Max Weber’s “Value Polytheism”: Contexts, Origin, Logical-methodological Foundations
https://doi.org/10.22394/2074-0492-2020-4-68-106
EDN: QYVVAF
Abstract
Weber's concept of "vocation" in science implies "anti-monumentalism”: research can always be continued, and the results obtained can be used in 69 various ways. The scientist cannot be completely aware of the final impact of their work, so they are faced with a paradox of consequences. This paradox is based on value polytheism, a concept put forward by Weber. There are two ideas central to polytheism: first, one must recognize the internal logic of value spheres and, second, one must consider their fundamental incommensurability. But how does this idea emerge in Weber's theory? Interpretations of value polytheism as a "fact” of a cultural situation and as the logical foundation of science do not allow one to answer the question of its origin. The conceptual bridge is found in Weber's sociology of religion. Tenbruck's, Schluchter's, and Hennis's models are examined to identify variations of value polytheism. However, their macro-orientation does not demonstrate the internal structure and functioning of polytheism. The present paper explicates the logical-methodological foundations of Weber's scientific programme to clarify these points. Primarily, it investigates the problem of the consequences of an action carried out in a "vocation” mode and the boundaries of "adequate” causal explanations as presented in Weber's works. It makes it possible to consider Weber's value polytheism and concepts associated with it not as value metaphysics or unreasonable axioms, but as a methodologically based conceptual apparatus.
About the Author
Ilya V. Presnyakov
Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
MA in Sociology (University of Manchester), Lecturer at
Lomonosov Moscow State University (MSU)
References
1. Anter A. (2011) Max Weber’s Concept of Nature and the Ambivalence of Modernity.
2. Max Weber Studies, 11 (2): 217-229.
3. Bendix R. (1998) Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait, London: Routledge.
4. Bendix R. (1965) Max Weber’s Sociology Today. International Social Science Journal, 7
5. (1): 9-22.
6. Blum F.H. (1944) Max Weber’s Postulate of “Freedom” from Value Judgments. American Journal of Sociology, 50 (1): 46-52.
7. Bruun H.H. (2007) Science, Values and Politics in Max Weber’s Methodology, Aldershot:
8. Ashgate Publishing Limited.
9. Bruun H.H. (2010) The Incompatibility of Values and The Importance of Consequences: Max Weber and The Kantian Legacy. The Philosophical Forum, 41 (1-2): 51-67.
10. Bruun H.H. (2001) Weber On Rickert: From Value Relation to Ideal Type. Max Weber
11. Studies, 1 (2): 138-160.
12. Drysdale J. (1996) How are Social-Scientific Concepts Formed? A Reconstruction of
13. Max Weber’s Concept Formation. Sociological Theory, 14 (1): 71-88.
14. Eden R. (1983) Bad Conscience for a Nietzschean Age: Weber’s Calling for Science. The
15. Review of Politics, 45 (3): 366-392.
16. Eden R. (2006) Weber and Nietzsche: Questioning the Liberation of Social Science
17. from Historicism. W.J. Mommsen, J. Osterhammel (eds) Max Weber and his Contemporaries, Sydney: Allen & Unwin: 405-421.
18. Eden R. (1987) Why Wasn’t Weber a Nihilist? K.L. Deutsch, W. Soffer (eds) The Crisis
19. of Liberal Democracy: A Straussian Perspective, New York: State University of New York:
20. -242.
21. Fuller S. (2020) What Does It Mean to Hear the Call of Science? Listening to Max
22. Weber Now. Social Epistemology, 34 (2): 105-116.
23. Gaaze K. (2019) Max Weber’s Theory of Causality: An Examination on the Resistance
24. to Post-Truth. Russian Sociological Review, 18 (2): 41-61.
25. Hennis W. (1983) Max Weber’s ‘Central Question’. Economy and Society, 12 (2): 135-180.
26. Hennis W. (2006) Personality and LifeOrders: Max Weber’s Theme. L. Scott, S. Whimster (eds) Max Weber, Rationality and Modernity, New York: Routledge: 52-74.
27. Hindess B. (2006) Rationality and the Characterization of Modern Society. L. Scott,
28. S. Whimster (eds) Max Weber, Rationality and Modernity, New York: Routledge: 137-153.
29. Kalberg S. (1990) The Rationalization of Action in Max Weber’s Sociology of Religion.
30. Sociological Theory, 8 (1): 58-84.
31. Lassman P. (2005) Pluralism without Illusions. Ethics & Politics, 7 (2): 1-12.
32. Lassman P., Velody I. (1989) Max Weber on Science, Disenchantment and the Search
33. for Meaning. P. Lassman, I. Velody, H. Martins (eds) Max Weber’s ‘Science as a vocation’,
34. London: Unwin Hyman: 159-204.
35. Munch P. (1975) “Sense” and “Intention” in Max Weber’s Theory of Social Action.
36. Sociological Inquiry, 45 (4): 59-65.
37. Oakes G. (2003) Max Weber on Value Rationality and Value Spheres. Journal of Classical Sociology, 3 (1): 27-45.
38. Oakes G. (2001) The Antinomy of Values: Weber, Tolstoy and the Limits of Scientific
39. Rationality. Journal of Classical Sociology, 1 (2): 195-211.
40. Oakes G. (1988) Weber and Rickert. Concept Formation in the Cultural Sciences, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
41. Parsons T. (1965) Evaluation and Objectivity in Social Science: an Interpretation of
42. Max Weber’s Contribution. International Social Science Journal, 7 (1): 46-63.
43. Portis E.B. (1978) Max Weber’s Theory of Personality. SociologicalInquiry, 48 (2): 113-120.
44. Rickert H. (1989) Max Weber’s View of Science. P. Lassman, I. Velody, H. Martins (eds).
45. Max Weber’s ‘Science as a vocation’, London: Unwin Hyman: 159-204.
46. Riesebrodt M. (1980) Ideen, Interessen, Rationalisierung: krirische Anmerkungen
47. zu F.H. TenbrucksInterpretation des Werkes Max Webers. Kölner Ztchr. Für Soziologie
48. und Sozialpsychologie, 32 (1): 111-129.
49. Roth G., Schluchter W. (1984) Max Weber’s Vision of History, Berkley: University of
50. California Press.
51. Scaff L.A. (1984) Weber before Weberian Sociology. The British Journal of Sociology, 35
52. (2): 190-215.
53. Shapin S. (2019) Weber’s Science as a Vocation: A moment in the history of “is” and
54. “ought”. Journal of Classical Sociology, 19 (3): 290-307.
55. Simey T.S. (1966) Max Weber: Man of Affairs or Theoretical Sociologist. The Sociological
56. Review, 14 (3): 303-327.
57. Tenbruck F.H. (1974) Max Weber and the Sociology of Science: A Case Reopened.
58. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 3 (3): 312-320.
59. Treitschke V.H. (1916) Politics. Vol.1, New York: The Macmillan Company.
60. Turner S. (1990) Weber and His Philosophers. International Journal of Politics, Culture,
61. and Society, 3 (4): 539-553.
62. Turner S.P., Factor R.A. (2006) Max Weber and Dispute Over Reason and Value. A Study of
63. Philosophy, Ethics and Politics, New York: Routledge.
64. Turner S., Factor R. (1981) Objective Possibility and Adequate Causation in Weber’s
65. Methodological Writings. Sociological Review, 29 (1): 5-28.
66. Wagner G., Zipprian H. (1986) The Problem of Reference in Max Weber’s Theory of
67. Causal Explanation. Human Studies, 9 (1): 21-42.
68. Weber M. (1994) Between Two Laws. P. Lassman, R. Speirs (eds) Weber. Political Writings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 75-79.
69. Weber M. (2020) Charisma and Disenchantment. The Vocation Lectures, New York: New
70. York Review of Books.
71. Weber M. (2012a) Roscher and Knies and the Logical Problems of Historical Economics. H.H. Bruun, S. Whimster (eds) Max Weber. Collected Methodological Writings, New
72. York: Routledge: 3-94.
73. Weber M. (2012b) Rudolf Stammler’s “Overcoming” of the Materialist Conception of
74. History. H.H. Bruun, S. Whimster (eds) Max Weber. Collected Methodological Writings,
75. New York: Routledge: 185-226.
Review
For citations:
Presnyakov I.V. Max Weber’s “Value Polytheism”: Contexts, Origin, Logical-methodological Foundations. Sociology of Power. 2020;32(4):68-106. https://doi.org/10.22394/2074-0492-2020-4-68-106. EDN: QYVVAF
Views:
5
Email this article 