Max Weber 's Politics As A Vocation

An individual 's fate and human rights belong not to the individual but to the Great Leader. How can the right to oppose the absolutism of the Great Leader exist in a society where the highest moral value is dedicating one 's body and soul to the Great Leader? No matter how much the Great Leader and his agents infringe on the people 's human rights, it is considered acts of blameless morality.” (Yop)

Philosophical thought provides the infrastructure that allows society to author moral laws. While morality may be the aim, other variables can cause these laws to become corrupt. The urge for power is one of many, recurring, variables that infect morality. During these times of ‘infection,’ society must contest those who oppose just laws. In order to shine a light on unjust laws, laws are bound to be broken. It is not only lawful to break unjust laws, but the duty of the people to speak up and be a voice for change. It is critical, during these times, to work towards equilibrium with the goal to change the law. Regardless of the circumstances, it is lawful to break unjust laws with the goal to make them just again.

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.

The purpose of this essay is to analyse Weber’s theory of authority and power in order to establish its role in the modern contemporary world today. Weber, in his most acclaimed writings, discusses his three ideal types of authority being outlined as traditional, charismatic and rational-legal authority. He believes that in order for any political leader or political establishment to hold legitimate authority over its peoples, they must have either one of these types of authority. All of these types of power and authority can be referred to in some way in today’s contemporary world using examples of differing political leaders and systems. However, Weber’s writings were conducted in 1922 and may be considered as out-dated, and not as relevant as they were at his time of writing. Also, many dispute that Weber’s types of authority were perhaps not entirely relatable and Martin Spencer, like many other critics of Weber’s work in fact argue that there should have been four types of authority. Hence why these issues must be discussed in order to conclude whether Weber’s ideal types of authority are representative of political leaders and governments, and whether or not they can be associated with the contemporary world we live in today.

Sociology studies and defines the diverse aspects of some of the most basic human behaviour, particularly focusing on the purpose and the value that human behaviour holds. Max Weber, the highly influential philosopher (born 1864 – died 1920), documented and observed human behaviour, focusing primarily in his text, “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”, on social action. Weber determines that social action is the behaviour or action of an individual, or actor, in the presence of another individual. The specific role of social action is to monitor the influence of another on an individual’s work output and how their behaviour changes and the direction of their actions determined. Weber claimed that “a correct causal interpretation of concrete course of action, is arrived at when the overt action and the motives have both been correctly apprehended and at the same time their relation has become meaningfully comprehensible.”

The article presents Weber’s argument regarding social stratification in contrast to Marx’s. In his discussion of his theory of social stratification, he outlines three ways in which society is divided: by class (economically), status (socially) and by party (ideologically). He argues that the individual identity is not determined by the class identity, and that status and party identities often cross class divisions.

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.

Michael Walzer, in the article of “Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands”, -meaning refute absolutism without denying reality of moral consequences-, distances himself from the saying that democracy is supposed to be based on rules of law and morals. He explains the struggle that a political actor must endure in order to balance his moral principles while exercising his political power. He continues on to say that politician in a contemporary democratic world who acts on behalf of the people he is pledged to serve must sometimes act dishonestly because “power and glory’ is envied by all and the politician has to win by any means necessary. He argues that a politician can meet both moral-absolutist and consequentialist moral demands provided he does what is politically necessary but understands himself to be guilty as a result. In his view, a politician can dismiss some of his moral beliefs to accomplish what he sees as the right political action; therefore, practices “dirty hands”. If the politician doesn’t practice dirty hands then he is

The 17th century was torn by witch-hunts and wars of religion and imperial conquest. Protestants and Catholics denounced each other as followers of Satan, and people could be imprisoned for attending the wrong church, or for not attending any.

As individuals subjectively judge issues right and just, they do so according to their own knowledge of the topic. A Statesman relates the virtue ethics questions, “How should I live?” and “What is the good life?” into emphasizing the duties of others, while, attempting to accomplish their own ethical belief. Ultimately, the true Statesmen arranges truth by whether the judgement remains consistent with the issues of moral consequences. David J Vaughan in his book Statesman and Saint: The Principled Politics of William Wilberforce provides the two faces of political statecraft, balancing the biblical government, leadership and Statesmanship of Wilberforce against the Lord Acton opinion that, "power corrupts, and “absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Max Weber see traditionalism as the "most important opponent...of capitalism". When Weber states "traditionalism" he refers to the "traditional needs" that people are accustom to. He means that people normally just want to live their regular and traditional life--a lifestyle that has become the norm to them. Additionally, Weber states that people only want to earn the enough money to sustain their current lifestyle. An example stated in the reading by Weber is that of the increasing piece rates and working men. In the example, when there is an increase in the piece rate the workmen do not work more to earn a higher wage, but rather they just work the necessary amount to earn the same as before. Although the workmen have the potential to earn

Through analyzing the written works of Max Weber’s Types of Legitimate Domination and Bureaucracy to C. Wright Mills’ The Sociological Imagination, the writings of the comparative authors reveal the domination of power in a socially constructed society and the way that individuals are influenced by the constructed hierarchy of power. Through sociological analysis, these concepts can be applied to the ways individuals are continuously influenced through socially constructed institutions in a society where individuals constantly interact with one another. As Mills and Weber apply sociological analysis to the context of their observations, they are able to observe the growing positive and negative influences that ultimately shape the

The concept of power has been a topic of interest of many sociologists as they seek to define the term. Ensuring that the exercise of power is legitimate is a key integral to the concept of power in present day. However, although the power is seen as legitimate, it also has to be exercised appropriately as; ‘power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely’ (Dalberg-Acton, 1907: 504). Max Weber and Hannah Arendt are two sociologists whose ideology of what the concept of power is, are at the opposite ends of a pole. It is different in the fact that both theories approach different aspects of power. Weber’s account of power is more associated with everyday understanding and use of power, whereas Arendt’s account of power focuses more on power as a tool when speaking and acting in concert (Goverde H. & Lentner H, 2000).

People's soul are made up of several parts, as will be shown along the way, each man's main concern and occupation in life should be to build harmony and unity. Politics is the way a person expresses how his or her order in life can be used for everyone, the image of their own inner order or disorder reflected in his social life. A person cannot live alone, because one is a social animal, one must act; politics becomes an important part of the mind. Politics are simply the means of bringing order into the world of men through laws that are the product of rational nature. It is the ultimate concern of the philosopher, the one of wisdom, to bring this order forward.

This essay is a critical analysis of the theories given by Max Weber of leadership, religion and rationalization.