>>> kwalker2 at gte.net 12/05/00 07:11PM >>>
weber's attitude toward marx was, in General Economic History, critically
respectful. The book begins and ends by addressing marx's work. he says,
for example, about Engels-Bebel that "although it is untenable in
detail..taken as a whole, a valuable contribution to the solution of the
problem. here again is the old truth exemplified that an ingenious error
is more fruitful for science than stupid accuracy."
(((((((((((
CB: I'd like to hear more about Weber. How exactly does Weber see the solution of the problem more clearly ? (Engels-Bebel on what , the origin of the state ?). Unlike you, I only read what was assigned in my social anthro class on Weber.
weber asked about the "preconditions" needed for the rise of capitalism. he didn't ask how capitalism worked, but how a proto capitalism came about in some places and not others. he anticipated many of Wallerstein's major arguments as well.
Weber follows Marx in this, except for two components. Both argued that capitalism requires a pool of formally free but economically propertyless labor; the sale of factors of production on the market; and the concentration of factors of prod in the hands of entrepreneurs.
Where weber departs, and this is a highly important point for understanding contemporary capitalism, is on the development of rational, calculable technologies and methods and rules for the social organization of work and the economy.
((((((((((((
CB: Doesn't this come in in Marxism in the theory of science becoming more and more a direct force of production ? And then Marx and Engels discuss technology so much , some accuse them of technological determinism. Doesn't seem that Marx and Engels miss the rational and calculable about technologies nor the organization of work. See Marx on manufacture, cooperation and mechanization in Vol. I of _Capital_.
Not that Weber doesn't , and you would know. But do M and E really miss anything in this area ?
The other thing is that M and E demonstrate the rationality and irrationality of all this, the contradictoriness.
((((((((((
marx's discussions are focused on primitive accumulation and revolution.
Weber goes on to develop an analysis of the various ways in which material and financial means were appropriated. Weber rejects the idea that there must be a specific accumulation of surplus for a capitalist take off.
if contemporary marxists are increasingly interested in the role of the state in the rise of capitalism, then Weber was among the first to pursue this line of research.
(((((((((((((
CB: What does Weber say about the Marxist theory of the state and capitalism ?
(((((((((
weber, contrary to your repeated assertions, wasn't an idealist. a methodological individualist in terms of some questions, yes, but that's not the same thing as idealism.
(((((((((((
CB: Anyway, sounds like you have the info on Weber.