Modern and Classical Theories in Political Science
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast the analytic and argumentative format employed by six different political theorists, three of whom can be characterized as "classical" and three of whom are categorized as "modern." In the first set are Max Weber, Karl Marx, and Joseph Schumpeter. In the second, the "modern" theorists to be examined are Barbara Geddes, Benedict Anderson, and Ronald Rogowski. At issue is not the specific ideas and hypotheses regarding class, meanings and individuals advanced by each theorist, but rather the argumentative strategies used by each to make a case. The units of analysis to be employed are class, meaning, and individuals -- each of which figures largely in the work of the six theorists. Max Weber (p.2) begins his argument with a "stylized fact" that reduces factual complexity to a single general proposition. From fact, he reduces his argument to a stylized argument that Protestants were overwhelmingly the agents and authors of capitalism. His formula is indefinite in its early presentation (Weber, p. 2), and presents a stylized answer but fails to identify the relationship between his key variables (capitalism and the Protestant ethic). Capitalism is posited as a dependent variable, with Protestant belief the independent variable (Weber, p. 2). In essence, Weber (p. 1 of 3) makes a "Verstehen" argument from meaning, an argument that concerns what an action means and not what it accomplishes. He takes the view that a
. . .
onstantly driven, theoretically, to the same problems and solutions to which material interest and social position drive the latter practically (Marx 50-51).
The "argument from class interest" in Marx represents a rejection of the argument from meaning as contained in Weber. It also is an argument against individual motive and other arguments from class interest. In aggregating statements about classes, as parts of society, into propositions about the political institutions of a whole society, Marx (p. 25) relied upon the concept of a class alliance: "During June days all classes and parties had united in the party of Order against the proletarian class as the party of Anarchy, of Socialism, of Communism."
A critical distinction between Marx and Weber is that in terms of the comparative method, Weber takes the position that something that happened once before the specific conditions he investigates existed cannot be replayed, while Marx invents comparative categories abstracted from personages and organizations that existed in France to imagine how something different might have occurred. Specifically:
Weber starts his comparison from the "here and now,"
examining two different religio-cum-social systems and their devel
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Max Weber, Weber Schumpeter, Marx Weber, Weber Marx, Schumpeter Using, Geddes Anderson, Joseph Schumpeter, Barbara Geddes, Specifically Weber, Benedict Anderson, dependent variable, argument class, dependent variables, marx weber, independent variables, phenomena contrasted ideal, argument meaning, independent variable, social economic, contrasted ideal, variable independent, dependent variable independent, contrasted ideal natural, variable independent variables, constructed phenomena contrasted,
Approximate Word count = 2332
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Modern and Classical Theories in Political Science
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
