Max Weber, a German sociologist, was born on April 21, 1864, near Erfurt, Saxony, central Germany (Weber, 2013). Weber worked tirelessly in the field of history, law, social economics, philosophy and politics at the University of Vienna, Berlin, and the University of Munich. As asserted by Weber (2013), on June 14, 1920, Max took his last breath, but for the whole of his life, he was an influencer who developed significant ideas and thoughts that resulted to different social research and theories.
Theories, Ideas, and Thoughts of Max Weber
The German Sociologist formulated three critical theories, namely the social action theory, theory of stratification, and the theory of entrepreneurship (Cotterrell, 2017). In these theories, he depicted his thoughts and outlined various ideologies and concepts that create a better understanding of sociology as a field.
The Social Action Theory
According to Cotterrell (2017), sociology refers to the “informative understanding of social action and responses to arrive at the underlying explanation of its effects and course.” Weber indicated that an action is a human response by which an actor links it with subjective meaning, and this makes it social. In this concept, Weber focused on identifying how the social action frequently gets abstracted by the social actors based on the means-ends chains. Taking an example of a bureaucratic organization that has different roles and obligations, it usually manages and organizes activities by giving every worker a specific duty in a hierarchical manner. The commitments linked with these duties are norms, values or rules, which acts as the means to the results and they get the facilitation from the bureaucratic culture.
Considerably, Weber’s orientation on social action was towards peaceful coexistence and production. Back of his mind, he understood the significance of values, both laden and free; hence, he focused on the issue of norms and rules which conceptualized that individual or organizations can approach freedom from values. A person can hoist specific values to essential duties or roles, and this is why no single person who can get away from the “spider web” of values. In the current world, every activity conducted requires values, and therefore, borrowing from Weber’s social action theory, it is possible to give adequate attention to everything that one does irrespective of their hierarchical level.
In support of his thought, Weber formulated three ideas. One of them is Deuten, which means to analyze and interpret, with the aim of grasping the subjective meaning. Weber knew that every person must assess any situation to obtain the intended purpose. The second term is Verstehen, and according to Weber (2013), it is to comprehend and organize the deliberate and the meaningful sense of the individuals’ responses into concepts. For instance, it is practical to observe the deeds of other people such as chopping woods. However, a question arises on whether it is possible to use observational understanding to expound on the particular social action. The answer is no because observing alone is not enough to justify any social deed.
The last thought was Erklaren, whose objective was to reveal the trend or the constants of the human behavior. In other words, it refers to as Empathetic Understanding where the sociologist must work to understand the implication of an act, based on the individual's motive. In the case of chopping woods, one needs to know whether the purpose is to get firewood or clear a forest. Therefore, Max Weber conducted his observation and discovered that social action is a response of a person, influenced by the behaviors of others, and it can be modified based on a determined direction (Seidman, 2016). As a result, Weber came up with the idea that, “a correct and appropriate causal interpretation of the actual course of action gets achieved when the motive and the unconcealed action have been appropriately apprehended, and their correlation turns comprehensible” (Weber, 2013).
In his research, Max Weber outlined various characteristics for social action, and one of them is that a particular social response influences either the past, the present, or the future (Seidman, 2016). The statement means that all the activities conducted by people have their basis and therefore, they are just a continuation of normative happenings. Secondly, social actions presume another individual’s existence. The presumption indicates that every move that individuals take has some connection with what another person did previously or is planning to do in the future. Lastly, there is the need for a subjective meaning, which must get its orientation in its course.
Furthermore, Max Weber outlined four stages of social action. One, the traditional phase, which focuses on norms, customs, and their usage. Weber meant that social activities are as a modification of some behaviors from others and the motives of these responses get attributed in methodological considerations (Weber, 2013). The second phase is the emotional state, which is an emotional reaction to the behaviors of others. Critically, this means that no social action that can exist in isolation; thus, social happenings are practical only when there is another person prompting someone to respond in a particular manner. The other level is the valuation stage, and here, responses get determined by a conscious belief, for instance, a religious setting. The meaning of this phase is that a blind imitation where the actor has no understanding of the nature of the activity copied cannot be a social activity. Lastly, the rational or the purposeful stage and at this phase, facts and reasons guide different operations. People carry out events with the aim of achieving a particular goal.
Theory of Entrepreneurship
In this concept, Max Weber indicated that religion has a significant influence on the development of entrepreneurship. According to Weber (2013), “some religions have some basic beliefs to acquire and earn money, while others have less.” It means, entrepreneurship is a function of religious beliefs, and the impacts of different religions shape the culture of entrepreneurship. The Weber’s theory of entrepreneurship had four features, namely the spirit of capitalism, protestant ethnic, inducement of profit, and adventurous spirit.
For the spirit of capitalism, Weber claimed that the religious ideas of groups, for example, the Calvinist, “played a significant role in establishing the sense of the capitalist” (Weber, 2013). Critically, Weber tried to imply that the modern capitalist spirit perceives profit as an end in itself, and many terms it virtuous. The big question is, what is the desired intent of the capitalist with the resources they accumulate? Based on Weber’s assertion, the desire of the capitalist about wealth is not for luxurious living or enjoyment, but to gather more money for power and overcome various challenges. In a nutshell, the spirit of the capitalist is a work-ethic that demands individuals to accumulate wealth and to do so, duties need to be managed and organized efficiently. Nevertheless, the modern spirit of capitalism demands innovation, individualism, the pursuit of wealth, and hard work.
The question that a critical thinker will ask is why Weber examined the two comparable conditions (capitalism and religion). The simple answer is that he wanted to identify the factors that hindered or blocked the emergence of capitalism to the other civilization, which seemed to have favorable conditions that could have supported its rise. Again, it appears that Max was considerate and concerned about the economic situations of his environment. Or, maybe he perceived the economic threats as potential risks to wipe him out. Nevertheless, political atmosphere and time must have significantly influenced his notions. Unfortunately, in the modern society, religion, and capitalism has no definite link. People associate capitalism with hard work and commitment.
With the concept of the Protestant ethic, Max apprehended that one of the critical factors in the economic success was the Protestant ethic and this was in the early stages of the European capitalism. In fact, individuals must have viewed the success of the world as a sign of eternal salvation, and that is why they vigorously pursued it. In support of his theory, Max quoted the ethical writings of Franklin Benjamin several times. One of the quotations stated that “remember, time is money. He that can earn ten shillings a day by his labor, and goes abroad, or sits idle, one half of that day, though he spends but sixpence during his diversion or idleness, ought not to reckon that the only expense; he has really spent, or rather thrown away, five shillings besides” (Weber, 2013). For an adventurous spirit, Weber claimed that “the latter is influenced by the free-force of impulse, while the former is affected by strict discipline.” The last thought is the inducement of profit where he introduced the idea of a new businessman into the picture tranquil routine. It means the intertwined capitalism spirit with the motive of profit leads to the establishment of more business ventures, and this applies in the current business world.
The Theory of Stratification
The theory also refers to the three-class system or the Weberian stratification where Max developed the idea of social stratification, a concept that mirrors the interplay between power, prestige, and wealth. According to Max (2013), there are three forms of social stratification and one of them is the class, which is the individual’s achievement in the society. However, what is the distinct division of classes? Weber (2013) attested that “the significant class division is between those who have the forces of production, and the ones with none. It means, people with substantial ownership obtains the highest economic rewards, and thus, they enjoy superiority in this life. The other form is status, which is the person popularity, social honor or prestige within the community. In his study, Weber discovered that political power had no link with the capital or ownership but had an association with one’s status. Through the analysis of Weber’s idea, the status group must be more relevant than the class as it offers the basis for the establishment of the social group where members have a common interest. Power is the last factor, which according to Cotterrell, (2017), individuals can get their way irrespective of the resistances instilled by others. That is why persons and parties are concerned with the attainment of social power.
The Weber’s thought on social stratification has some significance in the current world because it allows individuals to identify and describe the complicated reality of the contemporary society which is composed of diverse intertwining features. However, the stratification idea is more of an enlarging spectrum rather than polarities. But Weber’s critical stand is that within the existing social class, there is still further division and specification concerning status, which demonstrates the different social standings that individuals and groups have. Therefore, current leaders and agencies can use Weber’s thought to explain the present social differences in our societies. For instance, in the workplace, women, minority ethnic groups, and the disabled get discriminated despite their class position. It means, through the application of social stratification concept, one can differentiate the variations of individuals' status who share similar class position. Conclusively, a person’s status can be a more significant measure of identity than a class.
References
Cotterrell, R. (2017). Law, culture and society: Legal ideas in the mirror of social theory. Routledge.
Seidman, S. (2016). Contested knowledge: Social theory today. John Wiley " Sons.
Weber, M. (2013). From Max Weber: essays in sociology. Routledge.
