Legitimidad, dominación y derecho en la teoría sociológica del Estado de Max Weber

En este artículo se analizan de forma conceptual y crítica las relaciones entre legitimidad, dominación y derecho en el complejo aparato conceptual de la sociológica de Max Weber. El problema de investigación que guía toda la reflexión consiste en determinar criterios que permitan distinguir un poder legítimo de un poder ilegítimo. Se muestra que la concepción del Estado moderno, ligado a la racionalidad formal instrumental del derecho positivo, llevó a Weber a concluir que la legitimidad de una dominación depende de la legalidad, la eficacia y la continuidad. Se concluye que por razones metodológicas Weber renuncia a valoraciones normativas, lo que le impide dar una respuesta satisfactoria al problema de la legitimidad. Se afirma que sólo desde una racionalidad práctica o con arreglo a valores se puede establecer una relación entre legitimidad y justicia, dándole un apropiado tratamiento al asunto. 

Max Weber in the thought of Edward Shils (1910–1995) and Ernest Gellner (1925–1995): the paradox of two Weberian approaches to the understanding of nations and nationalism?

This article traces the paradoxical impact of Weber's oeuvre on two major scholars of nationalism, Ernest Gellner and Edward Shils. Both these scholars died in 1995, leaving behind a rich corpus of writings on the nation and nationalism, much of which was inspired by Max Weber. The paradox is that although neither scholar accepted Weber's sceptical attitude to the concept of ‘nation’, they both used his other major concepts, such as ‘rationality’, ‘disenchantment’, ‘unintended consequences’, the ‘ethic of responsibility’ and ‘charisma’, in their very analyses of the nation and nationalism. And they both saw, each in his own way, the nation and nationalism as constitutive elements of modern societies. However, the paradox ceases being a paradox if one sees the integration, by Shils and Gellner, of concepts of the nation and of nationalism in the analysis of modernity, as a development of Weber's ideas.

Krönika : Max Weber – myt och verklighet. Religion, kärlek, pengar och politik

Sociologisk Forsknings digitala arkiv

Entre a vida e a obra: música e religião em Max Weber

This study aims to analyze the relationship between music and religion in Max Weber s life and work, in a perspective that combines its intellectual productions in Sociology, in religion and art subfields. We developed a research in order to revisit the concept of rationalization, present in Weberian thought, and also to discuss how music and religion, as distinct spheres of life, star conflicts and alliances and build particular attitudes of action in the world, having the appearance of a rationality based on calculation in a central position to understand the construction of musical technique in the West and the autonomy of aesthetic enjoyment from religious enjoyment, previously linked. Regarding the procedure analysis, we built a symbolic cartography, according to Santos (2000), from selected works of Max Weber, as Religious rejections in the world and their directions (1982), among others. With the activity, we identified similarities and differences between music and religion in the author thoughts. We consider that the studied dimensions are important in Weberian analysis of the constitution of modern society and its cultural system, showing two distinct approaches to the issue of rationalization in the West

Ciência e Pedagogia na Obra de Max Weber

Weber ao pensar a questão da ação pedagógica e da pesquisa científica o faz de maneira que indica a especificidade da cultura moderna ocidental, onde a instauração do processo de racionalização tornou-se um elemento de importância significativa. Assim, o novo significado adquirido pelo professor quanto pela ciência, na modernidade, está assentado na idéia de que o conhecimento estaria destituído da capacidade de instaurar uma ‘concepção de mundo’ com validade universal. Se aceitamos a idéia de que a ciência e a pedagogia deveria fornecer sentido ao nosso cotidiano, para o nosso bem viver, a descrição de Weber certamente nos contraria. O empreendimento científico e a ação pedagógica, com o objetivo de buscar a verdade e a compreensão dos fatos, estariam distante da possibilidade de instaurar um conhecimento com validade objetiva universal.

Desencantamento do mundo e ética na ação pedagógica: reflexões a partir de Max Weber

This article has a theoretical character and presents some of Weber's ideas, with emphasis on those that can supply elements to reflect on the current state of education, more particularly based on his understanding of modernity. Disenchantment of the world is the key concept in his sociology, and is taken as the basis for a reflection about the meaning that science and the teacher can have today. A classic author, Weber's interpretation of the modern world brings to our consideration a variety of themes that influence markedly the thinking and practice of contemporary culture by its concern with understanding human actions and values. By studying the Western process of rationalization, he initiates debates in science, in ethics and, correspondingly, in education, allowing us to expand our comprehension of the meaning, significance, and role of our actions towards knowledge and teaching. The main object of education is to offer students contents that stimulate the freedom of thought. For that, the teacher needs to adopt a non-partisan ethics in the classroom, presenting contents unbiased by her/his political opinions and, if failing to do so, having the honesty to explain what she/he is doing. It is therefore of the utmost importance that the teacher should keep a neutral position, so that in and out of the classroom the students may reflect and question what they see, experiment and decide upon. Only then the conduct of the teacher will be consistent with the process of rationalization of our culture.

Was hat Max Weber mit Kātib Čelebi zu tun? Ein Annäherungsversuch an Gottfried Hagen

This article responds to Gottfried Hagen’s extensive review (see Der Islam 2/2013) of my book Islamische Verantwortungsethik im 17. Jahrhundert. Ein weberianisches Verständnis der Handlungsvorstellungen Kātib Čelebis (1609– 1657). Whilst I benefitted greatly from some of Hagen’s critical remarks and his- torical elucidations, his review not only misstates crucial passages of my book but also largely disregards its main objective, which is to develop a systematic model for understanding Kātib Čelebi’s ethical stance. Besides reiterating cru- cial arguments ignored and rectifying central aspects misrepresented in Hagen’s review, I here ask how the more fundamental misunderstandings – exceeding differences in theoretical positions or empirical observations – between the au- thor’s intentions and the reviewer’s reception may be explained. Gottfried Hagen’s historiographical perspective on Kātib Čelebi diverges from my sociological take on the same subject matter to the extent that both perspectives are struggling to enter into dialogue. Such dialogue, however, remains highly desirable so as to complement a historical reconstruction of Kātib Čelebi’s life and times with a systematic, theoretically grounded understanding of his views.

Karl Gentner als Max, Rollenbild, in: Carl Maria von Weber: Der Freischütz

Signatur des Originals: S 36/F03880

Karl Gentner als Max, Rollenbild, in: Carl Maria von Weber: Der Freischütz

Signatur des Originals: S 36/F03894