Overflowing words

Goerge Ritzer, being influenced by Baudrillard’s postmodern ideas and modernists Marx and Weber, created a grand theory that’s more concerned with the environment in which people consume. He depicted a world of hyperconsumption leading to contemporary society.

In connection with means of production is that means of consumption. Marx defined means of production as the things like machines and raw materials that make the production possible. He also defined means of consumption simply as the consuming of goods. But for Ritzer, in line with Marx’s definition, he defined means of consumption as the things that make the consumption possible.

Part of his grand theory involves the movement form old means of consumption such as cafes and diners to the new means f consumption like the shopping malls. Old means of production involves face-to-face interaction among consumers and employees. But because of the new means of production, consumption became revolutionized. It also led to creative destruction, where older structures are destroyed to make way for newer ones that functions more effectively and efficiently.

However, these new means of consumption are already being threatened by other. Because of the rise of Internet, people tend to do online shopping than going directly to malls. Going directly to malls would likely to consume much time, driving from your place to the malls, looking for a parking lot, and going in and out of each boutiques. Instead of having all of those physical acts, consumption can be accomplished swiftly. He also stated that fast paced modernization gives people the feeling being in a dream world. Capitalists held out this new means of production in order for the people to exercise hyperconsumption frequently and as a result, there will be more profitability.

Jean Baudrillard was a French sociologist, cultural critic, and theorist of postmodernity. He was influenced by the ideas of Karl Marx but he focused more on a society being the consumer. The shifting from producer to consumer society is because it is not only the workers were being exploited but also the consumer. The said shifting was seen as a control of capitalism. He focused on consumption and how this can create language and communication.

Our ability to consume different goods is more than just the consuming of products. Everything that we purchased has a language that one can infer. We purchased the products’ sign value more than its use value. Sign value is the meaning of the purchased product and because of this, people desire to buy and results to exploitation and create social differences. We are able to understand the signs because of the codes or the system of rules and how they relate to one another. Two basic questions are raised in connection to this: “Who am I?” “Where do I belong?” Consumption became a process of questioning oneself with how people will see them if they’re going to buy such product.

Categories of objects define the status of people. What they consume would define their position in the society. People are what they consume. They define themselves and are defined by others. Just like in the Philippines which belongs to the third world. Filipinos tend to purchased goods for acceptance. It is their way to fight off poverty and resist inequalities. Unlike with United States that belongs to the First World, they consume products to be different than the others. They are focused more on difference rather than to satisfy their needs. Because of hyperconsumption, people tend to consume far from what they need. As a result of consuming products because of differences, there will be no end to consumption. People will not be satisfied because of the feeling that they want to be different to others.

Because of his ideas where we value more of the object that we consume, relationships with objects have tended to replace human relationship. We tend to consume too much time with that objects than having daily conversation with people.

 

Paul-Michel Foucault was a French philosopher, historian, critic and sociologist, often associated as a forerunner of postmodern social theory. Foucault sought not to answer the traditional and straightforward questions but to critically examine them. Foucault seeks to describe and analyze social realities at various points in time. He focuses on being illogical, and in internal contradictions. He also emphasizes the discontinuities, the ruptures, the sudden reversals that characterized social theory.

Increasing Governmentality

Foucault was interested to governmentalities, or the practices and techniques by which control is exercised over people. It is generally associated with the willing participation of the governed. It’s a combined terms of government and rationality. Government as we all know, refers to the activities in shaping, guiding or affecting the conduct of the people. It goes beyond leading and directing. It also refers to the ability of an individual to govern himself/herself, a sense of self-governance. Rationality, a form of thinking that is systematic, suggests that before someone can be controlled, they must be define.

Discipline and Punish.

In the early 1970s, Foucault’s involvement with the prisoners’ movement led him to his book Discipline and Punish that deals about the emergence and changes of the prison system. Torture practices was replaced by rule-based control. Exercising punishment became kinder, less painful, and less cruel and had fewer negative effects.

Imposing rules had more advantages over torture. First, there is an ability to impose rules can occur much earlier in the deviance process than torture. People can be fully aware of the rules before committing in a defiant act. Next, imposing rules can take place more often than torture; rules can be taught and retaught. Third, it is closely associated with rationalization and bureaucracy. It is more efficient, more impersonal, and more sober than torture. Lastly, rule-based control can be exercised over a population.

Instruments of Observation and Control

• Hierarchical observation – it is the ability of official or someone who’s in the top to supervise the group they control with single gaze. There is a panopticon, a structure or can be a tower in form that enables the superior to have complete observation of a group of people. Whether there is someone in panopticon or none, people become constraint of their actions and forces them to behave the way they are expected to behave.
• Normalizing judgments – those in power can decide what is normal and what is abnormal on a variety of dimensions. Those who violate the rules can be punished by the officials.
• Examinations – it is not only exercised in schools; it is the way how the subordinates are being observed and being judged with what they are doing.

Increasing Disciplinary Power

Because of the creation of better methods of disciplinary power, our ability to punish people has increased. We are constantly watched and judged. We tend to behave in a way that officials will not question our actions and will not result to us being punished. It has been more known and causes harm without us noticing it.

 

Many people incorrectly believe that feminist theory focuses exclusively on women promoting their superiority over men. In reality, feminist theory is a major branch of theory within sociology that deals with social life and human experience in the perspective of women. It has always been about viewing the social world through the situations and experiences of women in society. It also treats women as the central subject in the process of investigation.

The basic theoretical question here is “What about the women?”. Four theories provide the answer for this question.

First is the gender difference. It is how women’s location in, and experience of, social situations differ from men’s. It is divided into three subparts. First is the cultural feminism, which is all about the positive aspects of women. According to Jane Addams and Charlotte Perkins Gilman, in order to effectively govern a state, society needed such women characteristics as cooperation, caring, pacificism, and nonviolence to settle conflicts. Women also cared for the society first and foremost. Women also have that style of communication, openness to emotional experience, lower levels of aggressiveness and greater capacity for creating peaceful coexistence. It is simply being more concern with promoting the values of women’s differences than explaining its origin. Second one is explanatory theory, where it dealt with the gender differences biologically, in institutional roles, in socialization and in social experience. Biologically, men and women are different because of hormones. In institutional roles, there is sexual division of labor because women were more capable of doing mother-like jobs. Third is the existential and phenomenal analyses that focus on how women have been marginalized and defined as “other” in patriarchal societies.

Second is gender inequality where women are not only different but also unequal to men’s. It’s evident with the electing new leader or president of a society. Women are being deprived of their right to be one of the leaders because of the connotation that only men have the capabilities and abilities in leading a state and that women can’t do so. Feminist arhue that women have the same capacity as men for moral reasoning and agency, but that patriarchy, particularly the sexist division of labor, has historically denied women the opportunity to express and practice this reasoning.

Third is gender oppression. It goes further than theories of gender difference and gender inequality by arguing that not only are women different from or unequal to men, but that they are actively oppressed, subordinated, and even abused by men. Radical feminists argue that being a woman is a positive thing in and of itself, but that this is not acknowledged in patriarchal societies where women are oppressed. They identify physical violence as being at the base of patriarchy, but they think that patriarchy can be defeated if women recognize their own value and strength, establish a sisterhood of trust with other women, confront oppression critically, and form female-based separatist networks in the private and public spheres.

Lastly is the structural oppression like gender oppression, recognize that oppression doesn’t only came from men but also from some groups like social structure. It also posit that women’s oppression and inequality are a result of capitalism, patriarchy, and racism.

Because of this, feminists do their best in order in order to achieve equalities for both men and women. They became the reason why women, in today’s time, have their rights that was being deprived from them.

 

Born on October, 14, 1940, George Ritzer is an American sociologist, professor, and author who examines globalization, patterns of consumption, and modern and postmodern social theory. His noble contribution is the Mcdonaldization, although based on Max Weber’s ideas of rationalization, but is through fast-food industry.

Mcdonaldization

George Ritzer introduced the concept of McDonaldization with his 1993 book, The McDonaldization of Society. According to Ritzer, it is a phenomenon that occurs when society, its institutions, and its organizations have the same characteristics that are found in fast-food chains. It is the process of rationalization, although taken to extreme levels. The process of this takes a task and breaks it down into smaller tasks. The resulting tasks are rationalized to find the single most efficient method for completing the task. All other tasks are then disregarded.

In the essence of Mcdonaldization, Ritzer identified its five basic dimensions:

• Efficiency – entails the optimum method for completing the task. It includes focus on minimizing time required to finish individual tasks to complete the whole operation of production and distribution. The efficiency of one party helps to ensure that the other will behave in the same manner.
• Calculability – is focused on quantifiable objectives rather than subjective ones. They disregard the quality of one product to satisfy the desired number of production. In other words, quantity over quality.
• Predictability – is related to calculability. The process is systemize to guarantee uniformity of product and outcomes. Customers know what to expect from a given product or service.
• Control – used by the management to ensure that workers appear and act the same on a daily basis. Classified into human, which is controlled by humans, and nonhuman, which is not.
• Irrationality of rationality – it is a side-effect of over-rationalized systems. It became unreasonable for the sake of rationality. They deny the basic humanity, the human reason, of the people who work within or are served by them.

The spreading of Mcdonaldization occur, not only in the business but in all industry because of its uniformity. However, it dehumanize people and the organic community. Workers are being deskilled, debased and exploited and customers become workers.

Nothing vs. Something

According to Ritzer, “Nothing” is a centrally conceived and controlled form largely empty of distinctive content“. “Something”, however, is indigenously conceived, controlled and rich in distinctive substantive content. “Nothing” usually aims at the standardized and homogenous, while “something” refers to things that are personal or have local flavor. Examples of “nothing” are multinational brands, credit cards and the Internet. Examples of “something” are personalized service, local shops and stores, and crafts places. Ritzer believed that things that incorporate the “nothing” component are taking over and pushing “something” out of society.

Globalization, Grobalization and Glocalization

Globalization refers to the processes that affect a multitude of nations throughout the world, but which are independent of any specific nation-state. The concept of “nothing” and “something” plays a large part in Ritzer’s Globalization. Society is bombarded with “nothing” and he believes that the globalization of “nothing” is almost unstoppable. To better understand globalization, it can be broken down into a few characteristics:

• The beginning of global communication through different media like television and the Internet
• The formation of a “global consciousness”

Theories of Globalization

1. Cultural Differentialism as a barrier – there is a tendency that it can’t adapt culture
2. Cultural Hybridization as a barrier – there is a mixing of culture; there is adaptation of another culture
3. Cultural Convergence – culture becomes the same
4. Cultural Imperalism – it is overlapped by other culture

Grobalization

Ritzer states that grocalization consists of glocalization and grobalization. It refers to ambitions of nations to impose themselves on various areas. Its aim is to overwhelm local.

Glocalization

It is a combination of globalization and localization that is developed and distributed globally, but is also accommodating the consumer in a local market.

 

REFERENCES

https://study.com/academy/lesson/george-ritzer-and-mcdonaldization-of-society-definition-and-principles.html

Global Dialogue. George Ritzer on McDonaldization and Prosumption. Retrieved from http://globaldialogue.isa-sociology.org/george-ritzer-on-mcdonaldization-and-prosumption/

Yannig Roth / This is my blog. (2012). The Globalization of Nothing, George Ritzer, Pine Forge Press. Retrieved from https://yannigroth.com/2010/09/23/globalization-nothing-george-ritzer/

Back. What Is It?. Retrieved from https://www.mcdonaldization.com/whatisit.shtml

 

 

 

Born on January 18, 1938, Anthony Giddens is a British political adviser, educator, sociologist, and social theorist. He has this holistic view of modern societies. He is known for his theory of structuration, which explores the connection between individuals and social systems.

Theory of Structuration

Giddens’ theory of structuration argues that in order to understand society, one cannot look only at the actions of individuals or the social forces that maintain the society. Instead, it is both that shape our social reality. He contends that although people are not entirely free to choose their own actions, and their knowledge is limited, they are the agency that reproduces the social structure and lead to social change.

The Juggernaut

He has described the modern world as a juggernaut, that is, as an engine of enormous power which can be directed to some extent, but which also threatens to run out of control. The juggernaut is a runaway world with great increases over prior systems in the pace, scope, and profoundness of change.

One example is a trailer truck delivering medical supplies. The truck could be delivering medicines that seem to be worthwhile, but that. In the future, cause more harm than good. Another one is nuclear technology and genetic research.

Distanciation

Giddens explained that we have the ability to control various components of the modern juggernaut to grow quite distant from us in space in time. He explained that such components tended to be physically close to us, are now spread out across the globe. A specific thing can have effect on people that is thousand miles away. Same thing about time, wherein, an object made long time ago can have catastrophic effect on us. And things we are creating today may cause unfavorable effect to people in the future.

People in the modern world are forced to develop trust in both systems and the people who control and operate them. The nature of the modern world requires that we place our trust in a variety of experts.

Reflexivity

People in the modern world tend to have the act of self-reference. They are reflexive, have the capacity to recognize forces of socialization and alter their place in the social structure. A person having low level of reflexivity is shaped by his/her environment while a person having high level of reflexivity shaped his/her own desires, policies, tastes and so on.

Insecurity and Risks

People tend to trust not only their parents but also authority figures. Also, we have followed daily routines that make it seem as if our lives are safe. However, we are aware of risks like increasing global economic interdependence. We are also aware that even if we completely trust the experts, they cannot fully control the juggernaut. They can come up with an action but that action could lead also to another major problem. Giddens have answers on why is juggernaut always threatening to rush out of control.

1. The juggernaut has design faults.
2. The juggernaut is subject to operator failure.
3. We cannot foresee the consequences of modifying the juggernaut.
4. People constantly reflects on the juggernaut creating new knowledge resulting to move at a different direction. However, it may bring number of negative consequences.

 

REFERENCES:

ThoughtCo. Anthony Giddens: Biography of British Sociologist. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/anthony-giddens-3026484

 

Neo-Marxian theory is an approach enhance or extend Marxism and Marxist theory. Several theorists follow Marx in the sense of offering depictions of the great sweep of history. It was developed as a result of social and political problems that Marxism failed to address. This reiteration tended to have a peaceful ideological dissemination, rather than revolutionary and violent methods. Two of the most important of these theories are The Emergence of the Culture Industry and From Fordism to Post-Fordism.

The Emergence of the Culture Industry

Before the birth of Culture Industry, it was the critical theory that has started. It was founded in 1923 at the Institute of Social Research in Frankfurt, Germany. Critical theory is a social theory subjected toward changing the society as a whole rather than only understanding and explaining it. Critical theorists were social and intellectual critics. They aim to dig underneath the surface of social life and seek “human emancipation” to fully understand how the world works. They were following Marx in terms of capitalism. However, they believed that it had undergone dramatic changes.

The main point in the society was in the process of shifting from the economic aspect to cultural, wherein people were more likely to be controlled by the culture rather than the economy. In connection to their thinking of culture is the superstructure and base. Marx and critical theorists tended to think culture as a superstructure grown out of the economic base and reflects the interests of the ruling class that controls it.

Critical theorists were most concerned with the culture industry. It is because of the ability of the culture to spread through than that of work. Work only affects people while they are on the job, but the impact of culture is felt everyday, 24/7. Another thing is that culture works its way to people’s consciousness and altering the way they think, feel and act. Third is there is no control happening in culture unlike in work where you are being dominated.

Culture industry in the 1930s up to this day, has played a much more direct role in the maintenance of capitalism by turning more people into consumers. As mass consumer, people tend to buy products being advertised everywhere and spent more time in shopping. Time was not being used to think about and undertake social revolution. Being also a mass consumer, people tend to work as much as they could to afford things. In this case, working eats most of their time instead of thinking for revolution.

It is clear that culture is the major domination over people and not the economic system. Work became less important in people’s lives, making the culture and the consumption of it grown out.

Critical theorist saw a major problem with the modern technology. Key elements of today’s culture industry like television, computers and Internets are the result of technological advances. Rather than being controlled by the people, these technologies controlled people. However, the main argue here is the deployment and employment of technology in capitalism. Thus, the capitalists used technology to control people.

Herbert Marcuse, one of the critical theorist, saw a dialectical relationship between people and structures that they created. People should be fulfilling their needs and expressing their abilities as they create, employ and alter technologies. However, in capitalism, people create technologies to be used also against them. Capitalists used these technologies in order to control and exploit workers. Individual freedom and creativity gradually reduce into nothingness. As a result, people lose the capacity to think critically to the society that controls them. The answer to this problem of Marcuse is the creation of society in which people control technology and not the other way around.

Critical theorists tended to argue that increasing rationalization was the central problem rather than capitalism. In their view, increasing rationality tends to lead to technocratic thinking in which people are more concern with being efficient, with simply finding the best means to and end without reflecting on either the means or the end. However, reason was lost in the process which people assess the choice of means to ends in terms of ultimate human values such as justice, freedom and happiness. To critical thinkers, reason is the hope for humanity. The hope for the society was the creation of a society dominated by reason rather than technocratic thinking.

Another concept is knowledge industry where entities in society is concerned with knowledge production and dissemination. Universities and research institutions are intended to expand their influence over society. They foster technocratic thinking and to suppress reason. It became a factory of hordes of students.

From Fordism to Post-Fordism

Made by Henry Ford in the early 20^th century, Fordism refers to the system of mass production and consumption characteristic of highly developed economies during the 1940s-1960s. Under Fordism, mass consumption combined with mass production to produce sustained economic growth.

• The system of mass production was oriented to the production of homogeneous products.
• Fordist system relied on fixed technologies. More flexible technologies would lead to unwanted product variation.
• To complement fixed technologies, standardized work routines were created and imposed on workers. However, workers who follow a standard routine did not know how to deal with emergencies.
• Fordists system were oriented to the progressive increase of productivity: more goods and lower cost.
• Lead to the era of confrontation between big labor and the large corporations and many long and costly strikes.

 

REFERENCES:

LinkedIn SlideShare. (2016). Neo-Marxism History And Theory of IR. Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/Aidar312kg/neomarxism-history-and-theory-of-ir

Encyclopædia Britannica. (2015). Critical theory. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-theory

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2005). Critical Theory. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-theory/

Encyclopædia Britannica. (2018). Herbert Marcuse. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Herbert-Marcuse

Thorstein Bunde Veblen was an American economist and sociologist who lived from 1857 to 1929 and who sought to apply an evolutionary, dynamic approach to the study of economic institutions. He was interested in the relationship between the economy, society and culture. His concern throughout his career was with the conflict between business and industry. He differentiated the two that in industry, its main focus is the productivity, while business seek to limit output for the sake of profitability.

Business

Veblen saw a historic change in the nature of business and business leaders. Early business leaders have earned their income because they have part in the direct contribution in the production. On the other hand, today’s business leaders is just concerned with the financial matters and therefore, not really earning their income.

Money or profitability is what the business is all about. The leisure class who tends to occupy this position is more interested in ownership and acquisition. It is nonproductive, parasitic and exploitative because they have the control. They are not interested in production and workmanship.

Industry

Industry is all about the mechanized processes. An industrial orientation is more concern with the productivity that involves the workforce of the working class. Unfortunately, it is controlled by the business leaders that is more focused with the financial matters. The business leaders tend to destroy and sabotage the industrial system to keep prices and profits high. Without such obstructions, the productivity would drive prices and profits lower. The modern industrial system is so productive that it goes beyond to cover cost and to give returns to owners.

Conspicuous Consumption and Conspicuous Leisure

Veblen created his theory of relationship between social class and consumption. He believed that people made purchases to signal their economic status and accomplishments to others. Conspicuous consumption is the purchase of goods or services for the specific purpose of displaying one’s wealth. In connection to this is the conspicuous leisure. It is described how the leisure class used unnecessary expenditures on fancy clothes, home adornments and other commodities as symbols of status.

One example can be illustrated is driving a luxury car and ordinary car. Any of the two car provides a transport to a destination, but the use of a luxury car additionally draws attention to the richness of the driver. The benefit of conspicuous consumption can be situated within the idea that consumers derive “utility” from the consumption of goods. Veblen identified two distinct characteristics of goods as providing utility. The first is what he called the “serviceability” of the good—in other words, both luxury and ordinary cars are equally able to get to a given destination. The other one is what he called its “honorific” aspect. Driving a luxury car shows that the consumer can afford to drive an automobile that others may admire, where there is a visible evidence of wealth it provides.

Pecuniary Emulation

In Veblen’s conspicuous consumption and leisure, he discussed how the upper class purchased goods in displaying their wealth. Therefore, lower class tends to conspicuously consume or imitate the spending habits of the upper class in order to appear to be member of the upper class. They attempt to appear to have a higher status than they actually do.

 

REFERENCES:

The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed. (2018). Veblen, Thorstein. Retrieved from https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/social-sciences-and-law/economics-biographies/thorstein-veblen

Mill, On Liberty, Chapter 1 | Library of Economics and Liberty. Thorstein Veblen. Retrieved from https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bios/Veblen.html

Famous Economists. Economist Thorstein Veblen – Biography, Theories and Books. Retrieved from http://www.famouseconomists.net/thorstein-veblen

Encyclopædia Britannica. (2018). Thorstein Veblen. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Thorstein-Veblen

 

 

Georg Simmel was an early German sociologist that worked on studying the society and the development of the discipline of sociology. He worked on different concepts about social theory and, because of this, his writings continue to inspire. Talking about classical theorists in sociology, people tend to talk mostly about Marx, Durkheim and Weber, leaving Simmel out. But his works are important to complement the other three.

Social Forms

We often focus ourselves with the content of social interactions with others – within families, friends, and even in businesses. But, for Simmel, the task of the sociologist was less about looking at the contents that distinguish types of social interaction from one another and more about illuminating the shared social forms through which a variety of seemingly different interactions take place. An example for this is the relationship of domination and subordination. There is someone subordinated and someone who is empowered but it is still the same social form. Another example is when someone transmits love to someone else and someone transmits hate to someone else, an emotional exchange.

Simmel has similar argument at the level of people with different social types may be filled with various content as different individuals enter these social types.

Tragedy of Culture

Simmel argues that modern societies allow individuals express their own unique talents and interests, while at the same time leading individuals to a tragic form.

Simmel argues that the tragedy of culture comes about when the objective culture comes to dominate the subjective culture of the individual. What is meant by objective culture? Subjective culture? Objective culture involves those objects that people produce (art, philosophy, science and so on) that become part of culture. On the other hand, subjective or individual culture refers to the capacity of the individual to produce, absorb and control the elements of objective culture. In other words, the tragedy of culture occur when the individual’s will and self-development become submissive to the product of its own creativity.

How would that be possible? First, the absolute size of objective culture grows. Second, the number of different components of objective culture increases. And lastly, various elements of objective culture become intertwined in ever more powerful, self-contained worlds that are increasingly beyond the comprehension of the actors who created them.

In modern society, this occurs when new innovations or inventions take a life of their own outside of the creator and confront the creator as an autonomous force, this results in the submission of creator to its own creation.

Division of Labor

The division of labor that arises during the process of modernization allows people to become increasingly creative and innovative. As a result they begin to produce an abundance of cultural objects for consumption. Eventually these products become fetishized by society and therefore gain power that they do not inherently possess.

The individual is destined to be the loser in the confrontation (to grip away from objective culture on a daily basis). Worse, there is no end to this process and to be increasingly controlled by it.

 

REFERENCES:

ThoughtCo. Who Was Sociologist Georg Simmel?. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/georg-simmel-3026490

Encyclopædia Britannica. (2018). Georg Simmel. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Georg-Simmel

Social Theory Rewired. Tragedy of culture. Retrieved from http://routledgesoc.com/category/profile-tags/tragedy-culture

 

Maximilia Karl Emil Weber, also known as Max Weber, is a founding figure of the field of sociology. He was a very complex thinker who made many contributions to social thought, like Protestant Ethic. He was against the idea of Marx that culture and political system is related to economic aspect of society. He exclaimed that the formation of economy comes from culture. He looked on the subjective conscious of the society. To understand the society, according to Weber, people need to understand the actions they are told to do so.

There are four types of rationality according to Weber. First is practical rationality that deals with day to day experience and tasks and activities done in practical way. They provide an easy and quick way to solve problems. Second is theoretical rationality that understands the world around us deductively and inductively. People need to understand the world rather than doing action. Third is substantively rationality that involves actions directly and guided by values and morality. Lastly is the formal rationality in which the choice between right and wrong action is based on rules, laws and regulations.

Weber became interested in the rationalization of the economic system which is capitalism. He considered capitalism to be rational because of its emphasis on calculating things. He was interested how Protestantism helped the rise of capitalism. It is that Protestant Ethic Weber has come up. Calvanists, because of their belief in predestination, could not know whether they were going to hell or heaven or affect their fate. They believed that their major signs of salvation was success in business. With that, if their business is successful, they were about to go to heaven. As a result, they intend to save money and reinvest in business to be more successful.

Another system of ideas was developed because of the Protestant ethic which is the spirit of capitalism. People became motivated to become successful not because of greediness (which is the main point of capitalism to Marx) but because of the ethical system that emphasized economic success.

There is a clear relationship between Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. Because of the belief of Protestant ethic that whoever became successful, he/she will be saved. And because of that ethical system, people became motivated to be successful.

Confucianism and Hinduism failed to develop capitalism. Confucianism values the ability to be clever and witty. It also values being well-steeped in literature. They were not concerned in economy and its changes because it is uncertain to them. They were not used to change and what they want was to maintain the current situation. In Hinduism, because of the caste, Hindu gains merit for their next life. Salvation is achieved through following rules contrary to the Protestants.

The theme of rationalization runs through one of many other aspects of Weber’s work – authority. There are three bases of authority for Weber: tradition, charisma and rational legal. First is traditional authority that indicates the presence of a dominant personality. This leader is someone who depends on established tradition or order. While this leader is also a dominant personality, the prevailing order in society gives him the mandate to rule. This type of leadership, however, is reflective of everyday routine and conduct.

Second is charismatic authority that points to an individual who possesses certain traits that make a leader extraordinary. This type of leader is not only capable of but actually possesses the superior power of charisma to rally diverse and conflict-prone people behind him. His power comes from the massive trust and almost unbreakable faith people put in him.

Last, legal-rational authority is one that is grounded in clearly defined laws. The obedience of people is not based on the capacity of any leader but on the legitimacy and competence that procedures and laws bestow upon persons in authority. Contemporary society depends on this type of rationalization, as the complexities of its problems require the emergence of a bureaucracy that embodies order and systematization.

However, this forms exhibit a specific weakness or problem. In traditional authority, traditional leader may rely on or even exploit prevailing practices. Traditional authority may suffer from a lack of moral regularity in the creation of legal standards. Charismatic leadership can be problematic because it is somehow based on some form of a messianic promise of overhauling an unjust system. Legal-rational authority makes manifest the power of the bureaucracy over the individual. While order and systematization are desirable, the bureaucracy may not be able to fully address the problems and concerns of everyone, as what the development of nation-states today suggests.

 

REFERENCES:

CLCV 205 – Lecture 2 – The Dark Ages | Open Yale Courses. SOCY 151: Foundations of Modern Social Theory. Retrieved from https://oyc.yale.edu/sociology/socy-151/lecture-16

ThoughtCo. On Max Weber’s “The Protestant Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism”. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/the-protestant-ethic-and-the-spirit-of-capitalism-3026763

Inquirer Opinion Cybercrime Act Features and issues Comments. Max Weber’s 3 types of authority. Retrieved from https://opinion.inquirer.net/85293/max-webers-3-types-of-authority