6
RELIGION AS A FORCE FOR SOCIAL CHANGE Weber

Weber religion

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

Page 1: Weber religion

RELIGION AS A FORCE FOR SOCIAL CHANGE

Weber

Page 2: Weber religion

Calvinism

Calvinists believe that those that are going to heaven have been chosen to do so since birth (predetermined) and this can’t be changed, so to counter this salvation anxiety, Calvinists believe that through hard work and asceticism they can then make themselves believe that they are going to heaven because they are doing so well through their calling and this makes them favoured by God

Page 3: Weber religion

Calvinism and Capitalism

Weber believed that this work ethic coupled with outside factors were what drove the development of Capitalism, these outside factors were

Page 4: Weber religion

Hinduism and Confucianism

Criticisms include that there are religions in Asia that are supported by the additional requirements, but do not lead to the development of Capitalism because of the religions focus on the spiritual over the material1. A certain level of technology2. A skilled and mobile workforce3. Rational modes of law and bureaucracy

Page 5: Weber religion

Marx’s ghost and other criticisms

Weber’s argument has been labelled as an argument with Marx’s ghost as while Marx saw economic and material factors as the driving force for change Weber believed that cultural factors are needed as well. Also not every country with a Calvinist population developed into a Capitalist country such as Scotland that had a high percentage of Calvinists but lacked the outside factors from Weber’s list that were also needed for Capitalism

Page 6: Weber religion

More criticism

Another argument against Marx was that Calvinism came after capitalism and was adopted by the bourgeoisie as a means of legitimising their power over the proletariat. Also that their proficiency in business was because of their exclusion from other areas of work similar to the experience of Jews in Eastern Europe although other minorities were excluded in the same way and didn’t develop similarly