Max Weber: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 тра 2024
- Max Weber serves as sociology's founding members with the "Protestant Ethic" being one of it's foundational texts. But, it's also much more than just sociology, Weber contends with and remolds much of the humanities and philosophy of the past. Here I hope to sum up his thesis within the "Protestant Ethic" but also expand upon it's consequence within contemporary philosophy and society.
Massive thanks to @SkipIntroYT for helping me on the quotes!
This channel is primarily funded by you. If this channel is something you enjoy, supporting keeps it alive. You'll receive early access to videos, exclusive content, discord access, editing tutorials, and more! / epochphilosophy
Same exact perks if you prefer to support via the UA-cam member section:
/ @epochphilosophy
If you want to support the channel for free, use the amazon affiliate link, this helps us IMMENSELY: amzn.to/32hdeQB
Socials:
Twitter► / epochphilosophy
Instagram► / epochphilosophy
I appreciate that you establish the social-material implications and the historical context of the text instead of just an overview of what the text directly states. I often find myself having to pause reading books or listening to lectures so I can fill in the gaps in knowledge left by the people teaching this stuff. You’re highly effective at communicating the substance of a thinker’s thought!
Great work!
I would like to note that Weber’s “asterisk” to historical materialism seems to ignore (at least not pay sufficient attention to) Marx’s Hegelian roots, or the logical structure of Marx’s works and concepts. Their conceptions of ideology seem to differ mainly in the application, or lack of the application, of the dialectic. For Hegel, and then for Marx, ideology is historically-specific in the many aspects of its form, the Hegelian/Marxist history of ideology up to the point of their own respective analyses on how society progresses is in terms of the Aufheben, or dialectic. For both Marx and Hegel, this ‘identifying spirit’ is in a process of aufheben, of realization, of actualization; it transcends (and preserves certain,,, more significant,,) cultural stamps within history so long as the contradictions present within ideology are reconcilable (reconcilable here having a contemporary meaning, essentially so long as society is capable of striving towards the ideals which are supposed to define the end of history. To Marx, those of the Frankfurt school, and to Baudrillard himself, as students of Hegel and of materialism, radical changes in the base of society entails a more gradual shift towards a “cultural logic” befitting society’s social and economic character. A major part of Marx’s “flipping on its head” of Hegel’s dialectic was to emphasize materially observable contradictions in both the base and superstructure, accepting the implication of the dialectic, that is ‘a constant transfer of information and series of adaptations with historical precedent’, where it is not an absolute path of human history based in the dialectical relationship between ideals, but rather a tendency amongst humanity to know itself in terms of its dialectical relationship to reality and itself, and thus a tendency to engage in struggle when conditions for survival necessitate it; hence material social forces being the driving force of history and class struggle being the contemporary model for viewing ideology within the marxist school of thought/action.
I have not read Weber, so this comment is based on the content of your video plus what I’ve read in Marx, Engels, Feuerbach, Lenin, Mao, Kojève, Hegel, Fromm, etc etc,, pretty much all of his contemporaries, so keep that in mind while engaging with the substance of this comment! Again I’d like to say you have a wondrous way about you when it comes to teaching basics of philosophy; I particularly enjoyed the Hope and Capitalist Realism videos! Keep up the good work!
I'm a Sociology student in Portugal and when I was studying Weber I was shocked that I had never heard of him until then, especially considering his connection with Marxist and Capitalist ideas. Really apreciated this video, thanks!
portugal carrega
@@mafalda9812Carrega o féretro do império carcomido que outrora já teve só se for.
YouTuga 🇵🇹🇵🇹🇵🇹💪💪💪
You might also want take a look at Robert K. Merton's 'Science, Technology and Society in 17th-Century England', also referred to as 'Merton Thesis'. It's quite similar to Weber's work, with the main difference that the focus is not on the realm of economics, but on the emergence of empirical (natural) sciences in Early Modern Times - especially in the Protestant regions of North-Western Europe. In contrast to Weber, Merton's work is (at least here in Germany) not so well known.
I studied sociology, I find Weber very brave, inteligent of diverse areas such as philosophy, sociology, histroy economics and Psychology very ineresting human being.
*EDIT: I want to clarify at 6:30, as it has caused some confusion, and a slight misreading on my behalf. Calvin is a believer in predestination, specifically 'double predestination'. Which introduces the dimension that god actively (rather than passively) sends subjects to hell. Thus, to Weber, spurring an anxiety that made was partially to blame for the Protestant Ethic. Something I glossed over was Weber argued that this new "work ethic" was worldly evidence of being among the elect (people going to Heaven) in the world. So, in a way, a status thing. That said, later throughout the history this evolved into something that negated predestination in favor of a worldly will towards Heaven. This is after Calvin.
Hopefully this clears some stuff up and thanks for some people for commenting, as it seems I even misread some of this. (German writers, man.)
german writers indeed
how does this channel have so few views? I always learn something or gain a new perspective when I watch your videos
Thanks so much!
Signed.
I'm in my Soc 101 class and struggling with the old wording of the paper. After watching this I can actually understand what I'm reading. Thank you! I know I need to adapt to reading classic literature but I believe your explanation can help me make necessary connections. Thanks again.
Ive missed you on my feed. Thank you for this.
always amazed by your work. I can't pay for it through patreon or anything but I think I speak for many, when I say that I always, value, like and share it.
I don't know how interested you would be on making content about Max Stirner, but I'll leave my suggestion here, just in case.
This was an amazing presentation! Thank you , beautiful, effective and informative!
as a student of administrative sciences which Weber's work is essential too, I appreciate learning more about him from leftist perspective
Great video summary of one of sociology's classics!
Great video, as always. I haven't read Weber, but I definitely agree that a one-sided materialism (or idealism) is not productive. I've been looking for someone who threads the needle between both approaches, so I should definitely read this book. Your point about the sociological change and a new, moralised outlook on wealth is a good one. In Australia there's a great political sociologist called Judith Brett who wrote a series of books analysing the right-side of Australian politics. She basically argues that the Australian middle class, being overwhelming Protestant, viewed work and savings in a quasi-religious way. To be thrifty was a sign of good moral character. This attitude gets applied to government spending: governments ought to save and exercise restraint, just as a good family would. Interesting stuff.
Exactly how Weber describes the Calvinist work/life philosophy.
This is incredible work
Great essay!
Dope. Dope to the max!
Thank you, this was a wonderful watch!! This was a wonderful explanation of Weber's book. I came across it when reading Marshall Berman's 'All That is Solid' many years ago. I think Weber is a wonderful companion to Marx as his book explains the spiritual origins of modern capitalism. I created whole project out of Weber's idea of 'The Iron Cage', which Berman highlights in his book. I later found out that the term 'cage' was actually a mistranslation from German to English and more accurately it should be cloak and not cage.
Excellent Summary
this was great, a more complete/precise introduction to weber's work than you get in a lot of anglophone intro to sociology textbooks. wonder what you make of georg simmel? if weber is neglected or caricatured outside 'critical theory' circles, simmel's work is virtually ignored.
Thanks! Your point likely stands though. I have maybe heard Simmel's name muttered once!
Your work is so wonderfully produced. My first encounter with Max Weber was his definition of the state in his 1919 Politics As A Vocation, which has been bastardized into shorthand forms and misinterpreted. Notably misused by American libertarians who purposefully leave out his conceptions of legitimization for their own propagandic purposes of demonizing anything that is monopolistic in the face of their free market ideology. Understanding Weber helped me to realize how pseudo-intellectual the American libertarian movement is. His deeper conceptions of legitimization have helped me comprehend other notions of political thought. I'm glad you also recognize him as a highly important thinker who's not nearly talked about as much as he should be. I found your work by looking up Zizek, which has been very illuminating. Thank you again for your highly polished material, I will remember about your Patreon for when I am not so economically anxious.
Politics As A Vocation is among his best work! Would love to cover that at some point.
Thanks so much for the kind comment.
Why are libertarians the focus of so much scrutiny in academia? No appeals to emotion please.
@@AdolfStalin Probably because it's such a basic ideology, and I don't mean that fallaciously; they pretty much think capitalism can do no wrong, and government is the bastion of evil. It's a very simple good/ bad paradigm with very little nuance. Take for instance the Weberian definition of a State; "a human community that (successfully) monopolizes the legitimate use of physical force within a defined territory"... Libertarians usually seek to just call it "a monopoly on force within a defined area" but they specifically leave out the _descriptive_ view of legitimacy because that interferes with libertarians _normative_ views of the state's legitimacy. I think libertarians would benefit from understanding why people legitimize the state and then start deconstructing those archetypes, but they rather just focus on the words 'monoply' and 'force'- rather simplistic if you ask me.
When examining their economic thought, they have a lot of presumptions that just fall outside of our modern Overton window because we recognize the basic need for controlling externalities, public goods, information asymmetries, among other things the "free market" fails at. It's pretty easy to see that corporations won't regulate themselves and internalize negative externalities, for instance, because they're inherently incentivized to maximize profit which often leads to negative externalities.... I guess libertarians just assume that market forces are going to make people include externalities, even though the whole concept is 'external' to the market forces. I've seen them selectively talk about externalities, but none of them actually make a thorough argument with good examples of how no regulation is best (At best they point to bad regulations, but that doesn't mean good regulations aren't possible). Looking at econ 101 graphs is a great way to start out but if that's the way one keeps thinking for the rest of their life... That's a problem. That why most are laughed at, imho, because everyone else moved on to macro econ.
amazing amazing. thank you kindly for your time.
At around 11:00 the guy in the right is not Durkheim, but Emile Zola.
After marx only Weber I really admired...His all. theories are so profound and still relevent his idealtype work as measuring rod for Sociologist ❤❤
Thanks!
Thank you for helping this channel! We all appreciate it!
Thanks a ton dude!
Does anyone have a PDF of the book The Emergence of Post-modernity at the Intersection of Liberalism, Capitalism, and Secularism by Matthew McManus for free?
Weber grooves.
Cheers mate
Your videos are what got me into philosophy, I never thought it could be so interesting. Thanks to you I found out about Mark Fisher - I'm reading "Ghosts Of My Life" and it's a great read. Thank you for making those videos and for enhancing my perspective of the everyday world around us!
Thanks so much. These comments do mean the world.
7:15 , calvinist must make up for this new found free will within the material world . I don't understand, in just the previous few minutes it mentioned the calvinist believed in predestination, how is that compatible with finding free will in the material world ?
I'm glad I'm not the only one who had this problem. I've been confused by this for years now but this video did not help.
Glad to see you got control of your channel back. Your channel is a shining star of theory. To those who hijacked this channel I hope your next shit is a hedgehog.
Wait, at 6:27, when you talk about predestination, you say that Calvinists believe that salvation is "not only in God's hands but in our own" and that they believe there's something to be done in the material world to ensure safe passage into the afterlife. Calvinists do not believe this, as proven by the quote you provided 10 seconds earlier in the video. At 7:09 you say that "this contrasts traditional typical belief that God predetermines our fate for us", but Catholics were the ones posing that "good works" are just as important as faith to ensure passage into the afterlife. Calvinism, and Protestantism as a whole, believe in "sola gratia", which posits that salvation is given by God's grace alone, and not something you earn by the merits of your work in the material world.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but you have that whole part backwards, and your explanation of the origin of the protestant work ethic doesn't make sense. I'm not trying to insult or disrespect your work though, just wanted to provide some constructive criticism.
Looks like I did hiccup on this reading, tbh. Thanks for this comment. I am definitely not a religious scholar lol. For double predestination, it still stands (although )I could have worded this better), aside from the misreading. In essence, double predestination holds that God actively predestines some people for salvation and others for damnation. This is in contrast to a more general view of predestination, which might assert that God predestines some to salvation but simply "passes over" the rest, allowing them to follow their own sinful inclinations to their ultimate end (damnation), without actively predestining them to that fate.
Double predestination adds another dimension that Weber theorizes that caused an anxiety that helped spur a "work ethic" seen in modern society. I should have clarified this more.
Yeah this video is very good.
I don’t know if i’m misunderstanding, but free will is not a new understanding through Calvinism, it’s more so the opposite, the doctrine has always been that we are saved through our own actions but Calvin said the opposite and that God predetermined the salvation of all men.
Someone correct me if i’m not understanding something.
@7:06 how does the doctrine of double predestination contrast the belief that God predetermines our fate for us? I would say it enforces that belief and eliminates human free will.
Exactly what I was thinking.
Hey, just thought I'd get in a request while waiting - Do Wittgenstein please!!. He's criminally under-represented on UA-cam and in academia too 😢.
I second that!
Doesn't serve the purpose of propagating vested ideologies
Thirded. Although that’s one hell of an undertaking, philosophical investigations is still being grappled with in many ways in epistemology.
Noted.
Though, to be fair the terms "base" and "superstructure" were never intended to be as dualistic as they are often portrayed. Simply put, the superstructure is also material. To claim that it is a pure epiphenomenon of the base or somehow can only have a conservative function would require some sort of mental gymnastics that distinguish it from the "truly material" realm of technology and production; mental gymnastics that again, sadly, many Marxists accomplish.
Not to mention that it was Marx's life project to craft theory that could act as a "material", historical force.
do you have a certain flow of direction in the topics and personalities you spotlight or you are open to anything that stimulates thought
It is forgotten what Martin Luther had said regarding witches, the Catholic church and Reason under other ones, and what happened next when he failed to converts Jews, and with Calvinism, it generates the manifest destiny of the British colonies in the US, on the question about what to do to the Indian tribes, they were salvages that can not be saved and "the only good Indian, is the dead indian"
There is certainly a fervent colonialist ethos embedded in a lot of (especially American) protestantism. Weber did an essay on the various American Protestant sects that I really enjoyed.
Matter of fact I did an exclusive episode on that.
For the algorithm
Great video, thanks!
Hey, that's what I'm here for! Thanks for watching and the comment!
The material and the spiritual are two sides of the same coin. They feed and influence each other, but cannot exist without the other
I don't really support your kinda leftist worldview, but this channel is a true gem when it comes to socio-philosophical knowledge. If I ever get out of my student's poverty I will definitely support you on patreon.
The Reformation was an important development towards atheizing humanity. The early Protestant and Reformed Christians were overwhelmingly bourgeois people who in effect fired the Pope and then acted entrepreneurially by assuming the Pope's role over their own spiritual lives. With the success of economic liberalism and the spread of business thinking beyond the economy and into the culture over the last few centuries, now people are talking about being the CEO's of their own lives, and that is an implicitly atheistic model.
How are people calling themselves the Ceo's of their own lives an "implicitly atheistic mode"
You’re misrepresenting humanism as atheistic. Such a lazy and intellectually dishonest religious trope.
I agree, and I'd just add that work prevents a societal fall, or return to the state which predated work, which would be a state which comprised of more resultant deaths. For me, the Protestants of Martin Luther represented the literate labors of the day, knowing and perhaps better appreciating, distinction between life and death. I've developed the motto, Opus est Vivet, and I'll share it to be the civlization's and use a different one for my self, but it does explain you reason to do and what to do. A civilization based off the motto ought to compel people to indeed work, because for the laws which govern all life, it is one of a few aspects all forms of life have in common with one another, and the cessation of work means death for anything which is alive.
Weber was a brilliant thinker, and reading him is always a pleasure, but all this subject is outdated. Data shows that Weber core theory was wrong, with many Catholic European areas (as Bavaria, Belgium, Austria and North Italy) overperformed several Protestant ones. Germany, the favourite Weber's example of his theory , was 44% Catholic at the time. It seems Weber equated certain national bonanzas with a religious identity, but he was wrong.
Btw, "Weber" pronunciation is like "Beeba".
Do you have any sources/citations that positively debunk Weber’s ideas/conclusions?
Am I being anal by pointing out that it's not 'locust' but 'locus' 😅?
BUXBE.
Very important book, it is a surprise to me that it is not very well-known at all.
Historically interesting
This is cute
stupid idea about marxism. Marxism is based on a much more flexible idea of ideologies.
wait i thought this was the elon musk tesla channel, why am i subscribed to a philosophy channel, i wanted bitcoin news!!??11111
You've been tricked. This philosophy thing is all a ploy to get you to donate to my Bitcoin wallet.
protestantism is based
No
@@generaljackripper4360 cathocope
Based on what?
No. Get out pro-Evangelical Protestant stan.
@@MrRrusiiiimagine being so emotionally stunted that you believe cope is a genuine insult
The overwhelming majority of the working class is completely opposed to the Marxism of this series of UA-cam videos.