Anneke van Baalen, HIDDEN MASCULINITY, Max Weber's historical sociology of bureaucracy.
Amsterdam 1994. Chapter 2 The Weber's private, sex defined values.
52
The difference between Weber-Schnitger's and Weber's scientific method appears to be a
difference between ethical and methodical individualism, the former wanting to be moral, the
latter to be value-free. As this difference, however, is based on a scientific division of labor
between spouses which corresponds with traditional views of 'femininity' and 'masculinity', it
is to be expected that the similarities between the Webers' respective analyses of the origins
of masculine domination are greater than the differences between them.
Weber's striving for 'objectivity', however, forbade him to use his wife's theory. He had to
develop his own approach for a discussion of the theories on prehistoric relations. I will show
that it abounds in contradictions which have important consequences for the consistency of
ES as a whole; Weber neither succeeded in being 'value-free', nor in being logical.
In the next two chapters I will present Weber's contradictory argument of the origins of
'patriarchy': the opposition of a 'natural' patriarchy on the one hand and a juridically defined
patriarchy on the other.
home with them, this is because of facts, not of values: if they do not kill their elementary sense of duty, they will
'degenerate' entirely if they have to work full time in the 'capitalist labor machine', EuM p. 391.
 |
 |
 |