labor, and
maintaining the ethos of business was regarded as the spirit of capitalism. The old ways or
traditional capitalism collapsed and a new spirit of capitalism or modern capitalism was set in
motion. This phase was also known as a revolutionary phase. Religion was completely absent
for the capitalists, according to them it is something that draws people away from labor. The
capitalist system was seen as a devotion of calling for making money through business, trade
etc. For them, capitalism is a way of life and anyone who did not follow it cannot rise.
SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM can be best understood as a part of Rationalism.
LUTHERS CONCEPT OF CALLING

The concept of calling has a religious explanation which means a task set by God.
The word has been first used in Luther’s translation of the bible and then was used
in the everyday speech of Protestants. Thus, the economic activity was given a
religious significance through the concept of calling. According to Luther, the concept
of calling has a divine ordinance directly from God, and one should fulfill it. Everyone
in this world has been assigned a particular duty by God, and also a particular
position so, one should fulfill those obligations in order to live acceptably by god in
the world. Having explained the term calling as a duty assigned by God, Luther could
not establish any further connection between worldly activity and religious acts, so
he elucidates the relationship between the Protestant ethic and the spirit of
capitalism through political and historical situations and also through the works of
Calvin or Calvinism.

PARTII                                                                                                                         

 ASCETIC BRANCHES  OF  PROTESTANTISM

There are four forms of Ascetic Protestantism:

 Calvinism
 Pietism
 Methodism
 Other sects emerging from Baptist movement.

 CALVINISM

Calvinists believe in the doctrine of predestination. According to Calvin, a small

number of people are chosen for grace by God, he (god) has all the power and is
free from all the laws, and only he(god) is the one who knows the truth of individual’s
destiny which is hidden in a dark mystery for people. The eternal truth is that only a
part of humanity will be saved and rest all will be damned. People exist to serve the
glorification god by doing the best in life and obeying God’s commands. God also
commands for a good social achievement and activity in social life which can be
linked to the labour in calling of Luther’s concept, where the service of labour is
impersonal and served for humanity, thus promulgates glory of God, to be the one
chosen for grace by God to be saved rather than damned. Calvin himself felt to be
the chosen member by god, according to him one can be certain of the selection if
one has a knowledge of God’s selection by complete trust and faith on him (lord),
and one should never assume from the conduct of others whether they are chosen
and damned, because that is the duty of god and one should not intervene god’s
secret. One should have self-confidence, as it is also a duty to consider oneself as
chosen and lack of self-confidence would ultimately mean lack of sufficient faith in
God.

PIETISM

Pietism is almost similar to Calvinism. In Pietism, there is a deep distrust of church

and the members of pietism live a life which is free from temptations of the world and
follow all the details which are dictated to them by god. They also believe that if one
has a higher certainty of grace and perfection, this is regarded as a sign of grace,
and god gives signs to those who wait patiently and continue with the state of
perfection. Another doctrine under Pietism which was given by the opponents was
Terminism, according to which it assumes that grace is given to everybody at some
moment in a lifetime and anyone who let that moment pass, was neglected by God.
METHODISM

In Methodism, there is a methodical, systematic nature of the conduct in order to

attain salvation. It was used to bring an emotional act of conversion. They believed in
the concept of rebirth or regeneration, an emotional certainty of attaining salvation
with utmost faith in God. Methodism has nothing new in the concept of calling and
was almost similar to pietism.

THE BAPTIST SECTS

Baptist sects were adopted from Mennonites, Quakers in the sixteenth and seventeenth
century. Baptists believe in true faith in God, according to them, individual should have faith
in God alone and should work in daily life, and the Holy Spirit speaks to the individual if one
is willing to hear. They do not believe what is written as a document that is, a bible. One
could attain salvation through the church. One should have an unconditional submission
towards the lord and rejection towards the world and its interest, according to which will lead
to the rebirth, and a good conduct is necessary to attain salvation.
ASCETICISM AND THE SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM

Men in this world have been sent by God to complete certain tasks, in order to be the
chosen one, one should not indulge in enjoyment and leisure activities, but to indulge
in activities which serves the gods will. Waste of time by social activities, luxury,
remaining idle all these are counted as sins. The concept of calling, thus, has the
greatest value, that any man without a calling lacks systematic conduct. God
demand in calling is rational labor, this provides with the justification of modern
division of labor. Systematic working as labor in calling leads to the highest level of
asceticism combined with true faith leads to the spirit of capitalism. Phrases such as
“time are money” and “honesty is best policy” were also the products of capitalism.
Spirit of capitalism is seen as the labor or work as a duty which is assigned directly
by God and one has to complete it with full honesty as to maintain grace of God.
Working is regarded as a blessing of God, and one should save more money and
also invest the earned capital and cut down on consumption. Protestant asceticism
created a powerful and faithful workforce which is loyal and whose ultimate goal is to
please God with its labor

Protestant Individualism and the Emergence of Capitalism 

Based on historical observation and analysis, Weber theorized this was because these
were the only two countries in which Protestantism was the predominant religion,
rather than Catholicism, which was the formal religion of every other European
country.
Weber theorized that the different value systems of the two religions had different
effects: the values of Protestantism encouraged ways of acting which
(unintentionally) resulted in capitalism emerging, over a period of many decades,
even centuries.

Protestantism encouraged people to ‘find God for themselves’. Protestantism taught

that silent reflection, introspection and prayer were the best ways to find God. This
(unintentionally, and over many years) encouraged Protestants to adopt a more
‘individualistic’ attitude to their religion by seeking their own interpretations of
Christianity.

In contrast, Catholicism was a religion which encouraged more conservative values

and thus was resistant to such changes. The Catholic Church has a top-down
structure: from God to the Pope to the Senior Bishops and then down to the people.
Ultimate power to interpret Catholic doctrine lies with the Pope and his closest
advisers. Practicing Catholics are expected to abide by such interpretations, they are
generally not encouraged to interpret religious scripture for themselves. Similarly,
part of being a good Catholic means attending mass, which is administered by a
member of the Catholic establishment, which reinforces the idea that the church is in
control of religious matters, rather than spirituality being a personal matter as is
more the case in Protestant traditions.

Part of Weber’s theory of why Capitalism first emerged in Protestant countries was
that the more individualistic ethos of Protestantism laid the foundations for a greater
sense of individual freedom, and the idea that it was acceptable to challenge ‘top
down’ interpretations of Christian doctrine, as laid down by the clergy. Societies
which have more individual freedom are more open to social changes.

Calvinist Asceticism and the Development of Capitalism

Weber argued that a particular denomination of Protestantism known as Calvinism

played a key role in ushering in the social change of Capitalism.

Calvinism preached the doctrine of predestination: God had basically already

decided who was going to heaven (‘the saved) before they were born. Similarly, he
had also already decided who the damned were – whether or not you were going to
hell had already been decided before your birth.

This fatalistic situation raised the question of how you would know who was saved
and who was damned. Fortunately, Calvinism also taught that there was a way of
figuring this out: there were indicators which could tell you who was more likely to
be saved, and who was more likely to be damned.

Simply put, the harder you worked, and the less time you spent idling and/ or
engaged in unproductive, frivolous activities, then the more likely it was that you
were one of those pre-chosen for a life in heaven. This is because, according to
Calvinist doctrine, God valued hard-work and a ‘pure-life’ non-materialistic life.

According to Weber this led to a situation in which Calvinist communities

encouraged work for the glory of God, and discouraged laziness and frivolity.
Needless to say there was quite a motivation to stick to these ethical codes, given that
hell was the punishment if you didn’t.

Over the decades, this ‘work-ethic’ encouraged individuals and whole communities to
set up businesses, and re-invest any money they earned to grow these businesses
(because it was a sin to spend the money you’d made on enjoying yourself), which
laid the foundations for modern capitalism.

Weber argued that over the following centuries, the norm of working hard and
investing in your business became entrenched in European societies, but the old
religious ideas withered away. Nonetheless, if we take the longer term view, it was
still the Protestant work ethic which was (unintentionally) responsible for the
emergence of Capitalism