Sociology article review due on 11/29/19

375

CLASSIC

CONTEMPORARY

CROSS-CULTURAL

RELIGION

60 The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism MAX WEBER

free labour. Only suggestions of it are found else- where. Even the organization of unfree labour reached a considerable degree of rationality only on plantations and to a very limited extent in the Ergasteria of antiquity. In the manors, manorial workshops, and domestic industries on estates with serf labour it was probably somewhat less devel-

oped. Even real domestic indus- tries with free labour have definitely been proved to have ex- isted in only a few isolated cases outside the Occident. . . .

Rational industrial organiza- tion, attuned to a regular mar- ket, and neither to political nor irrationally speculative oppor- tunities for profit, is not, how- ever, the only peculiarity of Western capitalism. The mod- ern rational organization of the capitalistic enterprise would not have been possible without two

A product of modern European civilization, studying any problem of universal history, is bound to ask himself to what combination of cir- cumstances the fact should be attributed that in Western civilization, and in Western civilization only, cultural phenomena have appeared which (as we like to think) lie in a line of development having universal significance and value. . . . All over the world there have been merchants, wholesale and retail, local and engaged in foreign trade. . . .

But in modern times the Occi- dent has developed, in addition to this, a very different form of capitalism which has appeared nowhere else: the rational capi- talistic organization of (formally)

In perhaps his most well-known treatise, Max Weber argues that a major factor in the de- velopment of the capitalist economic system was the distinctive world view of early, as- cetic Protestantism, especially Calvinism and Puritanism. In this excerpt from his classic analysis, Weber explains that religious ideas about work and materials initially fostered capitalism’s growth; ultimately, he concludes, capitalism was able to stand on its own without religious supports.

Source: From The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism by Max Weber, copyright © 1988, Prentice-Hall, Inc. Reprinted by permission.

MaciCh60ff.qxd 3/21/06 8:31 PM Page 375

the technical utilization of scientific knowledge, so important for the living conditions of the mass of people, was certainly encouraged by economic considerations, which were extremely favourable to it in the Occident. But this encouragement was derived from the peculiarities of the social struc- ture of the Occident. We must hence ask, from what parts of that structure was it derived, since not all of them have been of equal importance?

Among those of undoubted importance are the rational structures of law and of administration. For modern rational capitalism has need, not only of the technical means of production, but of a calculable legal system and of administration in terms of formal rules. Without it adventurous and speculative trading capitalism and all sorts of politically determined capitalisms are possi- ble, but no rational enterprise under individual initiative, with fixed capital and certainty of cal- culations. Such a legal system and such adminis- tration have been available for economic activity in a comparative state of legal and formalistic perfection only in the Occident. We must hence inquire where that law came from. Among other circumstances, capitalistic interests have in turn un- doubtedly also helped, but by no means alone nor even principally, to prepare the way for the predom- inance in law and administration of a class of ju- rists specially trained in rational law. But these interests did not themselves create that law. Quite different forces were at work in this development. And why did not the capitalistic interests do the same in China or India? Why did not the scientific, the artistic, the political, or the economic develop- ment there enter upon that path of rationalization which is peculiar to the Occident?

For in all the above cases it is a question of the specific and peculiar rationalism of Western cul- ture. . . . It is hence our first concern to work out and to explain genetically the special peculiarity of Occidental rationalism, and within this field that of the modern Occidental form. Every such attempt at explanation must, recognizing the fun- damental importance of the economic factor, above all take account of the economic conditions. But

other important factors in its development: the separation of business from the household, which completely dominates modern economic life, and closely connected with it, rational book- keeping. . . .

Hence in a universal history of culture the cen- tral problem for us is not, in the last analysis, even from a purely economic viewpoint, the develop- ment of capitalistic activity as such, differing in different cultures only in form: the adventurer type, or capitalism in trade, war, politics, or ad- ministration as sources of gain. It is rather the ori- gin of this sober bourgeois capitalism with its rational organization of free labour. Or in terms of cultural history, the problem is that of the ori- gin of the Western bourgeois class and of its pe- culiarities, a problem which is certainly closely connected with that of the origin of the capitalis- tic organization of labour, but is not quite the same thing. For the bourgeois as a class existed prior to the development of the peculiar modern form of capitalism, though, it is true, only in the Western Hemisphere.

Now the peculiar modern Western form of capitalism has been, at first sight, strongly influ- enced by the development of technical possibili- ties. Its rationality is today essentially dependent on the calculability of the most important techni- cal factors. But this means fundamentally that it is dependent on the peculiarities of modern sci- ence, especially the natural sciences based on mathematics and exact and rational experiment. On the other hand, the development of these sci- ences and of the technique resting upon them now receives important stimulation from these capitalistic interests in its practical economic ap- plication. It is true that the origin of Western sci- ence cannot be attributed to such interests. Calculation, even with decimals, and algebra have been carried on in India, where the decimal sys- tem was invented. But it was only made use of by developing capitalism in the West, while in India it led to no modern arithmetic or bookkeeping. Neither was the origin of mathematics and me- chanics determined by capitalistic interests. But

376 Religion

MaciCh60ff.qxd 3/21/06 8:31 PM Page 376

labour for the glory of God. Thus inactive contem- plation is also valueless, or even directly reprehen- sible if it is at the expense of one’s daily work. . . .

[T]he same prescription is given for all sexual temptation as is used against religious doubts and a sense of moral unworthiness: “Work hard in your calling.” But the most important thing was that even beyond that labour came to be considered in itself the end of life, ordained as such by God. St. Paul’s “He who will not work shall not eat” holds unconditionally for everyone. Unwillingness to work is symptomatic of the lack of grace.

Here the difference from the mediæval view- point becomes quite evident. Thomas Aquinas also gave an interpretation of that statement of St. Paul. But for him labour is only necessary naturali ra- tione for the maintenance of individual and com- munity. Where this end is achieved, the precept ceases to have any meaning. Moreover, it holds only for the race, not for every individual. It does not apply to anyone who can live without labour on his possessions, and of course contemplation, as a spiritual form of action in the Kingdom of God, takes precedence over the commandment in its lit- eral sense. Moreover, for the popular theology of the time, the highest form of monastic productivity lay in the increase of the Thesaurus ecclesliæ through prayer and chant.

. . .For everyone without exception God’s Provi- dence has prepared a calling, which he should pro- fess and in which he should labour. And this calling is not, as it was for the Lutheran, a fate to which he must submit and which he must make the best of, but God’s commandment to the individual to work for the divine glory. This seemingly subtle differ- ence had far-reaching psychological consequences, and became connected with a further development of the providential interpretation of the economic order which had begun in scholasticism.

It is true that the usefulness of a calling, and thus its favour in the sight of God, is measured primarily in moral terms, and thus in terms of the importance of the goods produced in it for the community. But a further, and, above all, in prac- tice the most important, criterion is found in private

at the same time the opposite correlation must not be left out of consideration. For though the development of economic rationalism is partly dependent on rational technique and law, it is at the same time determined by the ability and dis- position of men to adopt certain types of practi- cal rational conduct. When these types have been obstructed by spiritual obstacles, the develop- ment of rational economic conduct has also met serious inner resistance. The magical and reli- gious forces, and the ethical ideas of duty based upon them, have in the past always been among the most important formative influences on con- duct. In the studies collected here we shall be concerned with these forces.

Two older essays have been placed at the begin- ning which attempt, at one important point, to ap- proach the side of the problem which is generally most difficult to grasp: the influence of certain re- ligious ideas on the development of an economic spirit, or the ethos of an economic system. In this case we are dealing with the connection of the spirit of modern economic life with the rational ethics of ascetic Protestantism. Thus we treat here only one side of the causal chain. . . .

. . .[T]hat side of English Puritanism which was derived from Calvinism gives the most consistent religious basis for the idea of the call- ing. . . . For the saints’ everlasting rest is in the next world; on earth man must, to be certain of his state of grace, “do the works of him who sent him, as long as it is yet day.” Not leisure and en- joyment, but only activity serves to increase the glory of God according to the definite manifesta- tions of His will.

Waste of time is thus the first and in principle the deadliest of sins. The span of human life is in- finitely short and precious to make sure of one’s own election. Loss of time through sociability, idle talk, luxury, even more sleep than is necessary for health, six to at most eight hours, is worthy of ab- solute moral condemnation. It does not yet hold, with Franklin, that time is money, but the proposi- tion is true in a certain spiritual sense. It is in- finitely valuable because every hour lost is lost to

Reading 60 The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism 377

MaciCh60ff.qxd 3/21/06 8:31 PM Page 377

attitude toward life stands the test, the feeling of responsibility for them, for holding them undimin- ished for the glory of God and increasing them by restless effort. The origin of this type of life also extends in certain roots, like so many aspects of the spirit of capitalism, back into the Middle Ages. But it was in the ethic of ascetic Protestantism that it first found a consistent ethical foundation. Its significance for the development of capitalism is obvious.

This worldly Protestant asceticism, as we may recapitulate up to this point, acted powerfully against the spontaneous enjoyment of possessions; it restricted consumption, especially of luxuries. On the other hand, it had the psychological effect of freeing the acquisition of goods from the inhibi- tions of traditionalistic ethics. It broke the bonds of the impulse of acquisition in that it not only legal- ized it, but (in the sense discussed) looked upon it as directly willed by God. . . .

As far as the influence of the Puritan outlook extended, under all circumstances—and this is, of course, much more important than the mere en- couragement of capital accumulation—it favoured the development of a rational bourgeois economic life; it was the most important, and above all the only consistent influence in the development of that life. It stood at the cradle of the modern economic man.

To be sure, these Puritanical ideals tended to give way under excessive pressure from the temp- tations of wealth, as the Puritans themselves knew very well. With great regularity we find the most genuine adherents of Puritanism among the classes which were rising from a lowly status, the small bourgeois and farmers while the beati possidentes, even among Quakers, are often found tending to repudiate the old ideals. It was the same fate which again and again befell the predecessor of this worldly asceticism, the monastic asceticism of the Middle Ages. In the latter case, when ratio- nal economic activity had worked out its full effects by strict regulation of conduct and limita- tion of consumption, the wealth accumulated ei- ther succumbed directly to the nobility, as in the

profitableness. For if that God, whose hand the Pu- ritan sees in all the occurrences of life, shows one of His elect a chance of profit, he must do it with a purpose. Hence the faithful Christian must follow the call by taking advantage of the opportunity. “If God show you a way in which you may lawfully get more than in another way (without wrong to your soul or to any other), if you refuse this, and choose the less gainful way, you cross one of the ends of your calling, and you refuse to be God’s steward, and to accept His gifts and use them for Him when He requireth it: you may labour to be rich for God, though not for the flesh and sin.”. . .

The superior indulgence of the seigneur and the parvenu ostentation of the nouveau riche are equally detestable to asceticism. But, on the other hand, it has the highest ethical appreciation of the sober, middle-class, self-made man. “God blesseth His trade” is a stock remark about those good men who had successfully followed the divine hints. The whole power of the God of the Old Testament, who rewards His people for their obedience in this life, necessarily exercised a similar influence on the Pu- ritan who . . . compared his own state of grace with that of the heroes of the Bible. . . .

Although we cannot here enter upon a discus- sion of the influence of Puritanism in all . . . direc- tions, we should call attention to the fact that the toleration of pleasure in cultural goods, which contributed to purely aesthetic or athletic enjoy- ment, certainly always ran up against one charac- teristic limitation: They must not cost anything. Man is only a trustee of the goods which have come to him through God’s grace. He must, like the servant in the parable, give an account of every penny entrusted to him, and it is at least hazardous to spend any of it for a purpose which does not serve the glory of God but only one’s own enjoy- ment. What person, who keeps his eyes open, has not met representatives of this viewpoint even in the present? The idea of a man’s duty to his pos- sessions, to which he subordinates himself as an obedient steward, or even as an acquisitive ma- chine, bears with chilling weight on his life. The greater the possessions the heavier, if the ascetic

378 Religion

MaciCh60ff.qxd 3/21/06 8:31 PM Page 378

over into sober economic virtue; the religious roots died out slowly, giving way to utilitarian worldliness. Then, as Dowden puts it, as in Robinson Crusoe, the isolated economic man who carries on missionary activities on the side takes the place of the lonely spiritual search for the Kingdom of Heaven of Bunyan’s pilgrim, hurrying through the market- place of Vanity. . . .

A specifically bourgeois economic ethic had grown up. With the consciousness of standing in the fullness of God’s grace and being visibly blessed by Him, the bourgeois business man, as long as he remained within the bounds of formal correctness, as long as his moral conduct was spot- less and the use to which he put his wealth was not objectionable, could follow his pecuniary interests as he would and feel that he was fulfilling a duty in doing so. The power of religious asceticism pro- vided him in addition with sober, conscientious, and unusually industrious workmen, who clung to their work as to a life purpose willed by God.

Finally, it gave him the comforting assurance that the unequal distribution of the goods of this world was a special dispensation of Divine Provi- dence, which in these differences, as in particular grace, pursued secret ends unknown to men. . . .

One of the fundamental elements of the spirit of modern capitalism, and not only of that but of all modern culture: Rational conduct on the basis of the idea of the calling, was born—that is what this discussion has sought to demonstrate—from the spirit of Christian asceticism. One has only to reread the passage from Franklin, quoted at the beginning of this essay, in order to see that the es- sential elements of the attitude which was there called the spirit of capitalism are the same as what we have just shown to be the content of the Puri- tan worldly asceticism, only without the religious basis, which by Franklin’s time had died away. . . .

Since asceticism undertook to remodel the world and to work out its ideals in the world, material goods have gained an increasing and finally an in- exorable power over the lives of men as at no previ- ous period in history. Today the spirit of religious asceticism—whether finally, who knows?—has

time before the Reformation, or monastic discipline threatened to break down, and one of the numerous reformations became necessary.

In fact the whole history of monasticism is in a certain sense the history of a continual struggle with the problem of the secularizing influence of wealth. The same is true on a grand scale of the worldly asceticism of Puritanism. The great re- vival of Methodism, which preceded the expan- sion of English industry toward the end of the eighteenth century, may well be compared with such a monastic reform. We may hence quote here a passage from John Wesley himself which might well serve as a motto for everything which has been said above. For it shows that the leaders of these ascetic movements understood the seemingly paradoxical relationships which we have here anal- ysed perfectly well, and in the same sense that we have given them. He wrote:

I fear, wherever riches have increased, the essence of religion has decreased in the same proportion. There- fore I do not see how it is possible, in the nature of things, for any revival of true religion to continue long. For religion must necessarily produce both in- dustry and frugality, and these cannot but produce riches. But as riches increase, so will pride, anger, and love of the world in all its branches. How then is it possible that Methodism, that is, a religion of the heart, though it flourishes now as a green bay tree, should continue in this state? For the Methodists in every place grow diligent and frugal; consequently they increase in goods. Hence they proportionately in- crease in pride, in anger, in the desire of the flesh, the desire of the eyes, and the pride of life. So, although the form of religion remains, the spirit is swiftly van- ishing away. Is there no way to prevent this—this con- tinual decay of pure religion? We ought not to prevent people from being diligent and frugal; we must exhort all Christians to gain all they can, and to save all they can; that is, in effect, to grow rich.

As Wesley here says, the full economic effect of those great religious movements, whose signifi- cance for economic development lay above all in their ascetic educative influence, generally came only after the peak of the purely religious enthusi- asm was past. Then the intensity of the search for the Kingdom of God commenced gradually to pass

Reading 60 The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism 379

MaciCh60ff.qxd 3/21/06 8:31 PM Page 379

Here we have only attempted to trace the fact and the direction of its influence to their motives in one, though a very important point. But it would also further be necessary to investigate how Protes- tant Asceticism was in turn influenced in its devel- opment and its character by the totality of social conditions, especsially economic. The modern man is in general, even with the best will, unable to give religious ideas a significance for culture and national character which they deserve. But it is, of course, not my aim to substitute for a one- sided materialistic an equally one-sided spiritualis- tic causal interpretation of culture and of history. Each is equally possible, but each, if it does not serve as the preparation, but as the conclusion of an investigation, accomplishes equally little in the interest of historical truth.

CRITICAL-THINKING QUESTIONS

1. What are the distinctive characteristics of the religious orientation that Weber called the “Protestant ethic”? In what ways did they pro- mote the development of the capitalist economic system? 2. In what respects do early Calvinists with a sense of “calling” differ from today’s “workaholics”? 3. In what sense does Weber’s analysis differ from the materialist orientation of Karl Marx (Reading 51), who suggested that productive forces shape the world of ideas?

escaped from the cage. But victorious capital- ism, since it rests on mechanical foundations, needs its support no longer. The rosy blush of its laughing heir, the Enlightenment, seems also to be irretrievably fading, and the idea of duty in one’s calling prowls about in our lives like the ghost of dead religious beliefs. Where the fulfilment of the calling cannot directly be related to the highest spiritual and cultural values, or when, on the other hand, it need not be felt simply as economic com- pulsion, the individual generally abandons the at- tempt to justify it at all. In the field of its highest development, in the United States, the pursuit of wealth, stripped of its religious and ethical mean- ing, tends to become associated with purely mun- dane passions, which often actually give it the character of sport.

No one knows who will live in this cage in the future, or whether at the end of this tremendous development entirely new prophets will arise, or there will be a great rebirth of old ideas and ideals, or, if neither, mechanized petrification, embel- lished with a sort of convulsive self-importance. For of the last stage of this cultural development, it might well be truly said: “Specialists without spirit, sensualists without heart; this nullity imag- ines that it has attained a level of civilization never before achieved.”

But this brings us to the world of judgments of value and of faith, with which this purely histori- cal discussion need not be burdened. . . .

380 Religion

MaciCh60ff.qxd 3/21/06 8:31 PM Page 380