Max Weber's Types of Rationality: Cornerstones for the …

[Pages:86]Max Weber's Types of Rationality: Cornerstones for the Analysis of Rationalization Processes in History Author(s): Stephen Kalberg Source: The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 85, No. 5 (Mar., 1980), pp. 1145-1179 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: Accessed: 15/12/2010 10:12 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Journal of Sociology.



Max Weber'sTypesof RationalityC: ornerstones fortheAnalysisof RationalizationProcesses in History'

StephenKalberg UniversitdTtiubingen

Rationalityhas been recognizedas perhaps the major themein Max Weber'soeuvre.The commentatorws ho have addressedthis themehave generallyconstrictedits polymorphoucsharacter.This articleinventorieWs eber'susage of "rationality"and "rationalization"in Economyand Societyand the CollectedEssays in the SociologyofReligion.Four typesofrationalityare identifieadnd comparedwithone another:practical,theoreticals,ubstantivea,nd formal. Only "ethical substantiverationality"introducesmethodical ways of life. All fourtypesbecomemanifestin a multiplicityof rationalizationprocessesorchestratedat all levels of societal and civilizationapl rocess.Long-termrationalizatiopnrocessesare seento be rootedin valuesratherthanin interestsT. he dominanceofpractical, theoreticala,nd formalrationalizationprocessesin modern Westernsocietiesimpliesimmenseconsequencesforthetypeof personlikelytolivein thesesocieties.

Although"rationality"and its diversemanifestationisn historicalrationalizationprocesseshave been universallyacknowledgedas a major, and perhapsthemajor,themein Max Weber'scorpus,onlya fewcommentatorshave endeavoredto investigatethis themeor to relate the varioustypesof rationalityto one another.The attemptsby Schluchter (Roth and Schluchter1979, pp. 14-15) and Weiss (1975, pp. 137-38) are plaguedby a commonshortcomingb:oth note "usages" or "dimensions" of rationalitythatcannotbe consistentlytracedback to thefrequentdiscussionosf"rationalitya"nd rationalizatiopnrocessesin Economy and Society(E&S) and theCollectedEssays in theSociologyof Religion

1 An earlier version of this article was presentedin September 1977 in Gottlieben, Switzerland,at a colloquiumentitled"Max Weber und die Dynamik der gesellschaftlichen Rationalisierung."A German version will appear in Seyfarthand Sprondel (1980). I would also like to expressmy deep gratitudeto Guy Oakes of Monmouth College; WinfriedBrugger,WinfriedGebhardt, Klaus Koziol, Gerd Schmaltz, and F. H. Tenbruck in Tiubingen; David Herr in New York; Toby Huff in Boston; Donald Levine in Chicago; Richard Munch in DUsseldorf; Karl-Heinz Nusser in Munich; GuentherRoth in Seattle; WolfgangSchluchterin Heidelberg; and Constans Seyfarthin Frankfurt.

English version ? 1980 by The Universityof Chicago Press. 0002-9602/80/85050006$02.70

AIS Volume85 Number5 1145

AmericanJournalof Sociology

(CESR). Moreovert,heirdefinitiondso notcoincidewithWeber'svarious historical-sociologicaanlalysesof the paths followedby rationalization processesin differenctivilizationsD. onald Levine's(1979) recentdiscussion of Weber'snotionof "rationality"avoids thesedifficultiebsy adheringlargelyto Weber'sterminologyy,ethe does not comprehensively discussthis concept,nor does he touchon theissue of the mannerin whichthe typesof rationalitycombineor struggleagainstone another in historyas separaterationalizatiopnrocesses.Furthermoreli,ke Ulrike Vogel's (1973) and AnnSwidler's(1973) expositionsL,evine'sdistinction betweenWeber'stypesof social action and his typesof rationalityis insufficientdliyfferentiated.

Many explorationsof Weber's understandingof "rationality"have failedto emphasizeits multivalenetmbodimentsT.his approachis most clearlyrepresentebdy theassertionthatrationalizationprocessesin Weber's corpus amountto nothingmore than a "disenchantmenotf the world,"2bureaucratizationo,r an increasinglack of freedomO. thercommentatorhsavediscussedrationalizatioans tantamounotnlyto an increasingpervasivenesosf themeans-end(zweckrational)typeof social action (Nelson 1973,p. 85; Munch1980). Stillotherauthorshave limitedtheir examinationosf Weber'snotionof "rationality"and itsmanifestationins historicalrationalizationprocessesto specificspheresof life,such as the religiousphere(Tenbruck1975).

Weberhimselfis largelyresponsibleforthe lack of claritythat surroundshis analysesof "rationality"and the interplayof multifaceted historicalrationalizationprocesses.His scatteredand fragmentediscussions of this themeare morelikelyto mystifythan to illuminate(e.g. [1946] 1958f,pp. 293-94 [266]; [1930] 1958a, pp. 26 [11-12], 77-78 [62]; 1968,pp. 30 [15], 85 [44], 424 [259], 809 [468], 333 [195-96]; 1951,p. 226 [512]; 1952,pp. 425-26,n. 1 [1-2]; see n. 2 regardingpage numbersin brackets)and,despiteits centralityh,e nowhereofferas succinctexplanationofthisthemeH. is contortedstyleofwritingalso hampers all attemptsto takean inventoryofhis majorusagesof "rationality"and ''rationalizationprocesses,"as does his frequentcarelessness:since the appropriatequalifyingadjectiveoftenfails to precede"rational"in his

2 This misinterpretatiornesultsin part fromthe frequenttranslationof Entzauberung as "disenchantment."Entzauberung-literally,"de-magification"-has a very specific significancefor Weber: it is one of the two major axes followed by rationalization processesin the arena of religion(1951, p. 226 [512]; all referencesto Weber's texts give the English translationfirst,followedin bracketsby the page numbersof the originalGerman; bibliographicinformationabout the latterappears in the list of references).It relatesparticularlyto religiousrationalizationprocessesin theWest, beginning with ancient Judaism,and characterizesespeciallythe transformationfrommedieval Catholicismto Calvinism."Disenchantment,"a far more generaltermthat conjures up images of the romanticist'syearningfor the Gemeinschaftand an earlier, "simpler"world,has not the slightestrelationshipto Weber's usage of Entzauberung.

1146

Weber'sTypesof Rationality

writingst,he studentof Weber is generallyleftwith a choice between concludingthat his usage is indeed unilinearand undertakingthe unappealingtask of systematicallyexaminingthe hundredsof passagesin whichthis termappears. Because of the varied translationsof RationalismusR, ationalitit,3and Rationalisierunga,s wellas relatedkeyterms in the numerousEnglisheditionsof Weber's writingst,he readerwho doesnothaveaccessto theGermantextsconfrontas hopelesssituation.

This articleexhaustivelysurveysWeber'susage of "rationality"and "rationalizationa"s thesetermsappearinhismajorcomparative-historicalsociologicawl orkswrittenafter1904: E&S and theCESR.4 The selection of thesewritingsr,atherthan the methodologicaolr politicalessays,has been determinedby anotheraim of this article: to reconstructa,t the purelyconceptualevel,Weber'svisionof a multiplicitoyf rationalization processesthatvariouslyconflictand coalescewithone anotherat all societal and civilizationalevels.5Because the discretetypesof rationality constituttehecornerstonefsortheserationalizatiopnrocessesa,n inventory of theirdefiningfeaturesand interrelationshiapsstheyappearin Weber's comparativesociologymustserveas the necessaryprerequisitfeorsuch a reconstructionB."eforescrutinizintghetypesof rationalityh,owever,a numberofpreliminaryissuesshouldbe dealt within orderto avoid unnecessaryconfusion.

I. GENERAL FEATURES OF WEBER'S TYPES OF RATIONALITY AND RATIONALIZATION

The conceptualstatusof Weber'sfourtypesof rationalityin relationto his fourtypesofsocial actionwillbe clarifiedin thissection,as well as

3 This and thepreceedingtermare used synonymouslyby Weber. They have been generally translatedas "rationality,"though occasionallyas "rationalism.""Rationality" as well as "irrationality"will be repeatedlyplaced in quotation marksin thisarticlein orderto emphasizethe exclusiveconcernhere with Weber's distinctiveusage of these terms.

4 This three-volumework includes The Religion of China, The Religion of India, AncientJudaism,and The ProtestantEthic and theSpirit of Capitalismas well as the "Author's Introduction."It also includes three essays printed in Gerth and Mills's From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (see Weber [1946] 1958c, 1958d, and 1958f): "The ProtestantSects and the Spiritof Capitalism,""The Religious Rejections of the World and Their Directions,"and "The Social Psychologyof the World Religions."

5 This article, therefore,does not investigateWeber's distinctionbetween "rational" and "empathic"understandingas it relatesto the processof interpretativuenderstanding. For a discussionof thisdistinctions,ee Weber 1968,pp. 5-14 [2-7]; Levine 1979, pp. 10-11; and Weiss 1975, pp. 48-50.

6 Whereas"rationality"and all "types of rationality"always refer,for Weber and in this article,to a condition,"rationalization"or "rationalizationprocess" refersto a developmentT. he "types" (Arten,Formen; see, e.g., [1946] 1958f,p. 293 [266]; [1930] 1958a,pp. 26 [12], 30 [15]) of rationalizationare all based on the typesof rationality.

1147

AmericanJournalof Sociology

twogeneralcharacteristicosf the typesof rationalityand of rationalizationprocesses:theiruniversalityand their"sphere-of-lifsep"ecificity.

The Typesof SocialActionand theTypesof Rationality

Weber'sfourfoldtypologyof social action-affectual,traditionalv, aluerational,and means-endrationalaction-refersto universalcapacitiesof Homo sapiens.Insteadof dependingfortheirexistenceon societal,cultural,or historicalconstellationst,hesetypesof social actionstand"outside of history"as anthropologicatlraitsof man.

Against19th-centurFyrenchanthropologyW, eberarguedthatmandid notacquirehis"rationalityw" iththeEnlightenmenatnd thatindividuals in all previousepochswerenot incapableof rationalaction.On thecontrary,even everydayactionsof "primitive"man could be subjectively means-endrational,as, forexample,whenspecificreligiousritualswere performewd iththeaim of receivingfavorsfroma god. In Weber'seyes, thispureexchangerelationshiaps it existedin sacrificeand prayer(1968, p. 424 [258-59]; [1922] 1973,pp. 432-38) was identicalin formto the modernbusinessman'csalculationof the mostefficienmt eansto acquire profitL.ikewise,the factthatthe values in premodernsocietiesdiverged widelyfrommodernvaluesdid not,forWeber,call intoquestionthebasic capacityof man to orienthis actionsrationallyon the basis of values. On the otherhand, traditionaland affectualaction werenot uprooted and sweptawayto thedegreethatmodernizatiomn ovementasdvanced.

Howeveruniversalthe fourtypesof social actionmaybe, Weberconfinedthe applicationof thistypologyto specificand delineatedactions. As a comparative-historicsaolciologist,however,he wished to examine "more"thansimplyfragmenteadctionorientationsr; egularitieasnd patternsof actionwereof fargreaterinterestto him.Patternscould occur at a pluralityof levelsof socioculturapl rocesses,fromthosemanifestin the dominantpaths followedby entirecivilizationsto othersthat characterizedlong-termhistoricadl evelopmentosr short-termsocietalmovements.Regularitiesof actionsurfacedas well withininstitutionso,rganizations,strata,classes,and groupsin all societies.The typologyof the typesof rationalitya, classificationthat mustbe siftedout of Weber's writingsi,s one of manyconceptualschemeshe utilizesto analyzesuch regularitieasnd patterns". Practical,""theoretical,"formal,"and "substantive"rationalityconstitutethistypologyT. he consciousregularities of actionthatall of thesetypesof rationalityintroduceserveto master (bekerrsckenf) ragmenteadnd disconnectedrealities.

Sincethesetypesof rationalityare anchoredin means-endrationaland

1148

Weber'sTypesof Rationality

value-rationaalction,7thepatternsof civilizationaalnd societalprocesses theyidentifyinvolvesimplyconsciousregularitieosf actionorientations on thepartofindividualsa8nd,insomecases,"waysoflife"(Lebensfuehrungen).9Like socioculturapl rocesses,ways of life-or consistent"attitudes"thatpenetratethe entireorganizationof life-divergewidelyin theextenttowhichtheyinvolvemethodicaalction([1946] 1958f,p. 293 [266]). Theirbroadrangeof diversitydependsultimatelyf,orWeber,on a multitudeof interactinigdeas,values,interestsa,nd economicp, olitical, sociological,and historicalfactors.Rationalizationprocessesof historic significancien societiesand in entirecivilizationshave oftenoriginated whena constellationof factorscrystallizedthatrewardedmethodicalrationalwaysof life.As will be notedbelow,Weberarguesthatprecisely thesewaysoflifewerebased on valuesratherthanon interests.

The Universalityof theTypes of Rationalityand of RationalizationProcesses

The typesofrationalityand thevariousrationalizatiopnrocessesare often discussedby Weberin referencteo Westerncivilization'ds istinctivme odernizationpath. This predominanotrientationis mostclearlyevidentin the "Author'sIntroduction"to the CESR. In this essay, as well as in the CESR as a whole,Weberintends,above all, to addresstheissue of whytheChineseI,ndian,and ancientNear East civilizationdsid notadopt thosetypesof rationalizationprocessesthat characterizethe EuropeanAmericancivilization.

AlthoughWeberorientedtheseinvestigationtso the questionwhy"rationalizedsocieties"arose onlyin the West,the typesof rationalityand

7 Theoreticalrationality,whichis rooted in cognitiveprocessesratherthan in action, is the only typeof rationalitynot based on eithermeans-endrationalor value-rational action. It can, however,influenceaction indirectlya,s is explainedbelow. The relation betweenthe typesof rationalityand the typesof social action is discussedfurtherin SectionIII below.

8 That individual action is, for Weber, the fundamental"atom" in all societal and civilizationalprocessesmust be kept in mind throughoutthis article. Even collective conceptsare understoodby Weber to be specifiablecommon action orientationsof individualsin groups (1968, pp. 4 [11, 8 [3], 19 [8-9]; [192211973,pp. 429, 439). Such social phenomenaas a businesscorporation,a neighborhood,a family,or feudalism are constitutedfromthe common subjective "meanings" given to them by groupings of individuals,as is even a bureaucraticstructureof dominationand a compulsory institution(Anstalt) such as the modernstate. Collective entitiesare not themselves capable of "acting"; on the contrary,they exist simplyas a consequence"ultimately of a certainkind of developmentof actual or possiblesocial actions of individualpersons" (1968, p. 14 [6-7]; emphasisin original,translationslightlyaltered).

9 It is impossibleto traceWeber'susage of Lebensfuehrungin the translationsI.t often appears, particularlyin The ProtestantEthic and the Spirit of Capitalism,as "conduct," thoughalso as "style of life," "type of attitude,"or simply "life."

1149

AmericanJournalof Sociology

rationalizatiopnrocessestakeshape,in greateror lesserdegreesu, niversally. The "Author'sIntroductioni"tselfprovidesthemostunequivocalevidence of thisuniversalityI.n referrintghereto the particulartypesof rationalityand rationalizatiopnrocessesthatappearedin Westerncivilization,Weberimpliesthatrationalizationa,lbeitoftenof a differenktind, takesplace innon-Westercnivilizationass well ([1930] 1958a,pp. 25-26 [11], 30 [15]). He furthefrrequentlnyotes,forexample,the"rationalism" ofancientJudaism(1968,pp. 610 [367], 618-19 [372]) andofConfucianism (1951, pp. 226-49 [512-36], 164 [452]; 1968,pp. 538-39 [326-27]) and the rationalizationof mysticalcontemplation([1930] 1958a, p. 26 [11]).

In an analysisof religiousrationalizationF,. H. Tenbruck(1975) has come to the same conclusionA. fterexaminingthe original1905 edition of Weber'sThe ProtestantEthic and theSpiritof Capitalism(PE) and his later"Author'sIntroduction,""The Social Psychologyof the World Religions,"and the"ReligiousRejectionsof theWorld,"Tenbruckargues thatthemostsignificantthematicdevelopmenhtereinvolvesa broadening of Weber'sunderstandinogf "rationality"and rationalizationprocesses (1975,pp. 669,677-79). In thefirsteditionofthePE, Weber'sinteresti,n keepingwiththe prevalentintellectuaclurrentsof his time,focusedexclusivelyon rationalizationin the West. By the timehe wrotethe later essays,howeverh, e had enlargedhis notionofrationalizationtouniversalhistoricaldimensionsthat included civilizationaldevelopmentsin the Orientas well (Nelson 1969,p. 6; 1974,p. 272; Parsons1937,pp. 567, 752; 1963,pp. xxxii-iii;Bendix 1965,pp. 11-12; Munch 1980; Levine 1979,pp. 8-9).

The Sphere-of-LifSepecificityof "Rationality"and "Rationalization"Processes

Weberdoes notemploytheconceptsof "rationalitya"nd "rationalization" in a globalmannerto refermerelyto a generalunfoldingof civilizations. Instead,qualitativelydifferenrtationalizationprocessesthat potentially advanceat theirown indigenousratestakeplace at varioussociocultural levelsand in differenlitfe-spherebs,othin thoserelatingto the"external organizationof theworld,"suchas therealmsof law,politics,economics, domination(Herrschaft),and knowledgea,nd in the "internal"spheres ofreligionand ethics.Rationalizationprocessesmaybe foundalso in the aestheticand eroticarenas.10

Weber'sconvictionthatrationalizationoccursin diversespheresof life

10"Arenas," "realms,"and "spheres"are used heresynonymousl(yLebensbereiche, LebenssphaereS).pheresoflife,suchas thosejustnoted,areoftenreferretdo by contemporarsyociologistass "institutionoarl ders."

1150

Weber'sTypesof Rationality

compelledhim to examinethe degreeto whicha singlerealmcouldbe designatedas the"carrier,"behindwhichall otherrationalizatiopnrocesses fellin lineto a greaterorlesserdegree.In posingthisquestionh, e wished primarilyto scrutinizethe Marxianemphasison the economicsphereas thesubstructurfeorall others.In thisregard,WeberfoundtheMarxian stresswanting:forhim,rationalizationprocessescan take place in each arenaindependentlfyromtheothersand at theirownrates.A "rational" formoflawmakingf,orexample,did not originatein thosecountriesthat firstintroducedmodernformsof capitalismI.nstead,it aroseand attained a highlyrationalizedformin ancientRome. It was taken over in the Catholiccountriesof southernEuropelongbeforetheonsetof industrializationin thatarea ratherthanby England,theearliestcountryto industrialize.Likewise,purely this-worldly"rational" philosophiesemerged earliestin France with the Enlightenmenrtatherthan in Englandor Holland whereeconomic"rationalism"had reachedits higheststages. Moreover,aftercomparingtheintensecapitalisticactivityin 14th-and 15th-centurFylorencewiththe economicbackwardnessof 18th-century PennsylvaniaW, eberconcludedthatmoderncapitalismalone could not have givenbirthto an "economicethic" ([1930] 1958a,pp. 74-77 [6062], 25 [11]). Thus,he came to doubtall thosetheoriesthatunderstood theadvanceof "rationalitya"s a unilinearevolutionaryprocessoccurring withequal intensityin all societalspheres.He thenbegan to investigate themannerin whichactionwas rationalizedin particulararenas.

These preliminarryemarkson thegeneralfeaturesof Weber'stypesof rationalityand rationalizationprocesseshave aimed only to providea looseframeworwkithinwhichtheseconceptscan be definedand examined fortheirinterrelationshipWs.eberhimselfp, articularlyin his laterwritings,repeatedlyadmonishedhis readersto attendto themultivocalitoyf his usage of "rationality"and "rationalization"([1946] 1958f,p. 293 [266]; 1968,p. 998 [576]; [1930] 1958a,pp. 26 [11-12], 77-78 [62]).

II. MAX WEBER'S TYPES OF RATIONALITY: PRACTICAL, THEORETICAL, SUBSTANTIVE,AND FORMAL

In surveyingthetypesof rationalityt,hissectionaims above all to demonstratethe polymorphoucsharacterof "rationality"in Weber'soeuvre. The Weberianaxiomthatverydifferenptatternsof actionand ways of lifemaybe "rational"willbe repeatedlyunderlined.

PracticalRationality

Weberdesignateseveryway oflifethatviewsand judgesworldlyactivity in relationto the individual'spurelypragmaticand egoisticinterestass practicalrational([1930] 1958a, p. 77 [62]). Instead of implyingpat-

1151

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download