Karl Marx and Weber

Choi, Sang Hyun History of Sociology Professor Denis Kim November 1, 2012 Karl Marx and Max weber on righteousness Which whiz came first, the Chicken or the Egg? A unanimous discrepancy in interpretation of righteousnesss exists amidst the two prominent thinkers, Marx and Weber, in that Marx power motto devotions as the opiate of the masses (Marx, 184342) meaning that religions justify trustrs bitter lives and assimilate them passive whereas Weber see religions as having power to bring close non just social but economical changes (Jong Seo, 2005231).On top of that, Marx call upd that the religion is a dependent variable located by the substructure- materialistic and economic conditions. Weber, in contrast, assumed that the religion played a fiber in enlightening or changing pecks thoughts and behaviors unconsciously, causing them to hatch a new way of living much(prenominal)(prenominal) as capitalism. These contrasts pull ahead from the fact that these two intel lectuals approached the religions from various perspectives.Most of Marxs reasoning reveals the characteristics of methodological holism while Weber focused to a greater extent on individuals and held on to the liking that individuals motives and philosophy argon the source of changes and revolutions- methodological individualism. To begin with, it is critical to read Marx and Webers sociological perspectives beforehand in order to clutch bag a comprehensive judgement with regard to the two thinkers papers on religion. I believe that Marx revea guide methodological holistic characteristics to a greater extent from his study rather than methodological individualism. The opposite goes with the Webers perspective toward federation.Marxs approach tries to put up that fact that in that location be unseen matters that are present such as relationships between individuals. The thing is that society enables itself to have control everywhere individuals and tries to g everypla cen them with the unseen things. It is clear how Marx was on the methodological holistic purview in un timely of his emphasis on economic determinism. Marx believed that society is self- sustained of two dominant structures-sub and super. He explained that the upper-super structure such as religions is determined by the substructure which is primary(prenominal)ly close to economic elements such as relation of production and force of production.Mark concluded that materials are the wholeness(a)s that bring about social changes (food turner, 200517). We fuel argue that his ideas were mainly centered on methodological holism because he put more emphasis on the single-valued function (power) of economy and substructure than individuals and superstructure. Under the given interpretation, religion has al nearly vigor to do with social or economic changes because it belongs to the super structure. Religion seems to be reduced to a mere dependent variable or spin-off caused by the substructure in accordance with Marx (M. Argyle & B. Beit-H al whizzahmi, 1975174-177).In contrast, methodological individualism was introduced as a methodological precept for the social sciences by Max Weber, most importantly in the first chapter of Economy and troupe (Weber, 1968 1922). It amounts to the claim that social phenomena must be explained by showing how they forget from individual actions, which in turn must be explained through with(predicate) author to the intentional states that motivate the individual actors. In separate words, it put up be described as the claim that explanations of macro social phenomena must be supplied with micro foundations, nonpareils that specify an action-theoretic mechanism (Alexander, 1987).With this approach, Weber was able to value individuals as their own and tried to decipher what constituted community in terms of intangible elements such as ideas, motives, values, and beliefs. What strikes is that he had a great opport unity to go through the fulfill of instruction of capitalism with the help of this approach. His most well-known and intuitive book, The Protestant ethic and the Spirit Capitalism, is a great culmination of his approach and shedded new light on the importance of ghostly and moral values, with providing remarkable insights on how homo abstract ideas and values back tooth affect the society in a massive way.These two diametric ways of making sense of society led them to conclude what religions could do in their contemporary societies. As express above, Marx perceived economic factors or issues to be central and primary rather than marginal. It was inevitable that he saw religions as being marginal and of lesser importance. In his contemporary society, workers-proletariats were tempered less than as they were supposed to be and exploited enormously. The workers had no filling but to succumb to the haves-bourgeoisies- order or demands with the floods of workers when there were a few jobs available for them.They were, as Marx reasoned, about to take action to take everyplace the capitalism in which they were subordinated. He asserted and anticipated that communism would take over the capitalisms place and nation would live in a society where alienation and private ownership are nowhere to be seen. It was lonesome(prenominal) possible with the combined power of proletariat. However, religion played a role in soothing the wrath of the exploited class and do it almost impossible to accumulate certain level of collective behavior. Religion acted as a refuge from a anguish life for the proletariat.There comes Marx view on religion that the religion was a refuge from a suffering life. It is famously quoted that Religion is the opiate of the masses (Marx, 184342). In other words, religion teaches quite a little to give up materialistic conditions and procrastinate worldly happiness and rewards to centerual world (Giddens, 2011580). Even though it is toug h to live in the society, one is encouraged that the post-life would be much promising according to Marxs view. battalion have an imaginary refugee to which they would escape from their harsh real life.They are more belike to succumb to the social pressures or injustice because it will be okay in the spiritual world. They would endure socially and morally wrong actions and stick with their life no matter how heavy(a) it is. As these mickle take ramify in ghostly activities or listen to the preaching, they are unconsciously reassert that their bitter lives efficiency be what they were supposed to be, which led to class-in-itself being unable to reach the next step-class-for-itself with class consciousness. As stated above, no-communist revolution would be accomplished in terms of religions impacts on the exploited.According to Marx, this process must be changed or stopped since it has a negative baffle on heaps awakening or realizing their real daub in which they are explo ited (Swatos, 1998499). Weber, on the other hand, pursued effects of how the polar spirit ethos in the contemporary western societies emerged and where the western the societies were heading in terms of religion. His initial interest was sparked by the fact that most of the extremely achieved and skilled superior workers are from Protestant background (Weber, 2006233). Weber considered that there was an apparent relationship etween certain religious affiliations (particularly Protestantism) and business success, and suggests that this association might indicate an elective affinity between the two. In his book, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit Capitalism, he asserted that there are two baring factors that contributed to the development of capitalism in western societies. First, Calvins doctrine of foreknowledge played a significant role in upbringing peoples ascetic attitude or way of life. According to Calvins doctrine, ones possibility (destination) of repurchase is beyond the reach of domain knowing.Not only the ordinary, but also the priests are excluded in the knowing process. Furthermore, homo are not able to change their pre-destined salvation acceptance or rejection. No one but God knows who will be redeemed. man are feeble before God and expect or hope to be chosen as one of the lucky ones. It is possible that we can conclude humans in that era were too hopeless and powerless to advance their lives with enthusiasm. But it isnt. The thing was that humans were not aware of their pre-destined salvation but can be aware of signs of salvation in the out of bounds of worldly success only with frugal and ascetic attitude.That is to say that they are justifying their material success and imposing responsibility at the same time (Jong Seo, 2005). Under the given circumstance, people are always in the spare-time activity of working hard, not wasting gold, and accumulation of wealthiness in order to know if they are to be redeemed or not. Even wi th excessive amount of money, they would not stop themselves from working hard and ascetic life because thats what they were striving for proof of salvation. Second, Calvins religious calling played an important role in making people set the attitude stated above.Every vocation is wanted and by all means worthy of Gods calling. The thing is that not only sacred priests but other menial workers are also valued and sacred under the Calvins religious calling. It encourages people to accept the idea that no matter what you do, you should make an effort in your job because its valuable, divine, and godly. Also, as people were more aware of the notion or values, they were more likely to be charge upted to their jobs and lives (Weber, 2006120). These two characteristics of protestant morality led to more accumulation of ealth and rational management and work ethics (Weber, 2006). This is noteworthy that even with the enormous capital, one is not tempted to taste his or her rewards whic h is highly unimaginable in modern societies. This goes further that these protestants participated in their casual and worldly activities with ascetic attitude which in turn boosted capitalism in western societies. In other words, protestants ethics, Weber argued, have a exacting diverge on building the spirit of capitalism.Although society has improved and true the way never witnessed before with firm establishment of capitalism, it is unlikely to find this kind of protestant ethics sustaining in the modern society because a row of inherited decorousty without the essence of liven and ethics indue the sons and daughters of the protestants with no responsibility, making them fat pigs rather than dissatisfied Socrates, figuratively speaking. rear end Wesley, the founder of Methodist church, was also concerned with the likeliness of earning more money with less religious spirit (Weber, 2006189).From my point of view, I personally believe that Webers idea on religion is more d esirable compared to that of Marx in explaining the modern society. First, I agree with Webers main argument on religion that religious (Protestant) ethics are one of core factors bringing out changes in our lives. This is because Protestant ethics such as diligent, hard-working, and ascetic are related to the idea of merit form which is, in our modern lives, believed to be the way for equality and middlingness. We live in a society where unfairness flourishes and hope to diminish whatever exists between the reality and the ideal world.The reason why this unfair world is justified is that we believe that the world values and approves those who try really hard in their field with diligence (Sang Jin, 20113). The protestant ethics, I believe, played a role in leading the meritocratic ideas to our lives. Those protestants proved the fact that people with hard-work and abstinence were surely able to achieve success in lives, and looked up to as worthy of praise. Its likely that peopl e have piecemeal believed that the society where these protestant people are successful is just and fair because they try harder than the majority of people.This leads to the idea of merit system through which humans can justify their world. In other words, by proving success with hard-work, protestant ethics paved the way for meritocracy. Second of all, the abstract religious spirits can play an important role in maintaining the society. The religions have a tendency to lead to peoples voluntary and active fellowship in social and political issues which is different from Marxs expectation. Marx believed that religion has an influence on making people submissive and obedient. However, we now see that religions are spread out massively to help out those who need attention, care, and assist.When one is involved in any activities in religion, they are more likely to act and behave than people with no religions. As they take part in the religious activities voluntarily, their communit y or religious area in bound to be more absolutely integrated because they have something in common religious spirit and altruistic mindset. We can infer from Durkheims study on suicide that those with religions have less likeliness to commit suicide than those without because they are more integrated and associated in society which leads to a more sustainable society (Durkheim, 19521897).Finally, despite the fact that the original spirit of capitalism might have been diminished or in decline, it already provided an image of religious people and acts as a criterion for those. virtually say that the religious or protestant ethics are already faded away, but its still true that we have a some take of image towards religious people that they would be more upright and ascetic than non-religious people. For example, when Koreans hang out nowadays, they often ask one another if they take up alcoholic beverage or not. And we usually take it for apt(p) that the people believing in God do not drink alcohol.Likewise, these people mainly Christian-Protestant are expected not to drink alcohol or do drugs. This is because we know by experiencing a bunch of these people that These guys are not (mostly) bad guys. Even if they do not possess the mindset as their ancestors did, the society already formed some sort of image toward these religious people throughout the history. Therefore, the society enables and enforces the religious people to act and behave in accordance with the protestant. In other words, their ancestors image still lives within us and affects our lives.Even though I believe that Webers idea on religion is more proper when it comes to explanations of modern world, it would be more credible and wise to make a leap with both of the great thinkers explanations. This is because these so-called sociologists seem to lag back the other in some field and some not. For example, Webers reasoning was not sufficient in explaining Eastern countries huge developmen t even with the religion- Confucianism which considered to be negative in capitalisms good (Weber, 2006243).And Marxs reasoning would require additional explanations of modern religions in that religions are diversified and playing roles as many. These two dominant thinkers ideas are not strange but supplementary to some extent because both of the arguments can replace and be replaced by the other (Giddens, 2011584). In conclusion, these great thinkers had different approaches on religion and elicited their unique conclusions based on their observations.Marx saw religions as the opiate of the masses and perceived it as a negative thing for humans freedom from alienation and revolutions through workers collective angers whereas Weber saw religions as somewhat positive influencer in that flourish of capitalism in western countries was based on protestant ethics which was the direct action of religion(Calvinism, to be exact). In their analysis of religions, they showed the ways they regard religions as somewhat dependent variables-Marx and somewhat independent variables-Weber (Jong Seo, 2005).Controversy exists over whether who provided more reasonable and relevant insights to our world because both of the reasoning has some weak points and strong points. However, I believe that Webers idea on religion is more suitable in order to explain the modern society due to, social maintenance, and religious criteria, and the rise of meritocracy. No matter what one says, we are not certain which one came first between the yellowish and the egg due to uncertainty. There is no absolute answer for this question.Marx and Webers observations of religions as dependent or independent variables are resonating of this never-solving causality dilemma. A circular cause and consequence like seeing religion as the starter and seeing religion as the solvent make us wonder the question of Which came first, X that cant come without Y, or Y that cant come without X? We would be tra pped in an undated process of logics and pursuant of definite answer. Maybe its not the answer that matters but the understanding in the process that matters.The understanding that the somewhat contradictory views can, in actuality, be used as a supplement to the other so that it can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of not just religion but society in general, which as learners of sociology should pursue. All in all, the comparison of Marx and Weber on religion tells us that there is no categorical answer but understanding through which we gain our own perspectives of life. Works Cited Amanda, Review on Marx and Weber on Religion http//web. grinnell. edu/courses/soc/f01/soc295-02/marx_weber. html Giddens Anthony, Sociology. ????? , 2011Jong Seo Kim, Sociology of Religion, ????? ??? , 2005 Marx Karl, Critique of Hegels Philosophy of Right, CambridgeUniversity Press, 1977 M. Argyle B. Beit-Hallahmi, The Social psychology of Religion, London Routledge Kegan Paul, 1975 San g Jin Jeon, ????? , ????? , 2011 Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy, definition, http//plato. stanford. edu/entries/methodological-individualism/ Swatos William H, Peter Kivisto, Encyclopedia of religion and society, Rowman Altamira, 1998 Turner Jonathan H. , Sociology. Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005 Weber Max, Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism, Ed, ??? , ?? , 2006