Classical Approaches to Work

(1)

Classical approaches to work

Marx, Weber and Durkheim

(2)

Introduction

The ideas of “gang of three” – Marx,

Weber and Durkheim

Situated at three corners of a

triangle.

Durkheim

focused

on

–

social

Durkheim

focused

on

–

social

Durkheim

focused

on

–

social

Durkheim

focused

on

–

social

solidarity, integration and control.

Marx

concerned

–

social

Marx

concerned

–

social

Marx

concerned

–

social

Marx

concerned

–

social

fragmentation,

disintegration

and

fragmentation,

disintegration

and

fragmentation,

disintegration

and

fragmentation,

disintegration

and

conflict.

Weber

deelo!ed"

theory

of

Weber

deelo!ed"

theory

of

Weber

deelo!ed"

theory

of

Weber

deelo!ed"

theory

of

rationality and bureaucracy

(3)

Introduction

The ideas of “gang of three” – Marx,

Weber and Durkheim

Situated at three corners of a

triangle.

Durkheim

focused

on

–

social

Durkheim

focused

on

–

social

Durkheim

focused

on

–

social

Durkheim

focused

on

–

social

solidarity, integration and control.

Marx

concerned

–

social

Marx

concerned

–

social

Marx

concerned

–

social

Marx

concerned

–

social

fragmentation,

disintegration

and

fragmentation,

disintegration

and

fragmentation,

disintegration

and

fragmentation,

disintegration

and

conflict.

Weber

deelo!ed"

theory

of

Weber

deelo!ed"

theory

of

Weber

deelo!ed"

theory

of

Weber

deelo!ed"

theory

of

rationality and bureaucracy

(4)

Marx#s argument – $uman s!ecies is Marx#s argument – $uman s!ecies is Marx#s argument – $uman s!ecies is

Marx#s argument – $uman s!ecies is

different from all other animal s!ecies different from all other animal s!ecies different from all other animal s!ecies

different from all other animal s!ecies

not because of its consciousness but not because of its consciousness but not because of its consciousness but

not because of its consciousness but

because it alone !roduces its o%n because it alone !roduces its o%n because it alone !roduces its o%n

because it alone !roduces its o%n

means of subsistence. means of subsistence. means of subsistence.

means of subsistence.

&or exam!le' Take ra% resources like &or exam!le' Take ra% resources like &or exam!le' Take ra% resources like

&or exam!le' Take ra% resources like

cotton, %ool and turning them into cotton, %ool and turning them into cotton, %ool and turning them into

cotton, %ool and turning them into

%oen cloth. %oen cloth. %oen cloth.

%oen cloth.

This uni(ue human attribute – This uni(ue human attribute – This uni(ue human attribute –

This uni(ue human attribute –

!roides a medium %here indiidual !roides a medium %here indiidual !roides a medium %here indiidual

!roides a medium %here indiidual

can reali)e their true !otential as can reali)e their true !otential as can reali)e their true !otential as

can reali)e their true !otential as

humans. humans. humans.

humans.

$o%eer – ca!italism deny human it $o%eer – ca!italism deny human it $o%eer – ca!italism deny human it

$o%eer – ca!italism deny human it

*s!ecies bein *s!ecies being#.g#. *s!ecies be

(5)

Marx and capitalism

Marx distinguish bet%een

Marx distinguish bet%een *ob+ectificatio

*ob+ectification#

n#

Marx distinguish bet%een

*ob+ectificatio

n#

and *alienation#.

Objectification

–

roduct of human labour on ra%

materials

–

-mbodies the !roducers creatiity and

_{-mbodies the !roducers creatiity and}

yet remain se!arate from the !roducer

–

Some form of !roduction is essential to

_{Some form of !roduction is essential to}

humanity both in !roiding the material

structure of social life and in facilitating

self reali)ation of indiidual

self reali)ation of indiidual !otential.

!otential.

self reali)ation of indiidual !otential.

(6)

The !roblem is %hen the system of !roduction is The !roblem is %hen the system of !roduction is

ca!italist – minority o%ns means of !roduction. ca!italist – minority o%ns means of !roduction.

The ma+ority o%n only their labour !o%er and The ma+ority o%n only their labour !o%er and %here the !roduction is made for !rofit therefore %here the !roduction is made for !rofit therefore

it causes alienation not ob+ectification/. it causes alienation not ob+ectification/.

The uni(ue (uality of human beings – their ability The uni(ue (uality of human beings – their ability to !roduce their o%n means of existence, to !roduce their o%n means of existence, actuali)e and reali)e their o%n !otential , creatie actuali)e and reali)e their o%n !otential , creatie

ca!acity thru labor – is inerted thru ca!italism. ca!acity thru labor – is inerted thru ca!italism.

0n modern industrial !roduction under ca!italist – 0n modern industrial !roduction under ca!italist – %orkers %ill ineitably lose control of their lies %orkers %ill ineitably lose control of their lies

by losing control oer their %ork. by losing control oer their %ork.

(7)

1efore ca!italist – shoemaker %ould o%n

his o%n sho!, set his o%n hours,

determine his %orking condition, sha!e his

o%n !roduct, has say in ho% his !roduct is

sold and has relationshi! %ith !eo!le

%hom he %orked and dealt.

2nder the modern factory !roduction – by

contrast the %orkers hae to %ork under

monotonous and closely su!erised task,

lost control oer the !rocess of !roduction,

oer the !roducts they !roduce and the

relationshi! %ith each other.

They become estranged from their human

nature.

(8)

$uman beings cannot be human under

these conditions.

Marx – ca!italism has to be abolished as

much as any !olitical o!!ression if a

society#s emanci!ation !embebasan/ is to

be com!lete.

3a!italism limits !eo!le#s autonomy –

controlling their %ork!laces and economic

life.

4 society of truly free citi)ens according to

Marx – must be a !olitical, economic and

social democracy.

Single alternatie to Marx " 3ommunism

(9)

3ommunism is a socioeconomic structure and 3ommunism is a socioeconomic structure and

!olitical ideology that !romotes the establishment !olitical ideology that !romotes the establishment

of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society

based on common o%nershi! and control of the based on common o%nershi! and control of the

means of !roduction and !ro!erty in general. means of !roduction and !ro!erty in general.

0n 5arl Marx6s o%n %ords """"""""""" 70n 0n 5arl Marx6s o%n %ords """"""""""" 70n communist society, %here nobody has one communist society, %here nobody has one exclusie s!here of actiity but each can become exclusie s!here of actiity but each can become accom!lished in any branch he %ishes, society accom!lished in any branch he %ishes, society regulates the general !roduction and thus makes regulates the general !roduction and thus makes it !ossible for me to do one thing today and it !ossible for me to do one thing today and another tomorro%, to hunt in the morning, fish in another tomorro%, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the eening, critici)e the afternoon, rear cattle in the eening, critici)e after dinner, +ust as 0 hae a mind, %ithout eer after dinner, +ust as 0 hae a mind, %ithout eer becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.7 becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.7

(10)

0n !olitical science, the term 7communism7 is 0n !olitical science, the term 7communism7 is sometimes used to refer to communist states, a sometimes used to refer to communist states, a form of goernment in %hich the state o!erates form of goernment in %hich the state o!erates under a one"!arty system and declares allegiance under a one"!arty system and declares allegiance

to Marxism"8eninism or a deriatie thereof, een to Marxism"8eninism or a deriatie thereof, een if the !arty does not actually claim that it has if the !arty does not actually claim that it has

already deelo!ed communism. already deelo!ed communism.

Marxism holds that a !rocess of class conflict and Marxism holds that a !rocess of class conflict and reolutionary struggle %ill result in ictory for the reolutionary struggle %ill result in ictory for the !roletariat and the establishment of a communist !roletariat and the establishment of a communist society in %hich !riate o%nershi! is abolished society in %hich !riate o%nershi! is abolished oer time and the means of !roduction and oer time and the means of !roduction and

subsistence become the !ro!erty of society. subsistence become the !ro!erty of society.

(11)

Alienation

Systematic result of liing in a socially

stratified

society,

because

being

a

stratified

society,

because

being

a

mechanistic !art of a social class alienates

a !erson from his and her humanity.

4lienation – means se!eration from that

%hich is desired9desirable.

Theoretic basis of alienation – the %orker

inariably loses the ability to determine

his or her life and destiny.

They are de!ried the right to think of

himself as the director of his action, to

determine the character of

(12)

of said actions: to define his

relationshi! %ith other !eo!le: and

to o%n the things and use the alue

of the goods and serices, !roduced

%ith his labor.

"

4lthough

the

%orker

is

an

"

4lthough

the

%orker

is

an

autonomous,

self"reali)ed

human

autonomous,

self"reali)ed

human

being – as an economic entity – he is

directed to goals and dictated to

actiities

–

dictated

by

the

actiities

–

dictated

by

the

bourgeoisie %ho o%n the means of

!roduction/.

(13)

Four aspects of alienation

roduct alienation

– The !roduct is o%ned by the em!loyerThe !roduct is o%ned by the em!loyer – 4bsence of control of !roducer oer the4bsence of control of !roducer oer the

!roduct !roduct

– roducts are not for self reali)ationroducts are not for self reali)ation – roducts are to maximi)e !rofitroducts are to maximi)e !rofit

– Thus, the %orker !roduce cash cro!s for theThus, the %orker !roduce cash cro!s for the market %hen they are malnourished, build market %hen they are malnourished, build houses in %hich they neer lie, make cars houses in %hich they neer lie, make cars they can neer buy, !roduce shoes they they can neer buy, !roduce shoes they

cannot afford to %ear;and so on. cannot afford to %ear;and so on.

(14)

Activity alienation

Diision of labor Diision of labor

– The second as!ect of alienation stems from theThe second as!ect of alienation stems from the eer increasing diision of labor – fragments eer increasing diision of labor – fragments

!roductie !rocess. !roductie !rocess.

– Managers diide com!lex %ork !rocess intoManagers diide com!lex %ork !rocess into sim!le, re!etitie tasks %hich %orkers can sim!le, re!etitie tasks %hich %orkers can

!erform in machine"like fashion. !erform in machine"like fashion.

– The %orkers had to s!eciali)e in !articularThe %orkers had to s!eciali)e in !articular task, %hich reali)ed only one or t%o as!ects of task, %hich reali)ed only one or t%o as!ects of

their human !o%ers at the ex!ense of others. their human !o%ers at the ex!ense of others. – Meaningless tasksMeaningless tasks

– Work is inoluntary and doesn#t deelo!Work is inoluntary and doesn#t deelo! creatie !otential

(15)

Social alienation

Turn

eery

!roductie

grou!

into

Turn

eery

!roductie

grou!

into

com!etitor,

setting

indiiduals

against

com!etitor,

setting

indiiduals

against

indiidual .

4lienated from fello% human beings.

<educes social relations bet%een !eo!le to

economic exchanges of commodities.

“

“s!ends his time doing things in %hich he is

s!ends his time doing things in %hich he is

not interested in, %ith !eo!le he is not

interested, !roducing things %hich he is not

interested” &romm, =>?@'A@/

(16)

Species alienation

The mindless re!etition blurs

the

The mindless re!etition blurs

the

distinction bet%een humanity and

animality.

roducts become commodity %hich

dominate humans.

Bb+ects designed for use by human

are transformed ia the ca!italist

mode of !roduction into commodities

that dominate human.

(17)

Exploitation and capitalist labor

process

roduction

should

distinguishes

roduction

should

distinguishes

bet%een man and animals

medium for self reali)ation

3a!italism distorts that

This creates social conflict %hich in

turn %ill destroy ca!italism and moe

to%ards a communist society

(18)

0n the ca!italist system of !roduction, the manual labour of the em!loyed car!enter yields him %ages, not !rofits.

0n the ca!italist system of

!roduction, the intellectual labour of the em!loyed engineer yields him a salary, not !rofits.

Strikers confronted by soldiers during the =>=C textile factory strike in

8a%rence, Massachusetts, 2.S.4., called %hen o%ners reduced %ages, after a state la% reduced the %ork %eek from ? to E hours.

(19)

Durkheim and industrial society

"

" Durkheim formally established theDurkheim formally established the

academic disci!line and, %ith 5arl Marx academic disci!line and, %ith 5arl Marx and Max Weber, is commonly cited as and Max Weber, is commonly cited as the !rinci!al architect of modern social the !rinci!al architect of modern social science and father of sociology.

(20)

Durkheim and industrial society

Durkheim discussed social solidarity""the

bond bet%een all indiiduals %ithin a

society

0n his first ma+or %ork,

0n his first ma+or %ork, The Division of

The Division of

Labor in Society

Labor in Society , first !ublished in =@>A

, first !ublished in =@>A

4ssum!tion " that modern industrial

society

%as

disintegrating

due

to

society

%as

disintegrating

due

to

increasing

diision

of

labor

and

increasing

diision

of

labor

and

urbani)ation of life.

Durkheim retorted that –

rather being

Durkheim retorted that –

rather being

dismantled"

(21)

solidarity %as reconstructed in a

different form.

Durkheim"

argued

that

modern

Durkheim"

argued

that

modern

industrial society – actiely freed

!eo!le from isolation – by inducing

mutual

de!endence

through

an

mutual

de!endence

through

an

increasing diision of labor.

" Solidarity – “cohesion of human grou!s

Solidarity – “cohesion of human grou!s

into a social unity”.

" T%o ty!es ' =/ Mechanical solidarity ,

T%o ty!es ' =/ Mechanical solidarity ,

C/ Brganic solidarity

(22)

Mechanical Solidarity

Social cohesion based u!on the likeness and

similarities among indiiduals in a society, and

largely de!endent on common rituals and

routines.

3ommon

among

!rehistoric

and

!re"

3ommon

among

!rehistoric

and

!re"

agricultural societies

%hen all members of a society !erformed the

same or nearly the same tasks as all others in

a society.

0f one !erson %ere to die and not be re!laced,

the society %ould not change, because all

other members did the same thing

The bond deries not from de!endence on

other indiiduals, but from the de!endence on

the

total

social

system.

the

total

social

system.

(23)

Organic Solidarity

Social

cohesion

based

u!on

the

Social

cohesion

based

u!on

the

de!endence indiiduals in more adanced

society hae on each other.

3ommon among industrial societies as the

diision of labor increases.

Though indiiduals !erform different tasks

and often hae different alues and

interests, the order and ery surial of

society de!ends on their reliance on each

other to !erform their s!ecific task.

(24)

8ike the organs %ithin an animal,

indiiduals

!erform

certain

s!ecific

indiiduals

!erform

certain

s!ecific

functions, but rely on the %ell"being and

successful

!erformance

of

other

successful

!erformance

of

other

indiiduals.

0f one organ fails, the rest of them fail as

%ell.

4 body""or in this case a society""cannot

function at all if one !art crumbles.

This reliance u!on each other for social

and een !hysical/ surial is the source

of

organic

solidarity,

according

to

of

organic

solidarity,

according

to

Durkheim.

There is no necessary correlation bet%een

increased s!eciali)ation and decreasing

solidarity.

(25)

4t the end of his %ork – “The Diision of labour” 4t the end of his %ork – “The Diision of labour”

– ho%eer, – ho%eer,

Durkheim note – that there can be !roblems in Durkheim note – that there can be !roblems in

society. society.

The diision of labour itself does not al%ays The diision of labour itself does not al%ays

function as %ell as it could in modern society. function as %ell as it could in modern society.

Durkheim maintained that *abnormal# forms of Durkheim maintained that *abnormal# forms of the diision of labor still !ersisted and brought the diision of labor still !ersisted and brought %ith them !roblems for the !roduction and %ith them !roblems for the !roduction and re!roduction of the necessary degrees of social re!roduction of the necessary degrees of social

solidarity. solidarity.

There are t%o ty!es of abnormal forms of the There are t%o ty!es of abnormal forms of the diision of labour' “anomic” and “forced” diision diision of labour' “anomic” and “forced” diision

of labour of labour

(26)

Abnormal forms of division of labor

4nomic

– Meaninglessness of %ork' a transient

Meaninglessness of %ork' a transient

form generated bet%een the colla!se of

mechanical solidarity and the creation of

organic solidarity

– During this !hase – ne% norms of

During this !hase – ne% norms of

behaiour had yet to be diffused

throughout society – %orsen by the

a!!arent deskilling of %ork manifest in

factory system

(27)

Workers %ere constrained didesak/ to

meaningless o!erations of !roducts for

consumers they didn#t kno%

4s the norms of behaiour s!read and

anarchy kacau"bilau/ of the free market

d%indled

menyusut/

under

social

d%indled

menyusut/

under

social

regulation – the anomic diision of labour

%ould disa!!ear.

(28)

&orced diision of labor

– The force di of labour – is %here the

The force di of labour – is %here the

diision of labour is not allo%ed to

deelo! s!ontaneously.

– 4ny factors that !reent indiiduals

4ny factors that !reent indiiduals

from achieing !ositions %hich %ould be

consistent %ith their natural abilities

indicates a force diision of labour.

– This could be ine(ualities in the

This could be ine(ualities in the

structure

of

%ork

or

inade(uate

structure

of

%ork

or

inade(uate

organi)ation, %ith the %rong !eo!le in

!articular

!ositions

or

incoherent

!articular

!ositions

or

incoherent

organi)ational structures.

(29)

4ny interference %ith the o!eration of the

diision of labour that results in the

!osition being filled by those %ho are not

most a!t te!at9sesuai/ for the !osition

could be forced diision of labour.

&orced diision of labour – focused on

structural ine(ualities .

1ecause of different social class – !eo!le

%ho are in the lo%er class %ill not receie

the same ty!e of o!!ortunities.

(30)

Max eber

$is contribution to sociology of %ork are in

three fields

– Social stratification 3lass, status,

Social stratification 3lass, status,

!arty/

– 0nter!retatie methodology

0nter!retatie methodology

– bureaucracy

bureaucracy

(31)

Class and stratification

Weber deelo!ed a different a!!roach to the Weber deelo!ed a different a!!roach to the

study of social grou! and classes than did Marx. study of social grou! and classes than did Marx.

&or Marx – C !rimary grou! in society and there &or Marx – C !rimary grou! in society and there %ere classes the bourgeoisie and the !roletariat/ %ere classes the bourgeoisie and the !roletariat/ %hose contradictory relationshi! is the motie %hose contradictory relationshi! is the motie

force for change in ca!italism. force for change in ca!italism.

Marx – considers these classes to be defined and Marx – considers these classes to be defined and determined by %hether they o%n the means of determined by %hether they o%n the means of !roduction bourgeoisie/ or %hether they do not !roduction bourgeoisie/ or %hether they do not o%n the means of !roduction and sell labor to o%n the means of !roduction and sell labor to

those %ho do !roletariat/. those %ho do !roletariat/.

&or Weber – 0t is not !ossible to reduce the &or Weber – 0t is not !ossible to reduce the organi)ation of all these !eo!le to a single organi)ation of all these !eo!le to a single dimension such as o%nershi! or non"o%nershi! of dimension such as o%nershi! or non"o%nershi! of

the means of !roduction. the means of !roduction.

(32)

There is a !luralism associated %ith the class There is a !luralism associated %ith the class

structure. structure.

3reate a grou!ing such as a class, status grou! 3reate a grou!ing such as a class, status grou!

or !arty. or !arty.

&or Weber – %hat %e call social stratification9 &or Weber – %hat %e call social stratification9 social class is in the s!here of !o%er and can be social class is in the s!here of !o%er and can be analy)ed by examining economic situation, status analy)ed by examining economic situation, status honor and !arties organi)ations formed by honor and !arties organi)ations formed by

!eo!le to achiee certain ends/. !eo!le to achiee certain ends/.

4 !erson#s !o%er can be sho%n in the social 4 !erson#s !o%er can be sho%n in the social order through his9her status, in the economic order through his9her status, in the economic order through class and in the !olitical order order through class and in the !olitical order

through his9her !arty. through his9her !arty.

3lass, status and !arty – are each as!ects of the 3lass, status and !arty – are each as!ects of the

distribution of !o%er %ithin a community. distribution of !o%er %ithin a community.

(33)

=/

=/3lasses

3lasses

" 4nalysis of class – rooted in the

4nalysis of class – rooted in the

economic s!here, in the domain of

markets

" Weber#s a!!roach more dierse than

Weber#s a!!roach more dierse than

Marx.

" &or Weber – there are many more

&or Weber – there are many more

!ossible classes than +ust ca!italist

and %orkers.

(34)

Does not consider o%nershi! or non"o%nershi! of Does not consider o%nershi! or non"o%nershi! of

the means of !roduction to be the ma+or source the means of !roduction to be the ma+or source

of class formation in ca!italism. of class formation in ca!italism.

3lasses may be distinguished in seeral %ays 3lasses may be distinguished in seeral %ays

Since there are many markets, interests and Since there are many markets, interests and

class situations – there are multi!licity of classes class situations – there are multi!licity of classes

in any society. in any society.

A ty!es of class A ty!es of class

– ro!erty9o%nershi! classro!erty9o%nershi! class

– 3ommercial9ac(uisition class3ommercial9ac(uisition class – SocialSocial

(35)

a/

a/ Ownership/property classOwnership/property class

" Who o%n mines, cattle, slaes, ca!ital goods, " Who o%n mines, cattle, slaes, ca!ital goods, stocks, money, land, real estate and in today#s stocks, money, land, real estate and in today#s %orld ne% forms of !ro!erty such as forest, %ater, %orld ne% forms of !ro!erty such as forest, %ater, technology !atents/, communications media sells technology !atents/, communications media sells

audiences/, franchises and intellectual !ro!erty. audiences/, franchises and intellectual !ro!erty.

b/

b/ Commercial /acquisition classCommercial /acquisition class

" 0ndiiduals %ho hae no tangible, marketable0ndiiduals %ho hae no tangible, marketable

!ro!erty but hae certain skills or abilities %hich !ro!erty but hae certain skills or abilities %hich

can be offered on the market can be offered on the market

" Determined by the skills and occu!ationalDetermined by the skills and occu!ational

characteristics members bring into the market. characteristics members bring into the market.

" S!ecialists or those %ho hae unusual talents suchS!ecialists or those %ho hae unusual talents such

as entertainers, s!orts !rofessionals, may be able as entertainers, s!orts !rofessionals, may be able

to be %ell situated %ith res!ect to some market. to be %ell situated %ith res!ect to some market.

(36)

c/

c/ Social class

Social class

Bccu!ationally based and distinguishes

bet%een the %orking class of labor sellers:

the lo%er middle class of sho!kee!ers.

&or exam!les' the intelligentsia %ith little

!ro!erty

but

technical

(ualification

!ro!erty

but

technical

(ualification

technicians, ciil serants, arious kinds

of %hite"collar em!loyees/.

(37)

Status

0ndiiduals can be ranked on the basis of

honor or !restige.

Was not determined by class een though

it correlates %ith class. 0ndiiduals %ho

are lo% in class !osition can be high in

!restige and ice ersa.

Determined by life style, formal education,

occu!ational !restige, hereditary !restige.

(38)

!arties

&inal as!ect of Weber#s trilogy of !o%er

%as the !arty.

3lass fought oer economic issues, status

grou! contested the distribution of social

honor and !arties %ere oriented to%ards

the ac(uisition of social !o%er.

arties – are organi)ations, rather than

communities or grou!s – and they inole

striing for a goal in a !lanned manner.

4ssociations that aim at securing !o%er

%ithin an organi)ation.

They are associations of !eo!le that

attem!t to influence social action.

(39)

0f status grou!s or classes become %ell organi)ed 0f status grou!s or classes become %ell organi)ed – they may form !arties Trade unions, – they may form !arties Trade unions,

rofessional 4ssociations/. rofessional 4ssociations/.

arties tend to be a feature of modern society – arties tend to be a feature of modern society – %here !o%er is exercised in a more formal, %here !o%er is exercised in a more formal, rational and !lanned manner than in traditional rational and !lanned manner than in traditional

society. society.

arties – means of organi)ations to achiee arties – means of organi)ations to achiee s!ecific end in modern society and once s!ecific end in modern society and once organi)ations are deelo!ed as !arties – they organi)ations are deelo!ed as !arties – they become more rational, that is systematic and become more rational, that is systematic and

!ermanent. !ermanent.

(40)

Interpretative Methodolo"y

Bther main contributions of Weber is

his %ork on methodology.

Denied structural a!!roach of both

Marx and Durkheim.

Weber – use inter!retatie

methodology to study social action.

1ased on understanding the !ur!ose

and meaning that indiidual attach to

their o%n actions.

(41)

Social !henomena caused by indiidual actions Social !henomena caused by indiidual actions

and thoughts. and thoughts.

This inter!retatie method Ferstehen/ %as This inter!retatie method Ferstehen/ %as

different from the obserational methods used by different from the obserational methods used by

natural scientists . natural scientists .

Ferstehen – refers to understanding the meaning Ferstehen – refers to understanding the meaning

of actions from the actor#s !oint of ie%. of actions from the actor#s !oint of ie%.

-xam!le' =/ %andering around to%n as a -xam!le' =/ %andering around to%n as a

!leasurable ex!erience during acation !leasurable ex!erience during acation

C/ an ex!ression of boredom through C/ an ex!ression of boredom through

unem!loyment unem!loyment

The difference is difficult to ex!lain by obsering The difference is difficult to ex!lain by obsering

and re(uires inter!retatie understandings. and re(uires inter!retatie understandings.

(42)

Capitalism and rationali#ation

Weber

coninced

that

contem!orary

Weber

coninced

that

contem!orary

society %as grounded in the symbolic and

material adance of rationality.

The !rinci!al !hysical manifestation took A

form'

ca!italism,

rational

form'

ca!italism,

rational

+uris!rudence and bureaucracy

Weber#s ie% – modern society es! the

%estern %orld is gro%ing increasingly

rationali)ed.

(43)

<ise of rationality – means the decline of magical <ise of rationality – means the decline of magical inter!retation and ex!lanations of the %orld and inter!retation and ex!lanations of the %orld and the gradual elimination of all mysteries as science the gradual elimination of all mysteries as science

ex!loded more and more mythical assum!tions. ex!loded more and more mythical assum!tions.

Tradition action re!laced by rational action. Tradition action re!laced by rational action.

We don#t do things +ust because that is ho% it is We don#t do things +ust because that is ho% it is al%ays done, nor because %e had emotional al%ays done, nor because %e had emotional

reasons for doing it. reasons for doing it.

0nstead – %e did things because %e calculated 0nstead – %e did things because %e calculated the benefits out"%eighed the cost, or because %e the benefits out"%eighed the cost, or because %e assessed the action as the most efficient %ay to assessed the action as the most efficient %ay to

achiee our goals. achiee our goals.

We take actions %hich are most efficient %ay to We take actions %hich are most efficient %ay to

achiee our goals. achiee our goals.

(44)

$ureaucracy

Weber

regarded

bureaucracy

–

Weber

regarded

bureaucracy

–

ultimate exam!le of rationali)ation.

Weber – interest in the nature of

!o%er and authority, as %ell as his

!erasie !reoccu!ation %ith modern

trends of rationali)ation.

1ureaucracy – organi)ed according to

rational !rinci!les

1ureaucratic coordination of actiities

are the distinctie mark of the modern

era.

(45)

Characteristics of bureaucracy

=/ &ixed diision of labor

" Gurisdictional 1idang kuasa/ areas are

Gurisdictional 1idang kuasa/ areas are

clearly s!ecified

" $as s!ecific set of official duties and rights

$as s!ecific set of official duties and rights

that cannot be changed at the %him of the

leader.

C/ $ierarchy of office

" -ach office should be controlled and

-ach office should be controlled and

su!erised by a higher ranking office.

A/ <ational"legal authority

" This ty!e of authority rests on the belief in

the legality of formal rules and hierarchies.