>>In my first post, I wrote: "For Weber, so-called 'Europeans' were
>>'rational,' and so-called 'non-Europeans' were either 'irrational' or
>>less 'rational,' and he attributes the origin of capitalism to this
>>alleged difference: 'European rationality.' In Weber, one cannot but
>>see one of the founding fathers of what might be called cultural
>>racism." To me, cultural racism is different from but derivative of
>>what is called biological racism. Today's racism is mainly cultural
>>racism, I think, though via IQ debates, DNA obsessions, etc.,
>>biological racism is making a come-back of sorts.
>>
>
>I'm afraid Kelly's cruticisms of you are on target, Yoshie. Weber
>sees two main kings of rationality, Zweckrationalitaet, or
>instrumental rationality, which he ascribes to _Protestantism,_ not
>Europeans, and Wertrationalitaet, value rationality, which he
>ascribes to everybody else; the idea is that Protestantism promoted
>a sort of means-end calculation important for the development of
>capitalist institutions.
I fear that both you & Kelley neglected to read Max Weber's own "Author's Introduction" to _The Protestant Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism_, among other things. Or you have read it, but it didn't strike you as _noteworthy_, because you two subscribe to the same line of thinking as Weber's & believe that the "West" existed _even_ in the days of ancient Athens, the Roman republic & empire, etc. It is clear that, in Weber's eyes, there was _already_ the distinction between the "West" & the "non-West," the "Occident" & the "Orient," dating back _even_ to ancient Athens. This type of casual assimilation of ancient Athens to the "West" -- with the _suppression_ of the knowledge of political, economic, & cultural nexues _prior to_ the origin of capitalism & the rise of the "West" -- could not have occurred before the rise of the 19th century revisionist thought, as Martin Bernal, Andre Gunder Frank, etc. argue.
In contrast to Weber, I'm saying that the idea of the "West" and the ensemble of social relations that make this unit seem "natural & eternal" are the creations of capitalism. Therefore, Thucydides, Aristotle, etc. were not "of the West."
Edward Said doesn't understand how to historicize the "West" either, so he anachronistically argues that Aeschylus was caught in "Orientalism." Impossible.
I'm afraid that you & Kelley don't know what I'm talking about when I say Said commits the same intellectual error as Weber's, much less managing to disagree with me.
It's the same type of error as saying that Socrates was "gay." Anachronism, in a word.
Yoshie