Pokok-Pokok Pikiran Max Weber the Theory of Social and Economic Organization Dan Rasionalisme/Modernisme

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.

III. R ESULTS /F INDINGS A total of 2 wards were visited and a survey or research was conducted with the citizens and the responsible authorities 3 in the counselor ofce. These wards consisted of ward no 23 and 41.

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.

Marx and Weber’s characteristics of modern societies were different. Marx stressed capitalism and class conflict and Weber stressed rationalization and bureaucracy.  Marx and Weber identified problems within modern society.  Marx had a generally optimistic view about the future and believed his theory could improve human conditions. Weber on the other hand was more pessimistic.

Weber also works off of Marx’s theories, far more than Durkheim appeared to. In the major instance, he takes Marx’s super-sub structure notion, flips it upside down, and molds it to his own theories. Marx hypothesized the economy to be the base of all society; Weber, on the other hand, conceived religion as being the base to shape the rest of society and theorized as such in The Protestant Sects and the Spirit of Capitalism, where business and religion are viewed as strongly correlated.

To finalize, the works of Weber were powerfully reforming to culture today. Ironically, just because his theories provide new ways of thinking doesn’t mean they don’t have flaws. For instance, Weber’s view of protestant’s affected his research which clearly would make his theory never realistic. This new knowledge would make anyone frustrated towards Weber’s ignorance. On the other hand, some of Weber’s theories provides reasoning of why the world is as it is today. In detail, Weber’s theory of Legitimacy points out how there are three eras of reign that still exist in some form today. On that note, the amount of charismatic authority there was and is will intrigue people. Clearly, though Weber has his flaws, sociology still continues to

According to Marx’s theory, labour is what define oneself in the world and give meaning to one’s life. Weber emphasized that theory when he published in 1904 “The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism”.

Marx and Weber both provide a critical analysis of capitalism, studying the origins of capitalism and the general characteristic of today’s capitalistic society. This essay will be discussing the similarities and differences between both sociologist’s in their writings of capitalism. To begin with, Marx’s work and contributions will be considered, particularly focusing on his main book, Capital, and how this book is a very clear demonstration of the emergence of capitalism in the nineteenth century. His concept of alienation will be looked at, as will his idea of commodity fetishism and how he placed paramount importance on the idea of exchange value in developing a capitalist society. This essay will then be moving on to a comparison

and how it differed form the view Marx put forward on the development of Western capitalism. I am then going to look at the way Weber saw 'occidental'; capitalism differing from 'other'; types of capitalism. After this I will touch upon what Weber described as the 'spirit of capitalism';. I will then proceed to explain what effect predestination and worldly- asceticism had an on a Protestant and his calling, and how this therefore encouraged the development of Western capitalism; in Webers view. After this I will look at the

his concept of class, class struggle. With Weber, I will also discuss his central question, his method of

Marx’s and Weber’s approach the study of power and inequality through class and economics. They agree that the wealthy does have some power advantage over the poor. But they differ in the power distribution. Marx only sees the bourgeoisie as the ultimate power house; while Weber believes that power is distributed among class, status, and party. Their opinion on social mobility is also different. Marx sees class as automatic and Weber sees it as a developing and changing idea. This is why Weber’s approach to the study of power and inequality resonates most with contemporary U.S. society.

Weber destabilizes the relationship between base and superstructure that Marx had established. According to Weber, the concept of historical materialism is naïve and nonsense because superstructures are not mere reflections of the economic base. ("The Protestant Ethic" and "The Spirit of Capitalism (1904-5) Weber agrees that the economy is one of the most faithful forces in modern life. However there are other social and legal factors which exhibit power and thus influence society. These factors help define bureaucratic society or Weber's concept of modern society which operates through the rational administration of labor. According to Weber, the condition of modern society is disenchantment, which, through rationalization (division of

Max Weber was one of the world's greatest sociologists and wrote a lot about the capitalist world he lived in. He had a different conception of capitalist society than most of his contemporaries. He looked at capitalism from all the different aspects that the philosophy was made of. Some of these aspects are state power, authority, class inequality, imperialism, and bureaucracy. To understand how Weber thought one must look at each area separately then put them all together in a global package.

To start of my essay I will compare and contrast between the two theories of Karl Marx and Max Weber on the topic of social class that will be discussed widely. The inequality between people is the basis of the democratic system, which is “a political system”. It is said that “those who have the skills and abilities to perform and produce will succeed in life.” But this belief is the assumption that all people are given equal opportunities and advantages. During the 19th century Karl Marx and Max Weber were two of the most influential sociologists who developed their own theories about why inequality is maintained with social class in society. Many might argue that there are many similarities and differences between these sociologists theories, however although Marx’s and Weber’s both examined similar ideas. This essay will compare the differences and similarities between Marx and Weber’s theories of class within society, which are based on economic inequality and capitalism. And lastly this essay will demonstrate that Max Weber comes across as the greater theorist as he can relate his concept more towards today’s society. Anthony Giddens (2nd edition) quoted that “You need greater equality to achieve more social mobility.” Therefore social class is referred to a group of people with similar levels of wealth, influences, behaviours and status. Henry Ward Beecher (1813-1887) American Politician states that the “ignorant classes are the dangerous classes.”

Masyarakat yang terdiri dari orang-orang kebanyakan tidak mengerti apa orang-orang filem ingin sampaikan untuk mereka dan kepada siapa filem ingin dituju dan ditonton? Filem komersial yang sepatutnya memenuhi citarasa penonton menjadi sebuah filem yang menghampakan penonton . Mana tidaknya, sememangnya filem boleh mengaut keuntungan hasil daripada kutipan penonton tetapi nasib penonton ini dianiayai oleh helah-helah dan janji-janji istimewa orang-orang filem untuk mengatakan filem ini bagus tetapi sebaliknya semua orang sudah tahu dan ini seakan menguntungkan industri tetapi tergadainya maruah dan kehormatan kerana tiada kredibilti filem yang berkualiti. Hal inilah yang membuatkan industri filem negara tidak berkembang pesat.