Max Weber,critical theory,and the administered world

The sociological perspectives of Max Weber and the Frankfurt School have been viewed as polarities in much of the recent literature. The Frankfurt sociologists were advocates of a neo-Marxism that stressed dialectical reasoning and rejected the notion of value-neutrality. Weber adhered to the canons of causal logic and cultivated the ideal of objectivity in social research. Notwithstanding these theoretical and methodological differences, Weber and the advocates of critical theory arrived at surprisingly similar conclusions about the fate of the modern world. Weber saw the advent of a bureaucratic iron cage which would effectively negate the role of the individual, while the Frankfurt sociologists posited the onset of an administered world in which human activity would be smothered in an ever-expanding network of management and control. Given these commonalities, a revision of the standard evaluation of Weber and critical theory is suggested.     

Max Weber and the Sociology of Music

The sociology of music has been an area largely left to European sociologists. In an effort to generate greater domestic interest in the field, an examination of Max Weber's methodology and an update to his study of music is proposed. Fewer occupations or cultural projects are more social than making music, and the domestic sociological community's absence from the debate is deplorable given the dominant position our country possesses regarding musical production. Weber's Sociology of Music, which combines urban theory, class/labor theory, rationalization theory, and even climatic changes, is an excellent place to begin a thorough discussion of the social components of music. Our present understanding of cultural theories, urban theories, and Habermas's Communicative Action Theory can be employed to improve on Weber's theory; toward a new approach for the study of the sociology of music.     

Edmund Husserl's Impact on Max Weber*

In correcting Rickert, Weber was influenced by Dilthey when he accepted the central place of interpretive understanding in the Geisteswissenschaften. But it was partly the influence of Husserl that led Weber to correct Dilthey's psychological reductionism in two respects, both of which are important in Weber's concept of ideal types: (1) categorial understanding, such as we have not only in mathematical analysis but also in the analysis of rational action, does not depend on psychological peculiarities, and (2) perceptual understanding, such as the investigator may have of irrational and nonrational action, is not given by immediate intuition alone but is partly constructed, and the validity of the construction must be tested by causal analysis. The author argues, further, that there is a phenomenological aspect to Weber's well-known types of authority, for example.     

Historical preface to Max Weber, “Stock and Commodity Exchanges”

Theory and Society -     

The Legacy of Max Weber: A Non-Metaphysical Politics

Science, said Weber, cannot provide truth (only knowledge) and it cannot validate values (only help to achieve them) since reason, fact, and value are separate and unconnectable realms. In taking this position, Weber sought to remove social science from the metaphysical tradition of the West (in which it is still mired). For Weber, man creates his own meanings in a meaningless universe, a possibly moral creature with neither natural nor supernatural absolutes to guide him. This perspective gave Weber a unique detachment against all views of society, whether Traditional, Marxian, or his own preference, liberal, a detachment which contains unparalleled benefits for the student of contemporary society and its politics.     

A piece of lost history: Max Weber and Lowell L. Bennion

This article discussesMax Weber’s Methodology, Lowell L. Bennion’s (1933) published doctoral dissertation from the University of Strasbourg, France. This book is important because it is the first systematic English language treatment of Weber’s work. It also suggests an early link between Weberian and Durkheimian scholarship and foreshadows later debates regarding Talcott Parsons’ interpretation of Weber. Additionally the book provides a unique contribution by applying Weber’s “Calvinism-Capitalism” thesis to the development of Mormonism. We explore the academic context in which the book was written and its reception by American sociologists at the time. After summarizing the text, we examine its perspective on the issues later raised about Parsons’ account of Weber. We conclude by looking at Lowell Bennion as a sociologist and a devout Mormon, and the unique connection that he forged between his religion and Max Weber’s ideas. Her field is organizational behavior and theory; her primary area of research is the relationship between organizational hierarchy and managerial leadership. He is currently investigating the modes of white collar resistance in public bureaucracies.