Summary
Weber observes that according to the occupational statistics of countries of
mixed religious composition, business leaders and owners, as well as the higher
skilled laborers and personnel, are overwhelmingly Protestant. This fact
crosses lines of nationality. Weber observes that this could be partly
explained by historical circumstances, such as the fact that richer districts
tended to convert to Protestantism. This, however, leads to the question of
why, during the Protestant Reformation, the districts that were most
economically developed were also most favorable to a revolution. It is true
that freedom from economic traditions might make one more likely to also doubt
religious traditions.
However, the Reformation did not eliminate the influence of the Church, but
rather substituted one influence for another that was more penetrating in
practice. Weber also says that though it might be thought that the greater
participation of Protestants in capitalism is due to their greater inherited
wealth, this does not explain all the phenomena. For example, Catholic and
Protestant parents tend to give their children different kinds of education, and
Catholics have more of a tendency than Protestants to stay in handicrafts rather
than to go into industry. This suggests that their environment has determined
the choice of occupation. This seems all the more likely because one would
normally expect Catholics to get involved in economic activity in places like
Germany, because they are excluded from political influence. However, in
reality
Protestants have shown a much stronger tendency to develop economic
rationalism than Catholics have. Our task is to investigate the religions
and see what might have caused this behavior.
One explanation that has been given is that the Catholics are more
"otherworldly" and ascetic than the Protestants, and are therefore
indifferent to material gain. However, this does not fit the facts of today or
of the past, and such generalities are not useful.
Furthermore, Weber argues that there might actually be an "intimate
relationship" between capitalist acquisition and otherworldliness, piety, and
asceticism. For example, it is striking that many of the most ardent Christians
come from commercial circles, and there is often a connection between
otherworldly religious faith and commercial success.
However, not all Protestant circles have had an equally strong influence, with
Calvinism having a stronger force than Lutheranism. Thus, if there is any
relationship between the ascetic Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism,
it will have to be found in purely religious characteristics. In order to
understand the many potential relationships here, it is necessary to try to
understand the characteristics of and differences among the religious thoughts
of Christianity. It is first necessary, though, to speak about the phenomenon
we wish to understand and the degree to which an explanation is even possible.
Commentary
Throughout his essay, Weber will be making both empirical and theoretical
arguments. It is therefore important to understand the differences and
connections between the two kinds of arguments. An empirical argument is based
on observation or experiment; it describes facts that can be proven. For
example, Weber's claim that Protestants are more involved than Catholics in
capitalistic activities is an empirical argument, based on his observations in
Germany and elsewhere. Other studies might question the validity of such a
claim, and in fact Weber has been criticized for many of the empirical arguments
that underlie his study. Theoretical arguments are more speculative; their
purpose is to give meaning to empirical observations. For example, Weber
notices a correlation between ascetic Protestantism and the spirit of
capitalism. What could explain such a connection? It is not possible to simply
run an experiment or do a statistical study; this might show correlations, but
it will not tell a causal story. Thus, Weber explores more about the "spirit"
of capitalism, and about ascetic Protestantism, hopefully getting an accurate
description of each (this is empirical work). He then attempts to tell a
coherent story about what happened, given the information available (this is
theoretical). He looks at his information through the lens of his theory, and
ideally his theory would account for all of the relevant facts available. In
reality, the world is far too complex for any theory to possible capture all of
its intricacies, and Weber himself is very cautious about the limited ability of
any theory to explain the world. However, theory is still useful, since it is
the only way to give empirical facts any broader meaning.
Weber's study has important implications for how we look at religion. Weber
does not simply take religion on its own terms, seeing what it means to its
founders and followers.
For Weber, religion also has another function. It can create broader social
values and be instrumental in the creation of social institutions completely
unrelated to its own goals and ends. Religion has a generative power, and the
influence of its ideas should be studied in areas seemingly unrelated to its
theological principles, such as the creation of economic institutions.
