DOCSLIB.ORG

A Note on Max Weber's Unfinished Theory of Economy and Society

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Note on Max Weber's Unfinished Theory of Economy and Society A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Baecker, Dirk Article A note on Max Weber's unfinished theory of economy and society economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter Provided in Cooperation with: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies (MPIfG), Cologne Suggested Citation: Baecker, Dirk (2007) : A note on Max Weber's unfinished theory of economy and society, economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter, ISSN 1871-3351, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies (MPIfG), Cologne, Vol. 8, Iss. 2, pp. 27-30 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/155886 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu A Note on Max Weber’s Unfinished Theory of Economy and Society 27 A Note on Max Weber’s Unfinished Theory of Economy and Society Dirk Baecker ety” which is mentioned twice in the title of Max Weber's Witten/Herdecke University, Germany book: in the society being called as such explicitly, and in [email protected] the innocuous word “and” separating and linking that society from, and with, the economy. I. Max Weber dealt with problems of economic sociology in almost all of his work. One of its most important parts, Max Weber's two most important contributions to eco- which is today rendered as sociology of religion, was origi- nomic sociology appeared only posthumously. Both contri- nally conceived of as studies into Wirtschaftsethik, eco- butions, the Fundamental Concepts of Economic Action, nomic ethics (Weber 1988a). Yet, it was only when Weber which appeared in Economy and Society (Weber 1990), gave his understanding of the economy – with regard to and his General Economic History (Weber 1991), featured both its general history and its fundamental concepts – its a definition of Wirtschaften, of economic action, which final shape that he came up with a definition of economic went almost unnoticed, even though Weber had given it a action, which certainly must have struck him when he good deal of attention in his comments in Economy and looked at it and began to deal with its consequences. Society. He had also started to rewrite his Herrschafts- Wirtschaften, or economic action, as Weber conceived, is soziologie, his political sociology, due to certain conse- to be defined as the “friedliche Ausübung von Ver- quences stemming from that definition. As far as I can see fügungsgewalt” (literally “peaceful exercise of the right of only Talcott Parsons discussed this definition of Wirtschaften disposal”, but note the use of the term Gewalt, violence, in his book on The Structure of Social Action, noting that in the German wording of the concept) in the context of Weber made it difficult for others to see its scope by taking precautions, or provisions, towards the future satisfaction it up in separate chapters on the economic and the politi- of future needs (Fürsorge für einen Begehr nach Nutzleis- cal sociology (Parsons 1968: 654-656). Wolfgang Schlu- tungen) (Weber 1990: 31; Weber 1991: 1). chter reexamines carefully the problematic division of Econ- omy and Society into two parts, a newer one (1918), as To do justice to the English audience we must add that the first part, and an older one (1914), as the second part, due to the very translation of the definition in all editions which is the way the book was divided by Marianne Weber of the book, they stood almost no chance of hitting upon after the death of her husband Max (Schluchter 1989; cf. the problem Weber had discovered when he gave his un- Mommsen 2005). Schluchter notes that it is the derstanding of economic action its final twist by condens- Wirtschaftssoziologie (economic sociology) which moti- ing it into his definition. Frank H. Knight skipped the Be- vates a new Herrschaftssoziologie (sociology of domina- griffliche Vorbemerkung (Conceptual Exposition) in his tion), which has to be formulated before any Rechts- 1927 translation of the General Economic History and soziologie (sociology of law) and Staatssoziologie (sociol- thereby left out Weber's definition of economic action as ogy of the state) make sense. Indeed, for Weber, no eco- well (Weber 1981). And Guenther Roth's and Claus Wit- nomic sociology should ignore the way any economic cal- tich's 1968 and 1978 edition of Economy and Society culus is dependent on the rules securing that present sacri- translated Weber's definition of economic action as “any fices are not only being taken but are also rewarded by the peaceful exercise of an actor's control over resources keeping of promises made to justify the sacrifice. That which is in its main impulse oriented towards economic means that a whole edifice of a present calculus of future ends” (Weber 1968: 63). This translation makes it impossi- rewards embedded within systems and institutions at- ble to see Weber's problem. There is no talk of any force tempting to guarantee both the present calculus and the being exerted, let alone of any violence. The notes as well future cashing-in emerges, which may be called the “soci- are translated in a way that makes it impossible to see that economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter Volume 8, Number 2 (March 2007) A Note on Max Weber’s Unfinished Theory of Economy and Society 28 it could be interesting to take a closer look at that “exer- Almost nobody seems to have taken notice of the inherent cise of an actor's control.” And the temporal aspect of the paradox of the definition and of the possible consequences definition which is of utmost importance is completely left it has for Weber's economic and general sociology. Herbert out, because Roth and Wittich did not even try to translate Marcuse criticizes that Weber conceals the power aspects the idea of Fürsorge, that is of a precaution being taken or of the economy in his definition of it as a kind of rational of provisions being made. action (Marcuse 1965). Friedrich H. Tenbruck is too fasci- nated by Weber giving an account of the dissolution of the Parsons' translation of Weber's definition as “peaceful idea of God the creator to ask which role first this idea and exercise of power” (Parsons 1968: 654) is a better one. then its dissolution might play in the social establishment Weber indeed is dealing with questions of power, but not of economic action (Tenbruck 1975). Randall Collins ad- only of political power, as Parsons assumed, but more mires Weber's General Economic History for its “institu- fundamentally with questions of the exercise of violence tional” explanation of the economy in terms of entrepre- giving rise to the necessity of a certain political order. We- neurial organization of capital, rational technology, free ber indeed is looking at a paradox, namely at the paradox labour, unconstrained markets, a helpful bureaucratic of peaceful violence. Note, however, that Parsons avoids state, and the legal framing of bourgeois activity (all these the possible trap of rendering “Verfügungsgewalt” lexi- terms allegedly being directed against their Marxist inter- cally correct with “right of disposal,” which would reduce pretation) and does not note how Weber takes care to it to an exercise of legal rights, considered as an exoge- again and again explain the ends and the means of eco- nous factor. nomic action as the result from, and prerequisite for, the fight of man against man on the market (Collins 1980). Weber seems to have known what he was looking at, even Richard Swedberg proposes to go deeper into the notion if, given his rather objectivistic and positivistic understand- of “interest” to explore how Weber related economic ing of social sciences, he did not have the means to take it action and social structure, but even he, apart from right- seriously as a paradox. That he knew what he was looking fully drawing our attention to the distributive outcomes of at is demonstrated by the italics he used for the word “capitalism”, does not explain the quality of this relation friedliche (peaceful) and by the extensive discussion not of between the economic and the social (Swedberg 1998; cf. power but literally of violence in the notes he added to the Swedberg 2005; Nee/Swedberg 2005). definition. He took care to include the exercise of violence among the means of an action that is economically ori- ented, on the one hand, and to distinguish the “pragma” II. (a kind of instruction to useful action) of violence from the “spirit” of the economy, on the other hand (Weber 1990: Even if Weber lacked the means to deal with a paradox in 32). He adds that even when rights of disposal are to be a sound theoretical way, given that these means are only protected politically by the threat of the exercise of vio- nowadays developed due to an extensive research into the lence that does not turn the economy itself into some kind possible self-reference of social phenomena (Luhmann of violence (ibid.).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Introduction to the Thematic Dossier | Economy and Society: Politics, Practices, Agents, and Institutions
    Configurações Revista Ciências Sociais 26 | 2020 Economy and Society: politics, practices, agents, and institutions Introduction to the Thematic Dossier | Economy and Society: politics, practices, agents, and institutions Rodrigo da Costa Dominguez, Lisbeth Rodrigues, Jeremy Land e Jari Eloranta Edição electrónica URL: http://journals.openedition.org/configuracoes/10367 DOI: 10.4000/configuracoes.10367 ISSN: 2182-7419 Editora Centro de Investigação em Ciências Sociais Edição impressa Paginação: 7-17 ISSN: 1646-5075 Refêrencia eletrónica Rodrigo da Costa Dominguez, Lisbeth Rodrigues, Jeremy Land e Jari Eloranta, « Introduction to the Thematic Dossier | Economy and Society: politics, practices, agents, and institutions », Configurações [Online], 26 | 2020, posto online no dia 16 dezembro 2020, consultado o 18 dezembro 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/configuracoes/10367 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/configuracoes. 10367 © CICS Dominguez, Rodrigo da Costa; Rodrigues, Lisbeth; Land, Jeremy; Eloranta, Jari - Introduction to the Thematic Dossier: Economy and Society: politics, practices, agents, and institutions. Configurações, vol. 26, 2020, pp. 7-17. Introduction to the Thematic Dossier | Economy and Society: politics, practices, agents, and institutions RODRIGO DA COSTA DOMINGUEZ* CICS – University of Minho LISBETH RODRIGUES** CSG-ISEG – University of Lisbon JEREMY LAND*** University of Jyväskylä and University of Helsinki JARI ELORANTA**** University of Helsínki Interplay of the Economy and Society The economic orientation or the concept of “economic action” (Wirtschaften) intro- duced by Max Weber in his essays on the sociology of economics addresses the issue of satisfying desires for “utilities” (Nutzleistungen) as an exercise of an actor’s control over a certain resource. This resource is, originally, driven and directed towards eco- nomic ends.
    [Show full text]
  • Charisma, Medieval and Modern
    Charisma, Medieval and Modern Edited by Peter Iver Kaufman and Gary Dickson Printed Edition of the Special Issue Published in Religions www.mdpi.com/journal/religions Peter Iver Kaufman and Gary Dickson (Eds.) Charisma, Medieval and Modern This book is a reprint of the special issue that appeared in the online open access journal Religions (ISSN 2077-1444) in 2012 (available at: http://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions/special_issues/charisma_medieval). Guest Editors Peter Iver Kaufman Jepson School, University of Richmond Richmond, VA, USA Gary Dickson School of History, Classics, and Archaeology, University of Edinburgh Edinburgh, EH, Scotland, UK Editorial Office MDPI AG Klybeckstrasse 64 Basel, Switzerland Publisher Shu-Kun Lin Production Editor Jeremiah R. Zhang 1. Edition 2014 0'3,%DVHO%HLMLQJ ISBN 978-3-03842-007-1 © 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. All articles in this volume are Open Access distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which allows users to download, copy and build upon published articles even for commercial purposes, as long as the author and publisher are properly credited, which ensures maximum dissemination and a wider impact of our publications. However, the dissemination and distribution of copies of this book as a whole is restricted to MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. III Table of Contents List of Contributors ............................................................................................................... V Preface
    [Show full text]
  • Max Weber's Disciples
    STXXXX10.1177/0735275117740402Sociological TheoryJoosse 740402research-article2017 Original Article Sociological Theory 2017, Vol. 35(4) 334 –358 Max Weber’s Disciples: © American Sociological Association 2017 https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275117740402DOI: 10.1177/0735275117740402 Theorizing the Charismatic st.sagepub.com Aristocracy Paul Joosse1 Abstract While several studies have explored the interactional dynamics of charismatic power, most have neglected the role of what Weber termed the charismatic aristocracy. This article revives the classical concept to respond to contemporary calls for performative, follower- centric approaches to charisma. Specifically, the charismatic aristocracy is placed at the center of an analysis of a reiterative moment in charismatization: when influential followers generate content for the emerging charismatic persona. In these germinal moments, the dialogical nature of charisma is most clear, precisely because it is then that charismatic leaders often are not themselves confident in their status and can be found responding to instructional cues—indeed following the lead—of those positioning themselves as obsequious followers. Drawing on 10 years of observations, multistage interviews, and media collections, I provide an interactionist account of the charismatic emergence of John de Ruiter, leader of a successful new religious movement. I conclude by tabling a model that conceives of the charismatic aristocracy as an important fulcrum for expectation, affectation, and recognition in charismatic interactions. Keywords charisma, Max Weber, symbolic interactionism, cultural sociology, relational sociology, power When Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills introduced Weber’s concept of charisma to English readers in 1946, they did so with some major reservations. Weber’s emphasis on the charis- matic leader, we were warned, is a continuation of a “philosophy of history” which, after Carlyle’s Heroes and Hero Worship [1841], influenced a great deal of nineteenth-century history writing.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Look at Max Weber and His Anglo-German Family Connections1
    P1: JLS International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society [ijps] PH231-474840-07 October 28, 2003 17:46 Style file version Nov. 19th, 1999 International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, Vol. 17, No. 2, Winter 2003 (C 2003) II. Review Essay How Well Do We Know Max Weber After All? A New Look at Max Weber and His Anglo-German Family Connections1 Lutz Kaelber2 Guenther Roth’s study places Max Weber in an intricate network of ties among members of his lineage. This paper presents core findings of Roth’s analysis of Weber’s family relations, discusses the validity of Roth’s core theses and some of the implications of his analysis for Weber as a person and scholar, and addresses how Roth’s book may influence future approaches to Weber’s sociology. KEY WORDS: Max Weber; history of sociology; classical sociology; German history; Guenther Roth. “How well do we know Max Weber?”—When the late Friedrich H. Tenbruck (1975) raised this question almost thirty years ago, he had Weber’s scholarship in mind. The analysis of Weber’s oeuvre and the debate over it, fueled by a steady trickle of contributions of the Max Weber Gesamtaus- gabe, has not abated since. Thanks to the Gesamtausgabe’s superbly edited volumes, we now know more about Weber the scholar than ever before, even though the edition’s combination of exorbitant pricing and limitation to German-language editions has slowed its international reception. Tenbruck’s question might be applied to Weber’s biography as well. Here, too, the Gesamtausgabe, particularly with the edition of his personal letters, has been a valuable tool for research.1 Yet the fact remains that what we know about Weber the person derives to a significant extent from 1Review essay of Guenther Roth, Max Webers deutsch-englische Familiengeschichte, 1800–1950.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara the Disenchantment of The
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara The Disenchantment of the World and Ontological Wonder A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Religious Studies by Martin Becker Lorca Committee in charge: Professor Thomas A. Carlson, Chair Professor Elliot R. Wolfson Professor Andrew Norris June 2019 The dissertation of Martin Becker Lorca is approved. ____________________________________________ Elliot R. Wolfson ____________________________________________ Andrew Norris ____________________________________________ Thomas A. Carlson, Committee Chair March 2019 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation could not have been finished without the help of family and friends, I would like them thank here: In thank my classmates at UCSB, Dusty Hoesly, Michael Kinsella, Matt Robertson and Sohaira Siddiqui, for their intellectual companionship and friendship. For making possible the practice of reflection as a communal enterprise, I thank my friends: Eva Braunstein, Chris Morales, Samantha Kang, Lucas Wright, and Tim Snediker, who gave life to the philosophical group at Santa Barbara. With deep gratitude, for his precious help in editing and in giving essential feedback, I thank my friend Garrett Baer, with whom, in our philosophical walks at Lake Los Carneros (Goleta)—embodying the old peripatetic tradition—let ourselves to philosophize freely and sincerely. For crucial help editing this work, I thank Garrett Baer, Ryan Kelley, Allice Haynes, Kali Handelman, Kevin Johnston, Alexander Cohen, and Arnulf Becker Lorca. Much of the interpretation of “the nothing” comes from long and deep conversations with Franco Bertossa and Ricardo Pulido. I thank them for raising the question of Being, the one that touches “to the point where our entire nature is so shaken that is will never again be the same” (Heidegger, What is Called Thinking?, 179).
    [Show full text]
  • The Classics in Economic Sociology
    I The Classics in Economic Sociology There exists a rich and colorful tradition of economic sociology, which roughly began around the turn of the twentieth century and continues till today. This tradition has generated a number of helpful concepts and ideas as well as interesting research results, which this and the following chapter seek to briefly present and set in perspective. Economic soci- ology has peaked twice since its birth: in 1890–1920, with the founders of sociology (who were all interested in and wrote on the economy), and today, from the early 1980s and onward. (For the history of economic sociology, see Swedberg 1987, 1997; Gislain and Steiner 1995). A small number of important works in economic sociology—by economists as well as sociologists—was produced during the time between these two periods, from 1920 to the mid-1980s. The main thesis of this chapter, and of this book as a whole, is as follows: in order to produce a powerful economic sociology we have to combine the analysis of economic interests with an analysis of social relations. From this perspective, institutions can be understood as dis- tinct configurations of interests and social relations, which are typically of such importance that they are enforced by law. Many of the classic works in economic sociology, as I shall also try to show, hold a similar view of the need to use the concept of interest in analyzing the economy. Since my suggestion about the need to combine interests and social relations deviates from the existing paradigm in economic sociology, a few words will be said in the next section about the concept of interest as it has been used in social theory.
    [Show full text]
  • The Disenchantment of Logically Formal Legal Rationality, Or Max Weber’S Sociology in the Genealogy of the Contemporary Mode of Western Legal Thought
    The Disenchantment of Logically Formal Legal Rationality, or Max Weber’s Sociology in the Genealogy of the Contemporary Mode of Western Legal Thought Duncan Kennedy* Introduction Max Weber began his sociology of law with a description of the then present of Western legal thought, along with a brief summary of its pre- vious stages. This appreciation begins with a summary description of the Western legal thought of Weber’s time, as it looks from our present one hundred years later, emphasizing the contrast between the mainstream of his time, now called Classical Legal Thought, and its critics in the “social current.” Part II presents Weber’s sociology of law, comparing and con- trasting his approach with that of the social current. The most striking thing about Weber’s sociology of law, from the perspective of legal the- ory a century after he wrote, is his ambivalent endorsement of legal for- malism. This entailed rejection of the social current’s critique, a critique that is close to universally accepted today. In Part III, I explain Weber’s attitude toward legal formalism as motivated by the internal require- ments of his theory of domination, in which, after the demise of all ear- lier modes of legitimation, the Iron Cage of modernity is held together by bureaucrats defined by their adherence to that mode of legal reasoning. Part IV argues that Weber’s approach was inconsistent with the irration- alist and decisionist strands in his own theory of modernity, a theory that helps in understanding the current situation of legal thought, if we take the un-Weberian step of applying it to legal formalism.
    [Show full text]
  • German Historical Institute London Bulletin
    German Historical Institute London Bulletin Bd. 25 2003 Nr. 1 Copyright Das Digitalisat wird Ihnen von perspectivia.net, der Online-Publikationsplattform der Max Weber Stiftung – Stiftung Deutsche Geisteswissenschaftliche Institute im Ausland, zur Verfügung gestellt. Bitte beachten Sie, dass das Digitalisat urheberrechtlich geschützt ist. Erlaubt ist aber das Lesen, das Ausdrucken des Textes, das Herunterladen, das Speichern der Daten auf einem eigenen Datenträger soweit die vorgenannten Handlungen ausschließlich zu privaten und nicht- kommerziellen Zwecken erfolgen. Eine darüber hinausgehende unerlaubte Verwendung, Reproduktion oder Weitergabe einzelner Inhalte oder Bilder können sowohl zivil- als auch strafrechtlich verfolgt werden. BOOK REVIEWS GUENTHER ROTH, Max Webers deutsch-englische Familiengeschichte 18001950 mit Briefen und Dokumenten (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), xx + 721 pp. ISBN 3 16 147557 7. EUR 84.00 As a book, as a research project, and as an academic achievement, this work is quite extraordinary. Roth has tracked Max Webers genealo- gy back at least three generations and he has used every available archival source to reconstruct the various family histories. The book is based on primary sources throughout its length, which is, indeed, the reason for its own great length. The correspondence these families left behind is simply vast. The Baumgarten family, whose Hermann was Webers uncle, left an archive of 3,500 letters, and this is only a fraction of the documents utilized by Roth. To reconstruct a family narrative, the historian has to construct the letters as a correspon- dence. Sisters, who are the main correspondents, write to each other, they write to husbands, parents, and grandparents, and some of these letters are passed around the family with each reader perhaps adding their own comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Max Weber's Protestant Ethic in the 21St Century
    P1: Vendor/FZN International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society [ijps] ph137-ijps-376822 July 8, 2002 15:39 Style file version Nov. 19th, 1999 International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, Vol. 16, No. 1, Fall 2002 (C 2002) II. The Protestant Ethic: On New Translations Max Weber’s Protestant Ethic in the 21st Century Lutz Kaelber† The history of sociology’s most famous study began with the publication of a two-part essay. Its author, educated as a lawyer but formerly employed as a national economist, had no formal training in its subject. He had just overcome a mood disorder that had debilitated him and all but finished his promising academic career, allowing his wife to become better known in some academic and social circles than he was. The essay’s arguments were quickly challenged by historians, whose critiques the author rebuffed in an acerbic and cantankerous fashion. Within weeks and months after publishing the study, its author moved on to conduct other monumental studies and did not return to the original study’s subject matter until close to the end of his life, when the essays were thoroughly revised and made part of a much larger project comparing the interface of religion and economics in the major religions. Since the author’s death, there have been studies addressing the genesis of the original essays, the significance of the changes made in their revision, the original and revised essays’ status in the larger context of the author’s work, their extension both stepping back and moving forward in time, and, last but not least, their shortcomings and aberrations, real and imagined.1 The work itself has been translated into numerous languages.
    [Show full text]
  • From Max Weber to Public Sociology Michael Burawoy1
    From Max Weber to Public Sociology Michael Burawoy1 Growing up in a political as well as an intellectual environment, Max Weber not only sought to comprehend the world but also to change it. Arguably, he took Karl Marx’s 11th. Thesis on Feuerbach that “philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it,” far more seriously than its author. Marx, after all, did not reflect, in any systematic fashion, on the place of intellectuals and their ideas in history. Equally, Emile Durkheim – perhaps because he saw sociology as a deeply moral science, devoted to deriving what ought to be from what is – did not seriously concern himself with political engagement. Among these three founding figures of sociology, it was only Weber, who paid sustained attention to science and politics both in his life and in his writing. He strove to fathom the relation between sociology of society and sociology in society, between theory and practice. Although the notion of public sociology was absent from his conceptual armory, of the three Weber offers the greatest contribution, albeit indi- rectly, to the meaning, challenges and possibilities of public sociology. In, thus, fill- ing out Weber’s reflexive sociology with the notion of public sociology, I show the continuing relevance of his framework for the problems facing sociology and soci- ety today. Instrumental and Value Rationality One hundred years ago the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Soziologie (German Socio- logical Society, DGS for short) held its inaugural meeting in Frankfurt. Max Weber had been a driving force behind its foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Meanings of Disenchantment: Sociological Condition Vs
    Philosophy & Th eology 17, 1 & 2 51 TWO MEANINGS OF DISENCHANTMENT: SOCIOLOGICAL CONDITION VS. PHILOSOPHICAL ACT— REASSESSING MAX WEBER’S THESIS OF THE DISENCHANTMENT OF THE WORLD Jeffrey E. Green Harvard University Abstract Although the primary meaning of Max Weber’s concept of dis- enchantment is as a sociological condition (the retreat of magic and myth from social life through processes of secularization and rationalization), as Weber himself makes clear in his address, “Sci- ence as a Vocation,” disenchantment can also be a philosophical act: an unusual form of moral discourse that derives new ethical direction out of the very untenability of a previously robust moral tradition. The philosophical variant of disenchantment is significant both because it contradicts numerous elements of the sociological version and because it suggests there are forms of cognition unique to moral philosophy (insofar as the derivation of a moral teaching from the very absence of one is foreign to both a religious and a scientific mindset). “Que sommes-nous donc sans le secours de ce qui n’existe pas?” —Paul Valéry For Anthony Kronman According to the biographical account of Max Weber written by his wife, the most fundamental animating concern underlying Weber’s vast body of research was the following dynamic: “He was moved, 52 Green: Two Meanings of Disenchantment above all, by the fact that on its earthly course an idea always and everywhere operates in opposition to its original meaning and thereby destroys itself” (Weber 1975, 337).1 This dialectic between an idea’s intended meaning and the effective truth of it actual implementation can be found in a variety of places within the Weberian corpus.
    [Show full text]
  • The Madness of Eroticism: Perceptions of Nonconformist Sexuality Between Erroneous Individualism, Moral Malfunction and Sheer Madness Katharina Neef
    The Madness of Eroticism: Perceptions of Nonconformist Sexuality Between Erroneous Individualism, Moral Malfunction and Sheer Madness Katharina Neef There is a large variety of contemporary and retrospective views on the relation- ship between sexual deviance and madness at the turn of the twentieth century.1 This article investigates which semantics were used to describe a sexually deviant lifestyle in that historical setting, focussing on the triangle Else Jaffé (born Elisa- beth von Richthofen), Otto Gross, and his wife Frieda Gross (born Schloffer).2 Their erotic behavior deviated from the typical bourgeois sexual ethics, paternal- ism, and monogamy of the bourgeois social life of the Wilhelmine and Josephine era. All were part of what was regarded a sexually deviant, eroticist3 circle – concerning marital sexuality – but their environment labelled the reasons for their deviant sexual behavior quite differently: Several patterns ranging from individual failure to societal degeneration and from moral dysfunction to patho- logical behavior can be identified. And whereas madness is the common perspec- tive for Otto Gross’ biography, the women were regarded in different terms. Although the Von Richthofen sisters, Else and Frieda von Richthofen, are of- ten introduced as subjects of historiographic studies, they are frequently regarded as playing mere accessory roles to their well-known male partners such as Max Weber and D.H. Lawrence.4 In these biographies, Else and Frieda von Richthofen serve to encourage the main male character’s personal change, to en- 1 Dietze, Gabriele – Dornhof, Dorothea (eds.) (2014): Metropolenzauber: Sexuelle Moderne und urbaner Wahn. Köln/Wien. Matysik, Tracie (2008): Reforming the Moral Subject: Ethics and Sexuality in Central Europe, 1890–1930.
    [Show full text]