The classical sociological concepts on ‘rationalism’ by Weber (1904) mostly get referenced to by social articles on how the contemporary work-life has changed bureaucratic systems and that ‘dehumanize’ work-life to be a forced social action with no desired means-to-end but rather workers have no social choices just like working in an ‘iron cage’ (Weber, 1904). However, in this essay ‘rationalism’ will be analysed from a different angle of social well-being choices made by western society with a rational application for better mind and soul health and not only depend on medical treatments for well-being arguably being a growing trend in western society. Knowledge is applied to make responsible ‘calculations’ for better well-being by applying ‘efficient’ processes to improve social health standards for better lifestyles and welfare with relevance to Weber’s (1904) rationality notions in the day-to-day contemporary western society (Weber, 1904). Evidence of positive changes in contemporary social life with current examples and characteristics relevant to rationality will be referenced in analysing whether or not rational methods applied have improved standards of health and well-being with a focus on western world’s ‘current trends’ shaping the contemporary society with ‘lifestyle’ choices made with ‘formal rationality’ versus ‘substantive rationality’ (Weber, 1904). A critical analyse of Fevre’s (2003) ‘common sense’ concepts will be compared with the understanding of Weber’s (1904) ‘rationality’ concept and whether the notion rejects or supports the present well-being of the western contemporary society (Fevre 2003, Weber 1904). The discussion will include post-emotionality’
Parsons (1981) emphasized that viewing the classical Weberian theory of rationalism has new useful explanations in interpretation of current social changes in lifestyles with this ‘major paradigm of sociological thought’ with application to ‘formal rationality’ being ‘purposeful calculation’ in the ‘most efficient’ way for ‘means to an end’ can arguably be the ‘dominant aspect’ in post-modern society than ‘substantive rationality’ prior to that i.e. ‘an orientation towards ideal values and ends’ (Weber, 1904, Parsons, 1981). In the past, rational ideas concerning healthy lifestyles reflected more of an ‘ideal’ state as an end ‘value’ in strengthening beliefs in religion to increase spirituality of the soul with traditional holistic treatments, however, the modern society changed towards ‘formal’ methods ‘to look better, enjoy increased vitality, and enhanced life expectancy’ therefore modern trend towards healthier society arguably links to knowledge of rational choices whereby control over own health is calculated in the most efficient way controllable by each person freely (Weber 1904, Cockerham, Abel and Luschen, 1993). Ritzer and Walczak (1988) analysis of ‘formal rationality’ evidenced that for example, Americans had reduced relying on physicians as the main authority in their health matters, consequently ‘liberating’ the dependence on health ‘experts’ and therefore unlocking the ‘bureaucratic iron cage of dehumanization and overwhelming dependence’ (Ritzer and Walczak 1988, Weber 1904, Cockerham, Abel and Luschen, 1993). To date ‘formal rationality’ has evidenced that in the past society lacked ‘freedom’ or choice to be ‘creative’ in controlling their lifestyles, however, contemporary Weberian scholars have linked ‘formal rationality’ has encouraged freedom of choice for ‘healthier lifestyles’. Weber’s (1904) ‘formal rationality’ concepts was ‘sometimes ambiguous and inconsistent’ in how it was interpreted by sociologists, however, past interpretations on ‘dehumanization’ effects of bureaucratic systems as compared to ‘iron cages’ led to lack of freedom in choice, however, in comparison the contemporary sociologist has reversed the interpretation of the ‘dehumanization’ effects of the ‘iron cage’ to positive liberating the society with Weberian concepts towards gain of a healthier western society (Weber 1904, Cockerham, Abel and Luschen, 1993, Alexander 1987, Lowith 1982, Mommsen 1987 [1989], Roth 1987, Tenbruck, 1975) .
Weberian theory unified a ‘rising era’ from a ‘vanishing’ past in western society that transitioned the societal characteristics change that was key to the dominance of ‘formal’ over ‘substantive’ rationality mostly evident in the West, but not as a whole but in ‘achieving goals’ with ‘logically calculated, efficient and objective: formal rationality’ ‘as opposed to’ ‘personal devotion to religion, tradition, piety, and custom: substantive rationality’, however ‘substantive rationality’ has not been completely eradicated in the west, rather just inferior in dominance as ‘disregard of substantive values and ends’ have been replaced ‘in favour of efficiency’ to be a ‘specific and peculiar’ western society to the rest of the world (Weber 1904) generalized concepts of health and ‘lifestyles’ and gradually grew in the western culture, critically analysing whether or not Weber’s (1904) theories support the enrichment of a healthier western society’s with more knowledge or whether beliefs of the eastern society in comparison has led beliefs of religion, traditions, spirituality to better ‘mind and soul’ thus healthy contemporary western versus eastern lifestyles (Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993, Weber, 1904).
Rationality in the past was more reflective of ‘substantive’ value as an ‘ideal state’ of health but the modern ‘trend’ moved towards ‘formal’ methods that were effectively applied to ‘increase vitality’ and ‘enhance life expectancy’ in society (Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993, Weber, 1904). This signifies that contemporary society has more control over their health as essentially more knowledgable in recognizing ‘consumption versus production’; ‘choices versus life-chances’; class similarities versus distinctions’; and ‘self-control versus conformity’ that shapes real operationalization healthy lifestyles I postmodern western society (Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993, Weber, 1904).
In the West ‘formal rationality’ society applied practical experiments to dispute beliefs therefore making it possible to improve rather than abstract from worldly knowledge by challenging ‘religious dogma’, customs and traditions (Kennedy 1987 p.30, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993) and not just follow beliefs without questioning whether they are true or false, for example, whether God exists – can be or not be believed due to lack evidence and facts to prove there is a god (Cobern, 2000). Human thought during the enlightenment era believed what they were taught by religious leaders was not questioned, for example, the Calvinists’ belief was that life after death existed, however, no facts and information confirmed or denied this belief (Weber, 1904). However, knowledge in society provided science as a way to view information and facts to be true or false with consistency and evidence to confirm society’s reasoning and knowledge of whether it is a ‘reality’ or ‘belief’, for example, so you can feel, smell, taste or see it, therefore, the brain interprets whether it is ‘real’ or just a ‘belief’ (Cobern, 2000).
The western society structures of knowledge and belief ‘recognised that science requires a pre-suppositional foundation’ “in passing moral judgements’ to support the rational thought ‘to believe’ or ‘pre-suppose in advance’, that ‘man’s actions are either good or bad, even if it is not in their power’ ‘to distinguish between right or wrong ethics and values’ (Strauss 1965 [2008]). That is whereby a state of ‘reasoning’ or ‘believing’ are two ‘rational’ states of society i.e. ‘formal’ or ‘substantive’ that instigated ‘capitalism’ in the west to become the ‘peculiar’ and dominant modern civilization than the rest of the world with its characteristics of a capitalist lifestyle predominantly being the main difference between the contemporary West and the rest of the world as became the ‘power’ center after being the ‘first to industrialize’ and ‘develop’ with technology to ‘an advanced’ capitalist state of lifestyle subsequently since the ‘19th century’ whereby traditional beliefs, values and emotions displaced humans to be replaced by impersonal machines in ‘formal bureaucratic’ processes in society (Weber, 1904, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993).
Weber’s (1904) ‘Formal rationality’ concept on a ‘macro’ level compared social action of ‘purposeful goal-orientated actions’ at a ‘micro’ level was observed by Weber (1904) to replace ‘traditional’ actions that formed ‘rational-legal’ authorities as ‘rationally constructed’ on the ‘principles of efficiency and calculation’ in Western society which led to the ‘rise of bureaucracy’ and ‘inherently impersonal forms of social organisations’ that were ‘more efficient’ ‘theoretically’ led to warnings from Weber (1904) of a form of ‘iron cage’ which will ‘impose rationalisation’ on individuals in the future that Weber (1904) argued could not be reversed as ‘human beings have deliberately chosen this course of action as their best alternative’ (Weber, 1904, Weiss 1987 p.159, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993). Weber (1904) ‘was convinced that’ ‘without a doubt’ the ‘process of progressive rationalisation would increase restrictions on ‘free’ ‘will’ and ‘actions’ of ‘individuals’, but Weber’s (1904) concerns were not ‘fatalistic conclusion’ of the direction ‘modern society was being ‘forced’ towards but rather was a concern for ‘individual’s freedom of action’ that was important ‘part of the overall development of a formal rationalisation process’ (Weber, 1904, Weiss 1987 p.159 , Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993). However, on a critical point of view, arguably Weber’s (1904) ‘analysis appears to be more of a warning than certainty’ as a conclusion that all ‘formal’ social actions will deplete individual freedom (Weber, 1904, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993, Roth 1987, Tenbruck 1975 [1980]).
Weber (1949) also stated with evidence that ‘rationality’ would be a ‘force to enhance human freedom’ as the knowledge that brought science to the world also brought information and technology to the contemporary society that became a great source of immediate information for a healthier lifestyle, for example, via media sources that developed from ‘bureaucratic organisations’ but brought ‘feelings of freedom’ as a new ‘trend’ in contemporary western lifestyle focus on a healthier well-being in society which can ‘pursue a clear conscious’ in their social actions with the most adequate knowledge for the ‘purpose’ of ‘means-to-end’ goal as a ‘rational’ accomplishment (Weber, 1949 pp. 124-125, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993, Roth 1987, Tenbruck 1975 [1980]). Those that ‘break the iron cage’ tend to liberate themselves to control their own paths in life choices and circumstances to gain a positive ‘end’ with ‘self-responsibility’ in society by applying the ‘western bureaucratic rationalisation’ methods to gain ‘freedom’ and not ‘dehumanisation’ ends (Lowith 1982, Alexander 1987, Roth 1987, Weber 1949, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993). Roth (1987) argues that Weber (1949) considered ‘bureaucratic rationalisation’ to not ‘dehumanise’ but rather that Weber (1949) emphasised that ‘tradition and modernity’ should be combined to bring new lifestyle choices with a positive ‘rationalised’ direction instead of the ‘bureaucratic aspects of formal rationalism’ on its own, therefore, Weber (1949) warned that humanity will inevitably experience ‘dehumanising’ effects without ‘traditional substantive rationality’ in modern society (Mommsen 1989, Weber, 1949, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993). Weber’s (1949) primarily wanted to give prevailing ‘life conduct’ to provide ‘new opportunities for creative action’, for example, ‘jogging for better well-being not just as originally was for medical health but now is more of a trend of ‘life conduct’ to make the mind and soul benefit to avoid relying on medical experts so taking control of one’s wellbeing in body, mind and soul as a combined ‘traditional and modern’ rational process regardless of bureaucratic institutions that do not motivate ‘social conditions’ that are ‘initiative’ (Weber 1949, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993). Weber’s (1949) main aim was to change the ‘way of life’ with his concepts of ‘rationality’ by amalgamating ‘freedom’ and ‘constraint’ which has had the ‘iron cage’ effects prior to modernity but ‘now clearly’ ‘Weberian ‘scholars’ view how ‘freedom’ and ‘constraint’ relationship has emerged in western contemporary society with the idea that ‘rationality also provides freedom and the capacity for action that promotes creativity’ (Mommsen 1989, p.195, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993). Weber (1949) ‘attributed a paradox’ from historical events that ‘structures’ ‘constrained living and yet also opened opportunities’ as an ‘ultimate outcome of modernity’, therefore, ‘the dominance of formal over substantive rationality in the Western society does not just consist of the imposition of rationality calculated rules and regulations on people’ but liberated people to determine logically what is the best path and ‘most effective means to reach their objectives in life’ (Weber 1949, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993).
Ritzer (1988) argued that Weber (1981) did not intend a generalised effects of ‘rationalisation’ on globalisation in the contemporary society but mainly Weber (1981) relayed his analysis of the ‘Protestant Ethics’ way of life was on the ‘emergence’ of a new ‘universal phenomenon’ in the western society (Ritzer and Walczak 1988, Weber 1981, Weiss 1987, Habermans 1984, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993). Ritzer (1988) argued that Weber (1922, 1946, 1978) was aware that ‘healthy lifestyles in Western society’ was a result of ‘formal rationality’ involvement to ‘achieve a preferred end state – a healthy body’ by ‘exercising efficient and calculated means’ to gain an end state (Ritzer and Walczak 1988, Weber 1922 1946 1978, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993). The ‘knowledge’ of ‘wellbeing and medicine’ increased availability to society that aided in liberating ‘healthy lifestyle participation’ as opposed to ‘dehumanising’ effects on the public that, hence, ‘symbolising the personal assumption of greater control and self-responsibility for one’s own health’ as Weber (1920) held the ‘position that formal rationality disenchants the world and sustains a culture that devalues mysterious incalculable forces’ in ‘favour of knowledge that allows one in principle to master all things by calculation’ (Ritzer and Walczak 1988, Weber 1920, Cockerham, Abel & Luschen, 1993).
, value-oriented, affectionate – emotional, and that differentiates the key social actions connected to the western world growth in capitalism which “signifies the amount of calculation that goes into an action in order to increase its chances of success, and hence being the decisive feature that it eliminates an orientation to values because of their non-technical character” (Weber, 1904, Morrison 1995:298). Essentially Weber (1904) used the concept of ‘formal rationality’ to describe the accounting ‘calculations’ that ‘go into’ an ‘action’ or ‘decision’ as the ‘quantitative procedures’ (Weber, 1904). A strict process to measure a ‘cost effective’ and formal process of ‘means’-to-end action (Weber, 1904).
In contrast, ‘substantial rationality’ shapes ethics, norms and values regarding the ‘end’ goal but does not account for natural ‘end’ results as the focus is to accomplish ‘end’ goals but not consistently improving the way to achieve the ‘goals’ as well as enhance techniques to in ‘goal’ achievement procedures for ‘end’ (Weber, 1904). Society mainly followed pre-determined religious beliefs to gain means-to-end but modernity brought knowledge and science that changed the society especially in the western world that previously had been guided by religious beliefs predominately religious Christianity beliefs, that people did not question, however, the western society become less governed by ethical means-to-end but more by technical means-to-end actions. Weber (1904) claimed that the outcome of this change in society itself was that the technical criteria subjected to the ‘ends’ became more important for humans to attain at all costs in the western capitalist society whereby ‘formal rationality’ became the core development of bureaucracy with: an ‘end’ calculation i.e. ‘calculability’ as being the best means-to-end method of ‘efficiency’ with ‘predictability’ as an assured of the best outcome with ‘decisions made by technology’ and not humans so as to increase efficiency in ‘controlled’ methods and ‘uncertainty’ (Weber, 1904). This lead to ‘formal rationality’ dominating the western world due to superiority of technical and bureaucratic systems over other forms of administration and Weber (1904) argued that the bureaucratic systems development made it possible to compare production levels from machines rather than non-mechanical production by humans, however, reduced other administrative methods to subordination but ‘formal norms’ of ‘bureaucracy’ promotion as the superior methods (Weber, 1904).
Weber (1904) argued that ‘formal rationality’ and ‘bureaucracy’ led to the western contemporary society to develop into a ‘capitalist’ way of life whereby ‘formal rationalisation’ methods of ‘efficiency’ and ‘calculation’ increasingly became the main aims in social actions that reduced ‘substantive rational’ beliefs in ‘religion, traditions, emotions, community values’ subsequently got replaced by impersonal dehumanizing bureaucratic systems of ‘formal rationality’ (Weber, 1904) .
Weber (1904) examined that the root cause of societal transformation from traditional ‘substantive to ‘formal’ rationality in western society was linked to the ‘ascetic’ lifestyle lead by the ‘Calvinists – puritanical Christians’ effectively led ‘religion’ beliefs in society abstained from any worldly indulgence for pleasure of the ‘flesh’ as the ‘Calvinists’ believed that God had pre-destined those that were ‘faithful’ to god to be granted a place in heaven as an ‘Elect’, but to be the chosen one, work hard to prove to be righteous and ‘faithful’ to god will determine whether one was worthy enough to be an ‘elect’ (Weber, 1904). Therefore, the ones who worked harder and led an emotion-less ‘ascetic’ life gained ‘means-to-end’ but their ‘hard-earned gain’ was not for ‘self-indulgence’ if one wanted to be chosen as an ‘elect’. Weber (1904) argued that as the ‘Calvinists’ lifestyle was predominately in the west, hence ‘capitalism’ developed and dominated the West with the main aim of ‘gain’ through hard-work led to increased technology ‘gain’ in bureaucratic operations with disregard for human emotions or desire for worldly pleasures, hence, the ‘Calvinists’ were amongst the first capitalists that grow to dominate the western lifestyle with similar characteristics of ‘gain’ (Weber, 1904).
Weber (1904) summarized his work by supporting ‘formal rationality’ to be the cause of ‘bureaucratic’ development in the western societies that aided the growth of ‘capitalism’ as Weber (1904) emphasized that the characteristics were similar in ‘capitalist’ and the ‘Calvinist’ lifestyles which eventually succeeded in replacing ‘substantive rationality’ with ‘formal rationality’ in the contemporary western world.
2019-1-20-1547994587