Max Weber was allied to the Neo-Kantian tradition in German thought rather than the Hegelian which were philosophers of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries who followed the teachings of Immanuel Kant. Kant saw that human beings as existing partly in the world of natural casualty and partly in realm freedom, governed by moral rules rather than causes. Weber also believed than physical nature is a realm of rigid, mechanical determination, while mental life is one of freedom and the absence of casualty.
Generalities can be useful in the study of history and society as a whole as means t another end, as they help us to understand the individual case better. Weber believed that a generalizing approach to sociology was subordinate to history, as it provided abstract concepts, which could be useful in understanding complex, concrete individual cases. Concepts like these were created precisely for their usefulness in informing historical studies. Weber wrote two major essays which created controversial views to this day on politics and science as vocations, most noticeably the idea that science should be ‘value free’.For Weber the distinction between the scientific and the political was the recognition of a long standing philosophical distinction between facts and values – values are unable to be deduced from facts.
Scientists can only report upon what happens and how things are, they cannot tell us how they should be, how we should live, or what we should do. The provision of research and evidence cannot relieve us of the necessity to make choices at the level of values. Scientific knowledge can be of value in politics but it cannot replace of substitute for politics itself.This is merely an illusion as politics entails struggle between values, not the facts of empirical knowledge. The ‘individual’ which captured Weber’s scientific interest was the capitalist civilization of the West.
Weber’s inquiries into the origins of modern Western, capitalist society were into a specific set of conditions, and were not directed towards indentifying any necessary, general tendencies of history. Weber’s fame lies upon his account of ‘The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism’ (1985).Weber’s account was not of capitalism but of one of its forms which was the rational form. As the capitalist business continues to accumulate profit even though the level of profits exceeds what its recipients can ever spend. The aim of business is the forever expansion of profits which is not seem to derive from greed but it seen as morally righteous, with the resulting profit being the capitalists’ just deserts for their industry.
Weber believed that the spirit of capitalism looked very like a secularized form of the Protestant ethic.The spirit of capitalism could have grown out of the Protestant ethic as they are very much alike- except that God command one and the other is freestanding, secular morality, held for its own sake. As religions often demand a lot of self control this struck Weber as providing another parallel with secular- especially business- conduct under capitalism, namely its extensively rationalized. According to Weber historical events are a matter of the coming together of independent casual chains which have previously developed without connection or direct import for one another.Weber also provided some general concepts for sociological analysis about world religions. He looked upon the organization of society as involving struggles for power.
A key element in his account is that of stratification. The three dimensions of power are (1 economic, (2 prestige and (3 pure power. Among these three kinds of groups is the historically decisive struggle over power are apt to take place. Weber also defines classes, status groups and parties as part of his scheme when describing peoples struggle for power in society.
