Critical Analysis Of Max Weber's Theory

Karl Marx and Max Weber were influential sociologists that paved the way for modern sociological school of thought. Both, Karl Marx and Max Weber contributed a lot to the study and foundation of sociology. Without their contributions sociology would not be as prominent as it is today. From the contribution of how sociology should be studied, to how they applied their theories to everyday life has influenced many sociologists. Predominantly, both of these theorists’ discussed the effects of capitalism, how it has developed, shaped and changed society into what it is today. Specifically, Karl Marx’s contribution of the bourgeoisie vs. the proletariat class and Max Weber’s social stratification has helped individuals to understand how modern day society has transformed into what it is today. Particularly, this paper will lie out Weber’s theory of social stratification and Marx’s theory of the bourgeoisie vs. the proletariat class; additionally this essay will also compare and contrast the ideas of these two influential sociologists. Finally this essay will criticize both of these sociologists’ theories and display that Marx and Weber do not explain how modern day society and classes have been formed.

and subsequent reinvestment of capital, is an end that both Weber and Marx reach in their analyses of society and agree on in definition. However, while Marx tells us that phantoms of the brain i.e. morality, religion, ideology, cannot develop independently of material production or influence it, Weber argues that ideas and religion can indeed determine life and the processes of life, namely our material production. The key difference between the two is their scope of factors that can cause historical development. Marx only allows for one factor, productive forces and the economic conditions resulting from them; Weber, on the other hand, acknowledges that while ideology and religion can support the economic relations as a driving factor, they can also develop independently and become a factor, a force on its own that can alter production, economic conditions, and thus history. By accounting for the multiple ways in which a society can be altered, Weber provides a more complete and applicable understanding of historical development and the powerful concept that an idea from an individual or group of individuals can have a legitimate and significant effect on the direction of society.

He contended that they were characterized by social conflict and he additionally presented the “thought of the working class which he saw as comprising of those occupations bunches with capabilities and aptitudes that furnished them with business points of interest. In Weber's perspective, advanced society, particularly the Western world, is developing progressively think. As the reader will see, Weber viewed organization as a definitive case of justification. Consequently, Weber can be seen as being centrally concerned with the rationalization of society all in all and, all the more particularly, its

Two names that are repeatedly mentioned in sociological theory are Karl Marx and Max Weber. In some ways these two intellectuals were similar in the way they looked at society. There are also some striking differences. In order to compare and contrast these two individuals it is necessary to look at each of their ideas. Then a comparison of their views can be illustrated followed by examples of how their perspectives differ from each other.

In class, we talked about discrimination in society through economic inequality with Marx, and then with Durkheim. We discussed the positive viewing of individualism in society through inequality. Max Weber is comparable to Karl Marx because they both focus on inequality and capitalism. However, unlike Marx, Weber views the uneconomic actions in society. He has an interpretive view, and as an interpretive sociologist, this means he focuses on the concerns of the society itself and not the people

Weber argued that modern societies are characterized increasingly by a process of rationalization meaning that the world is increasingly governed by rationality in which tradition and affective forms of action are replaced by predominantly rational forms. This leads to disenchantment being seen as secularization, including the progressive disposal of non-rational elements from all spheres of life.  Weber feared that this process of rationalization would drive out the warmth and humanity of social life, the very things that give meaning to human existence.

Office Space provides many examples of the rationalization of the workforce. According to Weber, Rationalization is the process of replacing the traditional and emotional thought with reason and practicality.Weber believed that most societies throughout history were governed by tradition and that the most significant trend in modern sociology is an increasing rationalization of every

First of all is power influence:- Power means ability to do something. The term of power is not related to authority. A man can apply power, in absence of authority also. Very renowned scholar

For Weber, religion can be seen as a factor which pushes for social change, while for Marx it is essentially used as a conservation, keeping the wealthy, wealthy and suppressing the poor

In short, the methodology of Marx and Weber adopted to analysis the development of capitalist society is different. Both of them may share some similarity in the sense that they included economic condition as a factor, but the differ in the sense that Marx believe in 'historical materialism' and argue that class relation of production is the sole determinant of the society; Weber, on the opposite, reject Marx's idea of economic determinism and argued that the development of capitalist society is explain by combination of unique and contingent events, such as the religion reformation of catholic church to protestant church, also led to the change in people's economic orientation and thus the development of capitalist society. Such a division in methodology is important to our understanding of their different understanding of the theory of the stratification of 'class', an important concept in the understanding of capitalist society.

Weber felt that capitalism would take over and there would be too much distinction between the classes. He later went on to study the ruling government or bureaucracy of a society and what limits individuals have. He studied subjectively and objectively. He considered his own views into his studies but limited them and made it clear that sociology must limit the sociologist views on the situation or case. As a sociologist, he felt that putting yourself in the place of the subject will give for empathetic views and add another dimension to the study.

There are a number of different modern social theories regarding the nature of society, social change, human's place within society and the idea of how integration and alienation fit within a modern society. These paradigms combine reflexively into a notion of history. Max Weber was a German politician, scholar, economist, and sociologist. In fact, he founded the modern studies of sociology, public administration, and organizational theory. He was born in 1864 and so was writing and publishing after Marx, but still looking at capitalism, socialism, and the various dictates of society as ways humans are shaped, actualized, and able to have upward mobility. He is most famous for his works surrounding the sociology of religion and government, and how those two institutions shaped, controlled, and contributed to humankind.

Max Weber a German sociologist born in 1864. He was primarily concerned with the modern western society. He saw that the behaviour of individuals was increasingly

In the opposite, Weber rejected the economic determinism of Marxism in the understanding of the stratification of the modern capitalist society. For Weber, the capitalist society is stratified in a two different ways from the Marxist description: On the one hand, the class differentiation is not classified merely by the ownership of means of production. According to Weber, class interest not as a given historical attribute to workers and capitalist, but is an ‘average interests’ of different individuals sharing similar market situation and ‘life chance’. Such ‘life chance’ is defined by the capacity of the individual to create utility and exchange value in the market by the utilization of their property. Therefore, class situation of the propertied is not merely defined by the ownership of means of production, but also returns on investment and rental income, which Marx doesn't take into account; for the class situation of the property-less, people is also fragmented by their differential possession of scarce skills, services and knowledge. Class interest is complex and fragmented.

Weber was a key defender of methodological antipositivism, contending for the investigation of social activity through interpretive (as opposed to simply empiricist) means, in view of comprehension the reason and implying that people connect to their own behavior. Weber 's primary educated concern was understanding the procedures ofrationalisation, secularization, and "embitterment" that he connected with the ascent of private enterprise and innovation, and which he saw as the aftereffect of another mindset about the world.