De-Parsonizing Weber: A Critique of Parsons' Interpretation of Weber's Sociology

From Conscious Values to Tacit Beliefs: Assessing Parsons’ Influence on Contemporary Sociology

“…What marked Weber as distinct in this line of theorizing was his insertion of the actor's subjectivity by way of ideas into his analysis, giving his theory its widely perceived "idealist" label (Parsons, 1949, p. 12). Such idealism was made evident by Weber's (Weber, 1968) assertion that beyond merely acting toward one's own self-interests, the interests individuals act toward could broadly be reduced to ideal types of interest based on the particular type of subjective meaning attributed to a particular situation by the individual (Cohen et al, 1975;Lee and Munch, 1979). These types were the following: value rationality whereby the actor acted with the intention of fulfilling an end or goal that he or she self-consciously desires; instrumental rationality whereby the actor felt they needed to perform the action as a means to some end goal; affectual action whereby the actor acted due to their impulses or feelings; and traditional action that was the product of deeply ingrained routines or habits (Weber, 1968, p. 24-25).…”

“…While Weber (1968), p. 26, placed no particular emphasis on any of these ideal types of action as he saw that each was used in varying degrees depending on the contingencies present in an individual's life, Parsons saw all of these forms of action and interest as being reducible to one's understanding of social norms (Parsons, 1949, Cohen et al, 1975Alexander, 1983). Such a claim could be made because Parsons (1949) held that such norms hold the ultimate rationales behind why these actions are and should be performed, thus making action in all of these "spheres" ultimately value rational in that all action can be seen as working toward the ends posited by one's culture rather than merely to specific personal or even ideal typical motivations for action such as doing something routinely or instrumentally (Cohen et al, 1975, p. 231).…”

O conceito de estado em Max Weber

“…Está, portanto, certo Dahrendorf (1959, p. 167) ao insistir na inadequação do conceito de "grupo" e ao propor traduzir Verband por "association". Sobre os problemas próprios da interpretação parsoniana da obra de Weber e, particularmente, de sua sociologia da dominação, ver Cohen, Hazelrigg e Pope (1975).…”

Ecos da contribuição de Guerreiro Ramos para a divulgação da obra de Weber no campo de estudos organizacionais (EOs)

“…Cohen (1975) vai além ao identificar uma verdadeira reconstrução da sociologia de Weber por Parsons quando este interpreta a ação social e a dominação em Weber de uma perspectiva eminentemente normativa e não substantiva, como Weber propôs. A referida interpretação, entende-se, teve importante papel na "transformação" do tipo ideal de dominação legal em "modelo de burocracia" e na identificação de Weber como teórico da burocracia.…”