Max Weber Studies最新文献

{"title":"Otto Neurath's Distorted Reception of Weber's Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism","authors":"Ulrich Arnswald","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.a906834","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.a906834","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Otto Neurath probably never read Max Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism , but only perceived it through J.B. Kraus's book Scholasticism, Puritanism, and Capitalism . For Kraus, as a Jesuit, it was important to take a clear position in the conflict between Protestants and Catholics. The goal of his argument was to downplay and limit the importance of Protestantism to modern capitalism. He therefore hardly addresses Weber's particular argumentation. Neurath, in turn, presumably relied on Kraus in order to call upon a Jesuit as a key witness for Marxism. This as well as Neurath's well-known tendency for polemics made him follow Kraus, who with his criticism of Weber by means of Marx wanted to establish, as Neurath called it, a 'Marxism of a Jesuit' as a third way. Kraus's criticism triggered Neurath's misconception that Weber's writing should be understood as an anti-thesis to Marx. Surprisingly, he never realized how closely Weber's approach in the empirically based study corresponded with his own methodological approach of an empirical sociology.","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135806347","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"List of Contributors","authors":"","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.a906830","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.a906830","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"346 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135806346","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Planned Introduction to the Abriß der universalen Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte Mit- und Nachschriften 1919–1920 in the Max Weber Gesamtausgabe (Sections 1-6)","authors":"Bertram Schefold, Joachim Schröder","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.a906832","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.a906832","url":null,"abstract":"Planned Introduction to the Abriß der universalen Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte Mit- und Nachschriften 1919–1920 in the Max Weber Gesamtausgabe (Sections 1-6) Bertram Schefold (bio) and Joachim Schröder Translated by M.S. Whimster Preliminary Note 2023: In 2005, the editors of the Max Weber Gesamtausgabe (MWG) commissioned me to edit Max Weber's Abriß der universalen Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte. However, when the preparatory work for it was essentially completed, they did not accept the draft of the introduction. Since then I have been asked for it several times and, subsequently, the Abriß had appeared as volume III/6 of the MWG (edited by Wolfgang Schluchter in collaboration with Joachim Schröder). I wish to thank the editors of the journal Zyklos for publishing it; also to thank the journal Max Weber Studies for their translation.1 Nothing has been changed in the text, apart from the correction of typing errors, but the notes have been brought up to date with the help of Mr. Joachim Schröder; also the references to Weber's works then unpublished in MWG have now been updated. Mr. Schröder also compiled a bibliography based on the information provided in the footnotes, which has now been added. I would like to thank Mr. Schröder for his renewed help. The orthography of the text was based on the rules in force at the time of the draft. The preface added at that time is included for general explanation and for the sake of acknowledgements; for the Editorial Report, reference can be made to MWG III/6. Foreword This volume of the Max Weber-Gesamtausgabe contains the Wirtschaftsgeschichte, subtitled Abriß der universalen Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte [End Page 141] (Outline of Universal Social and Economic History), as edited by Siegmund Hellmann and Melchior Palyi from the unpublished legacy of his writings (Nachlaß). Weber's notes from which he gave the lectures and the colleague's notes on which Hellmann and Palyi originally relied have been lost. But the text of 1923, with its glossary of explanations, is here accompanied by a lecture transcript in its entirety and excerpts from a second one, and these make it possible to check the fidelity to the spoken word to a certain extent by comparison with the book edition. The Editorial Report provides information on the handling of these sources and some of the results of the comparison. The Introduction seeks to present the significance of the Outline of Universal Social and Economic History (henceforwards: Economic History) for Weber's later work and, using his transcribed but not yet published lectures on theoretical economics (Nationalökonomie), deals in particular with Weber as an economist from a dogma-historical perspective. The Düsseldorf office of the MWG provided substantial support for the editing work. First and foremost, I would like to thank Mr. Joachim Schröder for his reliable help in preparing this edition; Ms. Isabel Hartmann prepared the extensive bibliography, Mr. Richa","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135806349","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Narratives of Disenchantment and Secularization: Critiquing Max Weber's Idea of Modernity ed. by Robert A Yelle and Lorenz Trein (review)","authors":"","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.a906835","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.a906835","url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: Narratives of Disenchantment and Secularization: Critiquing Max Weber's Idea of Modernity ed. by Robert A Yelle and Lorenz Trein Larry Ray Robert A Yelle and Lorenz Trein, eds., Narratives of Disenchantment and Secularization: Critiquing Max Weber's Idea of Modernity (London: Bloomsbury, 2022), vii + 262 pp. (pbk). ISBN 9781350327757. £26.09. This is a collection of eight chapters plus the editors' introduction that arise from a conference in 2017 at Munich's Ludwig Maximilian University on the nature of secular modernity. The contributions address a range of questions about the meaning of Weber's 'disenchantment of the world', the problem of modernity, what alternative accounts of modernization have emerged, whether there was a breach with an 'enchanted' world, whether disenchantment is itself a myth, and the place of religion in the modern world. These are critical questions for understanding Weber's analysis and our conceptions of modernity. The papers are erudite, written by internationally acknowledged specialists and succinctly argued. It is good to see an edited collection that is thematic, where all the contributions address a core set of questions, although this also means that there is some repetition among the chapters. Further, the discussions here of secularism and disenchantment, although they tend to be Christo-centric, generally acknowledge the indeterminacy of the process for Weber, envisaging a linear trend over thousands of years from the Hebrew Bible through the Reformation to secular modernity (2). The brevity of the chapters, even though they manage to cover a good amount of ground, mean that tantalizing questions are often raised but not answered. This review enters into discussion on some of the key issues raised. The question of temporal rupture arises in a number of contributions. Trein (72) asks what is the significance of the past if 'one's present is thoroughly disenchanted' and proceeds to ask whether this implies a temporal rupture between enchantment and modernity? This leads into a fascinating genealogical discussion of the question of temporality as both a self-description of modernity and mode of theorizing it, though the chapter ends somewhat provocatively on the question, 'So what is modernity?'. Temporality is central to the concept of rationalization and [End Page 238] brings into play issues of diachronic and synchronic analysis. It might be true to say, as Jason Josephson-Storm does, that the Protestants did not doubt the existence of a spirit world and that witches were burned in New England, indicating that enchantment remained very much a part of the Reformation. Hans Kippenberg similarly points out that disenchantment must be distinguished from rationalization, and that the latter for Weber did not at all preclude the formation of modern esotericism (30). But rationalization was proposed as a process of long durée that could take unforeseen turns, which was presaged as a central theme of t","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135806345","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Methodology from the Standpoint of Experience: A Comparison of Max Weber, Heinrich Rickert and John Stuart Mill","authors":"Margaret Moussa","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.a906833","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.a906833","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: This paper interprets Weber's Rickertian theory of science as methodology articulated from the standpoint of experience. It thereby questions the view that Weber's methodology reflects a sympathy with neo-Kantian transcendental idealism. The first section explains the Baden School's distinction between transcendental argument and the explanation of events. The second traces Rickert's articulation of this distinction as a demarcation between epistemology and methodology. The third section examines Rickert's claim that his methodology is compatible with a consistent empiricism. The fourth section interprets differences between Rickert's and Weber's methodologies as indications of Weber's commitment to the standpoint of experience. Addressing three misconceptions of empiricism prevalent in Weber scholarship, the final section briefly compares Rickert's and Weber's methodologies with that of John Stuart Mill. Given that Rickert's influence on Weber is well documented we focus mainly on Rickert's methodology. Weber's arguments are considered in depth only where they significantly differ from Rickert's.","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135806348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Max Weber's Sociology of Civilizations: A Reconstruction by Stephen Kalberg (review)","authors":"","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.a906836","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.a906836","url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: Max Weber's Sociology of Civilizations: A Reconstruction by Stephen Kalberg Gregor Fitzi Stephen Kalberg, Max Weber's Sociology of Civilizations: A Reconstruction (Abingdon: Routledge, 2021), 535 pp. (pbk). ISBN 9780367497286. £27.99. As is the case for every 'classical author', the history of Weber's reception has its twists and turns. This should lead to a re-evaluation of the very concept of the 'classics,' at least within sociological theory. At different stages of the twentieth century, Simmel, Troeltsch, and Weber experienced a rediscovery of their works thanks to the financial engagement of German scientific institutions and academies. They were thus able to rise from the partial or complete oblivion to which they had been condemned since the mid 1920s. (Durkheim, in contrast, remains the last 'classic of sociology' without a complete works' edition.) Starting in the 1950s, Weber's historical influence has been characterized by successive waves of rediscovery and critique: among many others, one only needs to think of his reception by Parsons, Schutz, Lazarsfeld, Winckelmann, Mommsen, Tenbruck, Hennis, Lepsius, and Schluchter. In this context, Weber's historical-sociological research has often been contraposed to the systematic foundation of sociology (for example by Tenbruck) as well as to his 'political thought' (ideal-typically through Mommsen). In Germany, different groups of scholars thus gathered around Weber 'the historian of religion', Weber the 'founding father of sociology', or in critical gesture against 'Weber the nationalist political thinker'. These conflict lines have historical roots in the long durée of German academic schools that few remember. It is interesting to note that it was Hans Freyer who in 1930 sanctioned the preference of the new-to-be established folkish sociology for a 'science of reality', one that should be inspired in a very particular way by Weber's historical-sociological method. According to Freyer, Weber was to become the mentor of a historicist-existentialist sociology suited to the political project of the 'revolution from the right'. Weber's systematic sociology, on the other hand, ought instead be rejected, according to Freyer, because it was too close to Simmel's 'humanistic sociology', against which the nascent zeitgeist of the 1930s held many reservations if not resentments. This attitude was unconsciously transmitted over the [End Page 243] years and often moulded the pros and contras of Weber's reception after 1945. Placed before the cyclopean enterprise of establishing a critical-historical edition of Weber's works, the Max Weber Gesamtausgabe (1984–2020), the controversies over Weber's oeuvre ended in a compromise that in some ways aligned with the deconstructive zeitgeist of the 1980s. Weber's texts, whether published at the date of his death, ready for publication, or still in manuscript form, were to appear in the edition 'in the state in which they were available', without ","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135806350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Max Webers Sprache. Neue Einblicke in das Gesamtwerk by Edith Hanke (review)","authors":"Barbara Thériault","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.0008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.0008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126901687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The New Neo-Weberian State","authors":"W. Drechsler","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.0007","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The new Neo-Weberian State is the contemporary, the current iteration of Weberian Public Administration—practically, theoretically, and normatively. Geert Bouckaert’s updates convincingly show that both the Neo-Weberian State itself and original Weberian PA possess the resources to address contemporary questions both of the scholarly-theoretical development of Public Administration and the associated ethical challenges. In order to illustrate this, the present essay discusses first the various permutations of Weberianism and their relation to each other; then addresses the relationship between the Neo-Weberian State and the New Public Management; and finally deals with the connection of Weberian Public Administration in all of its forms with good Public Administration.","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132026262","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Will the Neo-Weberian State be a Model for Re-reforming the Japanese Civil Service?: Some Thoughts on ‘Max Weber and the Neo-Weberian State’","authors":"Hiroko SHIMADA Logie","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.0004","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The serial changes in the Japanese civil service are outlined: from a strong hierarchical service after 1945, to one obedient to the prime minister and his office, to a renewed call for impartiality and documents. The overall effect of all these changes have been to weaken the capacity of the civil service in respect to needs and expectations of society. The Neo-Weberian State will soon be published in translation and be able to guide the next changes in the Japanese civil service.","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134107145","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The neo-Weberian state: From ideal type model to reality?","authors":"G. Bouckaert","doi":"10.1353/max.2023.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.0002","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Public sector reforms have been a feature of past decades. Many of these reforms reacted against hierarchy and bureaucracy to shift to markets and networks. Next to New Public Management (NPM) and New Public Governance (NPG), the neo-Weberian state (NWS) also remained a crucial ideal type, certainly for the Western European practice which is embedded in Weberian public administration (PA). A theoretical and empirical question is whether NWS is sustainable and resilient in re-inventing and re-appraising ‘bureaucracy’ in the 21st century. This contribution claims that initially there was an empirical observation, certainly in continental Europe, of neo-Weberian public administration derived from the dynamics of public sector reforms in the second half of the 20th century. It was then ‘upgraded’ as an NWS ideal type model for theoretical reasons. NWS is a hierarchy-driven system within a hierarchy-market-network space. This NWS (based and driven by hierarchy) then moved to one of the normative reform models.It is also claimed and assumed that NWS, contrary to NPM (market-driven) and NPG (network-driven), will ensure the three core functions of a ‘whole of government’ strategy within a ‘whole of society’ context: inclusive and equitable service delivery, resilient crises governance, and effective innovation for government and society.","PeriodicalId":103306,"journal":{"name":"Max Weber Studies","volume":"120 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122216955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}