Weber the Protestant Ethic and Capitalism.
There have been many attempts between the C17 and C20 to identify the criterion of
rationality that distinguishes western and other societies and cultures. There have been
a number of different responses to the problem. Evans Pritchard in studying the
Azande considered that rationality was not specific to the civilized mind, but that the
primitive mind did not accept the scientific notions that would enable them to
distinguish between the real and the unreal, they had no overall criteria of rationality.
He considered scientific criteria of rationality as independent of other systems of
belief and as consequently dominant. Winch saw no independent criteria of what is
rational and considered rationality to be determined within a system of beliefs and
that there is no independent concept of rationality.
Weber rejects both explanations. He attempts to steer a middle way.
(Weber’s theories of religion are central to his sociology and why he thinks about the
modernity of the west. His protestant ethic thesis is part of his attempt to explain the
emergence and uniqueness of the west)
Weber believes we can talk objectively about rationality. To do so we need only to
look at actions and beliefs throughout history and see if they can be described as
satisfactory (in either a thin or broad sense) or not. Weber identifies different kinds of
rationality, all of which are ideal types and are categories of beliefs and actions used
to explain the world, and all of which are objective in the sense that they attempt
explanations of people’s actions. At the same time he also argues that rationality is
historical in character, he historicises rationality seeing it as a phenomenon that is
both cause and effect of the organisation of society, one that feeds back into society in
order to change it.
But Weber does not provide a simple formal description of this process. He argues
that it must be explained in the context of society and its institutions. These are linked
to ideas of morality, religion, economic organisation, social structure and the political
system – particularly the structure of political authority that a society establishes.
These are all important in telling us about the nature of rationality and about how we
interpret these systems. The distinction between civilized society and other societies is
not simply that between rational and irrational modes of thought. The West has been
subject to a process of rationalization that accounts for its distinctive modernity. This
process involves increasing secularization, the decreasing influence of religious
practice and the breakdown of traditional methods of social and political authority
(Weber saw the French revolution as most important in determining these changes).
These traditional forms of control are replaced with the creation of a rational legal
form of authority which is impersonal and located within the power of the modern
state. It is an impersonal legal entity that brings with it the impersonal control of life
through the bureaucratisation of the state. It leads to the emergence of a capitalist
system of production.
This process of rationalisation is not necessarily rational, it is the description of a
social transformation that takes place behind the backs of the people, it is not
consciously rational. It explains the trajectory of Western development as an
unconscious movement.
Weber produced “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism” in 1905. In it he
described the outstanding feature of western modern capitalism as “economic
rationalism”, and in this he occupied similar territory to that of Marx, but unlike
Marxism, Weber does not relate this to technical development, he argues that
capitalism has arisen not because of technology but because of religion. The central
issue is an exercise in knowing the right kind of history to adopt. The wrong kind is
monocausal as in Marx idea of technical development, which Weber agrees is
important but ignores that there are others which are equally if not more significant,
such as religion, ideology, social factors. There is no single cause and it is therefore
certain that Weber did not ascribe the rise of capitalism to Protestantism alone.
The Protestant Ethic has an elective affinity with capitalism. They fit nicely together.
Capitalism has existed throughout history through private ownership, control and
exchange, but these were not rational economic systems. There was no systematic
rationalism in the way that capitalism exists at present. For this to occur Weber
argued that three conditions needed to be present
1. the regular re-investment of profits, the systematic accumulation of capital
over time
2. A system of wage labour, implying a set of disciplined workers
3. A rational system of accounting which develops alongside the modern
capitalist economy.
From these it can be seen that Weber viewed capitalism as a social practice that
requires certain conventions of rationality. But where do these conventions come
from? Weber saw them as characteristic of religion in early modern Europe, and
in particular within Protestantism. Christianity in general was geared towards the
accumulation of capital as a consequence of Christian asceticism. Christianity is
essentially a this worldly religion where salvation depends on the struggle with
sin that we are engaged on in this world, in contrast with eastern religions which
are other worldly and dependant on spiritual contemplation and little agreement
with this world at large. Weber argues that it is this difference that explains why
there was no similar rise of capitalism in India and China, because there were no
religious presuppositions and no struggle within this world.
Capitalism in the modern form did not emerge in Europe until around 1600. Why
the wait? Weber attributes the rise of capitalism at this time to the religious
upheavals in Europe at this time especially the Reformation and the rise of
Protestantism. It was this that created an environment suitable for the development
of modern capitalism. The precepts of Calvinism demonstrate the close affinity
between religion and capital accumulation; the Puritans dislike of outward
displays of wealth, that money was a dirty word where only the damned had
money and prosperity. Weber suggests it is the psychological character of
Puritanism is the basis for the motivations that capitalism needs in individuals. He
looked at the writings of the Puritan Benjamin Franklin. His economic thoughts
celebrate penny pinching common sense interspersed with reminders that this is a
moral and religious duty to maintain financial probity (parable of the talents).
Earning money in the modern economic order is the result of a calling or vocation.
The idea of vocation is essential to Weber’s argument. The vocation is a gift from
God. One must live up to a calling and not stray from the path. It is a single
minded pursuit. It does not cause capitalism but the affinity between this and the
single minded approach to the accumulation of capital necessary for capitalism is
distinctive to Protestantism and is not present in any other religion, it explains the
emergence of capitalism in the late C16 as a result of the emergence of
Protestantism and the protestant ethic
Lutheranism saw salvation as based on faith alone, that one should live according
to God’s law. Calling was seen as a duty imposed in line with God’s word and the
requirement for brotherly love. Monks were seen as selfish, they lived isolated
lives and were therefore derelict of the duty to God and the need for
demonstration of love for ones brothers. Lutherans were hostile to the
accumulation of money. Calvinists are more important to Weber because they take
root in more diverse places and because the central aspect of their dogma is the
doctrine of predestination. That some are already determined as elect/saved while
others are damned and there is no way to know or change it. The psychological
motivation would suggest that people would do whatever they liked as it has no
bearing on whether they go to heaven or hell. For Weber however the idea of
predestination worked alongside that of a calling – only the elect were given a
calling and the idea of predestination re-enforces this idea in that only those not
elected would stray from the path. Adoption of the protestant ethic therefore
worked as a sign of grace (being saved) the desire to show that one is fulfilling
their calling/vocation by demonstration rather than by emotion or outward show,
which puritans disavowed. Pessimistic individualism was likely to be interpreted
as a sign of sin and brought on the distrust of others.
There were many social references within this idea of capitalism. A necessary
precondition for western capitalism was the accumulation of wealth. This led to
distrust and the need for enforceable contracts which implies the need for a
powerful agency (the State) to enforce them.
The doctrine of proof; that by fulfilling a vocation one supplied proof of salvation
was a psychological pre-condition for the development of capitalism as a rational
system. Protestantism was seen as an important causal factor in the rise of
capitalism. It provided a psychological grounding for individuals within the
system of production. The religious content could then be discarded within the
capitalist society but the form and ethic that underlie capitalism remains – the
single minded pursuit of the accumulation of wealth.
Weber was not arguing that this was the most important cause of in the emergence
of western modern capitalism, he acknowledges a range of factors which together
explain it’s unique trajectory.