laitimes

Anthony Giddens | Weber's equation and the origins of modern Western economy

author:Time roses
Anthony Giddens | Weber's equation and the origins of modern Western economy

The author| Anthony Giddens, a famous British sociologist

Undoubtedly, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism is arguably one of the most reputable and controversial works of modern social science. It was originally published as a paper in two editions in the Social Sciences and Social Politics Literature from 1904 to 1905, of which Weber was one of the editors. The article immediately caused a critical controversy, in which Weber was actively involved, and almost seventy years later, the controversy has not subsided. This English translation is in fact a revised version of the treatise, first published in the Collected Writings on the Sociology of Religion, published in 1920-1921 shortly after Weber's death, and thus contains a review of the critical literature produced by the original paper.

Weber wrote The Protestant Ethic at a critical time in his intellectual development, shortly after recovering from a serious illness that had left him incapable of serious academic work for almost four years. Most of Weber's writings before his illness, although clearly foreshadowing the themes that unfolded later in his life, were technical studies of economic history, economics, and law. They include studies of medieval commercial law (his doctoral thesis), the development of land ownership in Rome, and the socio-economic conditions of agricultural workers in contemporary eastern Germany. These writings were partly inspired by the so-called "historical school" of economics that deliberately parted ways with British political economy, which emphasized the need to examine economic life in the context of the historical development of culture as a whole. Weber has always benefited from this view. However, the vast amount of research he began again after his recovery and devoted his life to a much wider range of issues than his earlier writings covered. The Protestant Ethic is the initial result of these new efforts.

To grasp what Weber seeks to achieve in this book, it is necessary to have a basic understanding of at least two aspects of the environment in which the book arises: the intellectual atmosphere in which he wrote it, and the connection between the book and the large-scale research project he designed for the rest of his life.

First, the background

German philosophy, political theory, and economics in the 19th century were very different from those in Britain. The dominance of utilitarianism and classical political economy in Britain was not reproduced in Germany, where it can be argued that they were alienated by the influence of idealism and the growing onslaught of Marxism in the last decades of the 19th century. In England, the extant tradition makes J. S. Mill's System of Logic (1843) unified the natural and social sciences in a proper framework. Mill was Comte's most prominent English disciple, although he sharply criticized some of the latter's excesses. Comte's positivism would never find ready soil in Germany; Dilthey's critical acceptance of Mill's view of "moral science" provided an additional impetus that eventually made Geisteswissenschaften widely known. The Geisteswissenschaften tradition, or "hermeneutics," dates back to before Dilthey, and from the mid-18th century onwards, it has been entangled with, but partly from, the larger idealistic philosophical current. Hermeneutics strongly advocate a distinction between the natural sciences and the study of people. Although we can "explain" natural events from the perspective of applying the law of cause and effect, human actions have an intrinsic meaning and must be "explained" or "understood" in a way that does not exist in nature. Closely related to this focus is the emphasis on the centrality of history in the study of human behaviour, whether in economic action or in other areas, since the cultural values that give meaning to human life are thought to arise from specific processes of social development.

Just as acknowledging the proposition that history is essential to the social sciences, Weber embraced the idea that the key to explaining human action lies in the "Verstehen" of meaning. However, he does not accept concepts such as "intuition" and "empathy", which many others consider necessary for interpretive understanding of behavior. Most importantly, he rejects the idea that acknowledging the "meaningfulness" of human behavior makes it impossible to account for cause and effect in the social sciences. At the level of the abstract method, Weber failed to achieve a satisfactory harmony of the different threads that he tried to weave together, but his efforts in the integrated approach produced a different approach to historical research—both sensitive to diverse cultural meanings and insisting that "material" factors have a fundamental causal role in influencing the course of history.

It is with this ideological background that Weber sees Marxism both as a set of doctrines and as a political force that promotes practical goals. Weber maintained close ties with the Social Policy Association, a group of liberal intellectuals who wanted to promote progressive social reform. [1] He was a member of the so-called "young generation" associated with the Association, which was the first to acquire a refined understanding of Marxist theory and to attempt to make creative use of certain elements drawn from Marxism—but never accepted it as a comprehensive ideological system, and was unafraid of its revolutionary politics. Weber acknowledged Marx's contribution, but he had greater reservations about Marxism than his famous colleague Sombart (Weber was at times sharply critical of the writings and political participation of some self-proclaimed Marxists). They share, however, the origins and possible evolution of industrial capitalism, especially in Germany and in the West as a whole. [2] In particular, they all believe that the economic conditions that determined the development and future changes of capitalism that Marx believed were rooted in a unique cultural whole. [3] Much of their work has focused on discerning how this "temperament" or "spirit" (geist) of modern Western capitalism emerged.

2. Protestant ethical propositions

In his Protestant Ethic, Weber attempted to illustrate the uniqueness of modern capitalism by first separating capitalist management from profit itself. The thirst for wealth is almost ever-present, which in itself has nothing to do with capitalist action, implying a conventional orientation towards profit through (nominally peaceful) economic exchange. This definition – such as the form of commercial operations – "capitalism" has always existed in various social formations: Babylon and ancient Egypt, China, India and medieval Europe. But it is only in the West, and in a fairly recent era, that capitalist activity is associated with the rational organization of a formally free labor force. [4] By the "rational organization" of labor, Weber refers to its stylized calculation of administration in the course of a continuing operation.

A rationalized capitalist operation consists of two elements: a disciplined labor force and a disciplined capital input. They all stand in stark contrast to traditional types of capitalist activity. The significance of the former can easily be illustrated by the experience of those who have established modern production organizations in communities that know nothing about them in the past. Consider an employer that introduces piece-rate wages in order to increase productivity, so that workers can expect this to spur members of their workforce to work harder to raise their wages. The result, however, may be that workers may actually work less than they used to, because they are not concerned with earning the highest daily wage, but simply earning enough to meet traditionally established needs. A similar phenomenon exists with the rich in traditional social formations, where people who profit from capitalist operations simply earn money so that they can be used for such purposes: to buy material comfort, pleasure, or power. Regular capital reproduction means that capital is constantly invested and reinvested for the goal of economic efficiency, which is unfamiliar to traditional types of business activities. Related to the latter is a very clear vision: the accumulation of wealth for its own sake, not for the material rewards it helps to bring. "To live, to make money, to make profit is the ultimate goal of life. The activity of economic profit is no longer subordinate to man as a means of satisfying his material needs. (p.53[5]) According to Weber, this is the spiritual essence of modern capitalism.

How can this peculiar historical fact be illustrated by the earthly pleasures that have the drive to accumulate wealth, but have no intention of what wealth can buy? Weber insists that it would be wrong to think that it is a ruin of traditional morality: this novel landscape is a peculiar moral landscape that in fact requires an extraordinary degree of self-discipline. The entrepreneur associated with the development of rational capitalism also has a drive to accumulate wealth according to a very frugal lifestyle. Weber found the answer in the puritan "asceticism," as epitomized by the concept of "vocation." According to Weber, the concept of vocation did not exist in ancient or Catholic theology; it was introduced by the Reformation. Fundamentally, it refers to the idea that the highest form of an individual's moral obligation is the fulfillment of his responsibilities in earthly affairs. This integrates religious practice into the everyday world, in stark contrast to the Catholic monastic life, whose goal is to transcend the requirements of secular life. Moreover, the moral responsibility of Protestants is progressive, while the cycle of sin, repentance, forgiveness, and renewal that Catholics cycle throughout their lives does not exist in Protestantism.

Weber argues that although the idea of vocation had appeared in Luther's teachings, it had been more rigorously developed in various Puritan denominations: Calvinist, Methodist, Pietist, and Baptist. Much of Weber's discussion was in fact focused on Calvinism, although he was not concerned only with Calvinism's doctrines themselves, but with their later evolution in the Calvinist movement. One of the elements of Calvinism, which Weber paid particular attention to, and perhaps crucial to his proposition, was the doctrine of salvation predestination: only certain people were chosen to be spared punishment for hell, and these people were predetermined by God. Calvin himself could be assured that he was saved because he was the instrument of prophecy of God, and his followers could not. Weber commented, "This doctrine, because of its extreme inhumanity, must have an important consequence for the lives of a generation that believes in its extraordinary consistency... An unprecedented sense of inner loneliness. (p.104) Weber argues that the spirit of capitalism arises from this painful torment. On the pastoral side, there have been two developments: one is to see oneself as a chosen people, and without this certainty, it means a lack of faith; Second, the practice of "good deeds" in earthly activities is considered to be a means of proving such assurances. Thus, success in a vocation is ultimately seen as a "sign" of being one of God's chosen people—but never a means. The accumulation of wealth is morally sanctioned by its combination with serious and diligent undertakings, and is cursed only when it is used for a life of emptiness, luxury, or indulgence.

According to Weber's argument, Calvinism provides the capitalist operator with moral vitality and motivation; Weber said of its teachings that it had an "iron-clad coherence" to the kind of gloomy discipline that believers demanded. The ascetic self-discipline elements of earthly affairs undoubtedly exist in other Puritan sects, but they lack the momentum of Calvinism. Weber pointed out that their influence was mainly to shape a moral outlook in strengthening labor discipline in the lower classes of capitalist economic organization. For example, "the virtues that pietists prefer are on the one hand those of faithful officials, clerks, laborers, or contracted workers" (p.139).

III. The Protestant Ethic in the Context of Weber's Other Writings

Despite its reputation, The Protestant Ethic is a fragment. Compared to Weber's studies of other "world religions"—ancient Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism, and Confucianism (a comprehensive study of Islam that Weber had planned, but did not complete), The Protestant Ethic is much shorter and less detailed. Together, they form a complete series of writings. [6] Novelty, whether in Protestant Ethics or other studies, Weber conceived them not as a descriptive account of religious types. Their intention is to analyze the different models of cultural rationalization and to try to identify the importance of such differences for socio-economic development.

In his study of India, Weber focused specifically on the period when Hinduism became the first state religion (about four hundred or five hundred years before Christ was born). The beliefs and practices classified as "Hinduism" are quite diverse, and Weber argues that reincarnation and compensation (karma) theories are particularly important to the purposes of his research, and that they are both closely related to the caste system. Whoever, according to the obligations of his caste, the actions of an individual in a previous life will in fact determine his fate in the next life; Devout believers can silently pray for the possibility of approaching God in the process of continuous incarnation along a hierarchy. Hinduism places a special emphasis on asceticism, but in Weber's words, it is an "afterlife" asceticism, that is, it wants to get rid of the burdens of the material world, rather than rationally dominate the world itself, as in Puritanism. At the same time that Hinduism became a systematic religion, India's trade and manufacturing reached a peak. But the influence of Hinduism, and the caste system that intertwined with it, effectively inhibited any economic development comparable to modern European capitalism. Weber commented that "according to the law of ritual, any change in occupation, any change in labor skills, may lead to ritual degradation, and such ritual law certainly cannot promote economic and technological revolution from within itself..."[7] The phrase "from within oneself" is crucial, and Weber is concerned with the origins of modern capitalism in Europe, not its subsequent adoption elsewhere.

Like India, China's trade and manufacturing industry has reached a fairly high level of development at some time, with thriving chambers of commerce and handicraft guilds, a monetary system, and a well-developed legal framework. Weber argued that all these elements were prerequisites for the development of rational capitalism in Europe. Although the nature of Confucianism is as different from Hinduism as Weber portrays, it is not prepared to "integrate the drive for profit into an ethosis ethic of behavior" than Hinduism.[8] In a great sense, Confucianism is a religion of "this world," but not a religion that embodies ascetic values. Calvinist ethics introduced an activism into the believer's attitude towards earthly affairs, and a drive to pursue God's virtues was evident that was completely absent in Confucianism. Confucian values neither contribute to this rational instrumentalism, nor endorse the a priori nature of earthly affairs, as Hinduism does, but establish an ideal that harmonizes the individual with the established order of all things. A pious gentleman is a person who can align his actions with the inner harmony of the universe. An ethic that focuses on rational adaptation to the earthly world cannot "in fact" produce in economic activity a moral dynamic comparable to the spiritual temperament of European capitalism.

Weber's other studies of the "world religions," such as the study of ancient Judaism, were also an important part of his overall plan. The origins of Judaism in ancient Palestine marked the interconnection of environmental factors in which some of the fundamental differences between the religions of the Near and Far East became complex and refined. The distinctive teachings of Judaism are perpetuated in Christianity and thus integrated into Western culture as a whole. Judaism brings with it a tradition of "moral prophecy," which means the active propagation of God's mission, in stark contrast to the more typical "model prophetic prophecy" of India and China. In the latter type, the prophet is a model for believers to emulate, and the teachings of this model prophet do not have the typical expression of moral prophecy, that is, active evangelistic zeal. Judaism and Christianity rely on the tension between sin and redemption and give them a basic capacity for change that is lacking in religions in the Far East, which is more oriented towards silent prayer. In Christian theology, the opposition between earthly incompleteness and God's perfection requires believers to reinvent the earthly world according to God's will to achieve their own salvation. In Weber's view, the moral impulse to pursue salvation actively, and to concentrate it on economic activity, culminated in Calvinism.

Weber pointed out that the Protestant Ethic merely traces "one link in the chain of cause and effect" (p.27) that links Puritan to modern capitalism. Undoubtedly, he is not asserting that the differences in the rationalization of religious ethics that he clarified are the only major factors that distinguish the development of Western economic development from the development of Eastern civilization. On the contrary, he elaborates on a number of fundamental socio-economic factors that set the European experience apart from India and China that were crucial to the emergence of modern capitalism, including the following: (1) The separation of productive management from domestic management before the development of industrial capitalism, which was far more advanced in the West than anywhere else. In China, for example, expanded kinship units provide the main form of economic cooperation, thus limiting the influence of guilds and individual business activities. (2) The development of Western cities. In post-medieval Europe, urban communities achieved a high degree of political autonomy, thus allowing "civil" societies to emerge from agrarian feudalism. But in Eastern civilization, partly because of the influence of kinship networks, the urban-rural divide was blocked, and cities have always been more deeply rooted in local agricultural economies. (3) In Europe, the existence of a generational tradition of Roman law provides a more complete and developed rationalization of judicial practice than anywhere else. (4) This, in turn, was a key factor in enabling the development of nation-states and full-time bureaucratic bureaucratic administration, which was unattainable in Eastern civilizations. The rational legal system of Western countries is to some extent used within the business organization itself, but it also provides a general framework for harmonizing capitalist economies. (5) Development of double-entry bookkeeping in Europe. In Weber's view, this is a very important phenomenon in the process of opening the way for the adjustment of capitalist management. (6) This series of changes—as Marx emphasized—set the stage for the formation of a "free" army of labor that sells its labor power for a living on the market. There is a prerequisite here, namely the erosion of the previous monopoly on the disposal of labor power that existed in the form of feudal obligation, which reached its extreme under the caste system of the East.

All this meant a confluence of certain necessary conditions for promotion, which, combined with the moral dynamism of the Puritans, led to the development of modern Western capitalism. But, while Puritanism provided the spiritual spark and ignited the series of changes that enabled industrial capitalism, once the latter became an established order, it uprooted the special ethical religious elements that had helped to produce it:

When asceticism was brought into everyday life from the chambers of monasteries and began to dominate secular morality, it played its part in the construction of the vast system of modern economic order. ...... The triumphant capitalism no longer needs the support of this spirit, because capitalism has the basis of a machine. ...... The idea of vocation hovers in our lives like the specter of dead religious belief. (pp. 181—182)

Here, the Protestant ethic, which first focuses on the origins of modern capitalism, connects Weber's somber indictment of the modern development of industrial culture as a whole at that time. Puritanism helped create the "iron cage" in which modern man had to live—a growing and ruthless bureaucratic order that ruthlessly eliminated the "spontaneous enjoyment of life." Weber concluded that "the Puritans worked in order to fulfill their vocation, but ours were compelled to do so" (p.181).

4. Controversy

The Protestant Ethic was written for the purpose of argumentation, which is evident in Weber's many references to "idealism" and "materialism." The study, he said, "helps to understand how ideas have become a historically effective force," and the spearhead is economic determinism. The Reformation and the subsequent development of the Puritanical sect cannot be interpreted as the "inevitable result of history" of previous economic changes (pp. 90-91). It seems clear that Weber was referring here to Marxism, at least to the crude form of Marxist historical analysis that prevailed at the time. [9] But he also made it clear that he did not want to replace this deterministic materialism with an idealist historical account that was also monist (cf. p. 183). Rather, this work shows that he firmly believes that there is no "historical law": the emergence of modern capitalism in the West is the product of the special coupling of events in history.

The passion implicit in Weber's account is evident in the commentary on Puritanism and its aftermath identified by the Protestant Ethic. The "iron cage" is a graphic illustration of Weber's aversion to what he saw as the key to modern culture: the celebration of the mundane and routine. However, he quotes Goethe [10], "The expert has no soul, and the indulgent has no heart and liver; But this body is fantasizing that it has reached an unprecedented level of civilization. (p.182) Such generalizations stand in odd contrast to Weber's cautious approach of setting a series of qualifications on the subject of the book. Although this contrast is clarified when the book is seen as an element of Weber's overall project, the Protestant Ethic itself does not explain it, and perhaps it is this contrast that has further fueled the controversy that has arisen since its publication. But how can it be explained that the controversy it has caused is so fierce and why the debate is so lively and enduring?

One of the most important reasons for the emotional intensity of this book is undoubtedly the fact that two important terms in Weber's equation, "religion" and "capitalism," have a potentially detonating effect when used to explain the origins of the modern Western economy. Weber insisted that certain religious ideas had transformative power, which drew opposition from the vast majority of contemporary Marxists; His portrayal of Catholicism had nothing to do with secular discipline and had an impediment, rather than a facilitative, effect on modern economic development, which of course drew hostility from many Catholic historians; His analysis of Protestantism emphasizes the role of the Puritans (the influence of which in turn is associated with the "iron cage" of modern culture), which is almost impossible to universally welcome by Protestant thinkers. Finally, the use of the term "capitalism" is itself controversial, and many – some still – tend to believe that applying the concept to economic history is not helpful.

Thus, the very diverse reactions to the Protestant Ethic help explain why the debate has been so protracted. But there are other important fundamentals. The ideological power of Weber's argument comes in no small part from his disregard for traditional disciplinary disciplines, made possible by the extraordinary breadth of his own knowledge. His work can therefore be seen on several levels: a particular historical proposition asserts a correlation between Calvinism and business attitudes; a causal analysis of the influence of Puritanism on capitalist activity; an explanation of the origins of those key components of modern Western society as a whole; In the context of Weber's comparative studies, this is part of an attempt to identify the different processes of Chinese rationalization of the major civilizations of the East and the West. The debate about the Protestant ethic is repeated between these levels, and in this direction encompasses not only these substantive issues, but also most of the methodological issues that Weber wrote to help illuminate; It has attracted a large number of scholars from the fields of economics, history and economic history, comparative religion, anthropology and sociology. In addition, as some or all of Weber's analysis was accepted and some of its elements were attempted to expand, subordinate debates arose, such as around R. K. Merton's account of the influence of Protestantism on 17th-century English science. [11]

It is difficult to deny that some of the critical reactions to the Protestant Ethics, particularly the German edition and the English translation after its first publication in 1930, were based on a direct misunderstanding of Weber's claims or a misunderstanding of what he was trying to achieve in this book. Weber admits to some of this misinterpretation of some of these misinterpretations by his early critics, such as Fisher and Rushfar, to a certain extent. [12] Of course, these critics could not possibly place The Protestant Ethic in the context of Weber's broad comparative analysis, and they may be forgiven for not being aware of the locality of the study, although Weber has cautioned readers that its scope is limited. However, many of the critics who subsequently wrote in the 20s and 30s of the 20th century (including von Bello, R. H. Tony, F. H. Knight, H. M. Robertson, and P. Gordon Walker) are not easily forgiven for ignoring the Collected Essays on the Sociology of Religion and Economy and Society almost entirely. [13] Some of the literature of this period is worthless, at least when it comes to evaluating Weber's own arguments, for example, some authors accuse Weber of seeing Calvinism as the "only" reason for the development of modern capitalism, or pointing out that some contemporary countries, such as Japan, have experienced rapid economic development that has nothing to do with the "Protestant ethic."

However, this brought into discussion a considerable amount of potentially plausible criticism of Weber, ranging from the immediate rejection of his claims to the suggestion of more minor changes to his work. It may be possible to categorize them according to the view that they contain one or more of the following:[14]

1. Weber's description of Protestantism is incorrect. This criticism was directed at Weber's discourse on the Reformation, his interpretation of the Puritans in general, and Calvinism in particular. It argues that Weber wrongly assumed that Luther introduced a concept of "vocation" that was different from everything previously seen in biblical interpretation; Calvinist ethics are in fact "anti-capitalist" ethics, and never approve of the accumulation of wealth, even if it is an indirect goal. Others insist that Weber's interpretation of Benjamin Franklin's ideas, which is central to the Protestant ethic, and other aspects of Weber's analysis of American Puritanism, are unacceptable. [15] This statement, if correct, is somewhat meaningful, since Weber sees the influence of Puritan on American business as an important example of his proposition with particular clarity. [16]

2. Weber misinterpreted Catholic doctrine. Critics point out that Weber apparently did not study Catholicism in detail, although his argument was based on the idea that Catholicism and Protestantism were fundamentally different in economic values. According to this view, post-medieval Catholicism contained elements that were strongly conducive to the "spirit of capitalism" and that the Reformation should in fact be seen as a reaction to the "spirit of capitalism" rather than paving the way for its later appearance. [17]

3. Weber's discourse on the relationship between Puritan and modern capitalism is based on unsatisfactory empirical material. This is one of Fisher's and Rushfar's thesis, and has received various forms of response. It has been pointed out that the only numerical analysis Weber involved was a study of the economic activity of Catholics and Protestants in Baden in 1895, and that the accuracy of these figures is questionable. [18] More generally, however, critics point out that Weber's sources are mainly Anglo-Saxon texts, and they assert that studies of the economic development of the Rhineland, the Netherlands, and Switzerland in the 16th and 17th centuries do not show any close connection between Calvinism and capitalist management. [19]

4. Weber tried to draw a sharp contrast between modern or "rational" capitalism and the types of capitalist activity of the past, but for no good reason. It is believed that, on the one hand, Weber's preference for his concept of "modern capitalism" was manifested in conforming it to the Puritanical elements on which he focused, but on the other hand, what Weber called the "spirit" of modern capitalism was in fact mostly present in previous periods. Tony acknowledged the divergence of Lutheranism from later Protestant denominations, but he insisted that it was the "capitalist spirit" that influenced the evolution of Puritanism in the past, not the other way around. [20]

5. Weber misunderstood the nature of the causal relationship between Puritanism and modern capitalism. Of course, most authors who hold one or more of these views conclude that there is no such causal relationship at all. In this respect, however, the controversy has expanded into a debate about abstract historiography, which really concerns the question of whether a causal analysis of history is possible. Marxist critics generally reject Weber's examples of a "pluralistic" view of historical causality, and some have tried to reinterpret the propositions of the Protestant ethic as a collateral phenomenon of previous established economic changes. [21] Other authors, who are not necessarily Marxists, also reject the methodological framework employed by Weber and attempt to demonstrate the consequences of this framework when Weber narrates the origins of the capitalist spirit. [22]

After the onslaught of great criticism, how much of Weber's narrative can stand? Some might argue that all of them actually hold up because the vast majority of criticism is wrong or because it misinterprets Weber's position. [23] However, I am not convinced that this view is well-founded. Obviously, at least some of Weber's critics must have been wrong, because the literature is somewhat contradictory: some authors criticize Weber with claims that contradict others. Still, some of the criticisms are quite powerful, and taken together constitute a dire indictment of Weber's views. Arguably, the most explicitly questioned factors in Weber's analysis include the uniqueness of Lutheranism's conception of vocation,[24] the assumption that Catholicism lacks "affinity" with systemic business, and the extent to which Calvinist ethics, which actually contributes to the dignity of wealth accumulation in the way Weber believes, at the heart of the Protestant ethical proposition. If Weber was wrong on these issues, it would always be a complex question to summarize the importance of his broad writings. To be truly satisfactory, this means considering the state of the "Universal Religions" series, the question of cultural rationalization in general, and the methodological framework employed by Weber. However, no author has yet attempted such a task, and if he is to achieve anything, he will probably need someone to do it at an academic level close to Weber's own.

This article is excerpted from Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism (Shanghai People's Publishing House, 2017)

Read on