This is a suggested answer to the first type of 10 mark question you’ll find in section A of the AQA’s second sociology paper (paper 2, topics in sociology).
For some general advice on how to answer (both types of) 10 mark questions – please see this post.
A 10 mark question (which has no item) will ask students about two elements from one or more of the bullet points on the topic specification. Thus it is here that you might see ‘classic’ questions such as this one.
Outline and explain two ways in which religion might promote social change (10)
The first way in is through helping people to challenge perceived social injustices and helping them fight for a ‘better’ society.
One example of where this has happened is with Liberation Theology. This developed in South America in the 1970s, when certain members of the Catholic Church started to criticize the economic inequality in the region, following witnessing the enormous deprivation suffered by the poorest in society.
Some priests challenged the role of the church in supporting the economic and political elites, taking up the cause of the landless peasants and campaigning for a more equal society.
Maduro actually argued that in such societies, where the church is central, it is the only institution which might bring about social change!
While they were not very successful, the question does say MIGHT! This type of political involvement has a long history in Christianity, and lately the Archbishop of Canterbury has been criticizing the effects of neoliberal economic policies, again standing up to power.
While the above examples may not have been successful, they can be: as with Martin Luther King and the wider Baptist Church – churches not only act as sources of solidarity for those fighting oppression, they can also act as centers which can organise protest marches.
Weber argued that the values of Calvinism (A very strict version of Protestantism) gave rise, over a couple of centuries, to the economic system of capitalism.
Calvinism taught that working hard was a way to worship God and also to ‘prove’ that you were one of the ‘elect’ (saved). It also taught that having fun was sinful. These two religious beliefs together encouraged the development of societies with cultures which valued hard work and entrepreneurialism, and discouraged frivolous expenditure.
Eventually, this led to any money saved from setting up businesses to be put back into the business (it was a sin to spend on leisure) in order to encourage more ‘work’ and ‘industry’.
These were the exact same set of values which were necessary for Capitalism to work – the work ethic and entrepeneurialism.
Weber developed his theory by doing comparative analysis – he argued that Capitalism emerged first in Holland and England where Calvinist values were strongest (he has been criticised but I don’t any marks for that, so no point saying why).
A further analysis point is that this is religion promoting social change unonciously.
Another further analysis point is that this study shows that religion can promote huge ‘systems level’ socio-economic changes in society.
Max Weber theorized that 17th-century Protestant values contributed to the emergence of capitalism in Europe. Weber argued that Protestantism, particularly Calvinism, promoted a strong work ethic, characteristics upon which the capitalist system flourishes. However, he also noted that other factors, such as governmental support and available capital, played a role, and Protestantism alone did not necessarily lead to capitalism.
Weber argued the values of the protestant religion led to the emergence of capitalism in Northern Europe in the 1600s.
Weber observed that Capitalism first took off in Holland and England, in the mid 17th century. He asked himself the question: ‘why did Capitalism develop in these two countries first?’
Protestant Individualism and the Emergence of Capitalism
Weber argued that the particular varieties of protestantism present in England and Holland in the 1600s were essential to the emergence of capitalism in those two countries.
The values of Protestantism encouraged ways of acting which (unintentionally) resulted in capitalism emerging, over a period of many decades, even centuries.
Weber observed that most other countries in Europe at that time were Catholic. He theorised the different value systems of the two religions had different effects.
Protestantism encouraged people to ‘find God for themselves’. Protestantism taught that silent reflection, introspection and prayer were the best ways to find God. This (unintentionally, and over many years) encouraged Protestants to adopt a more ‘individualistic’ attitude to their religion by seeking their own interpretations of Christianity.
In contrast, Catholicism was a religion which encouraged more conservative values and thus resisted social changes. The Catholic Church had a top-down structure: from God to the Pope to the Senior Bishops and then down to the people. Ultimate power to interpret Catholic doctrine rested with the Pope and his closest advisers. The authorities expected practising Catholics to abide by such interpretations and not to interpret religious scripture for themselves.
Similarly, part of being a good Catholic meant attending mass, which was administered by a member of the Catholic establishment. This reinforced the idea that the church was in control of religious matters.
Weber argued that the individualistic ethos of Protestantism laid the foundations for a greater sense of individual freedom. It was acceptable to challenge ‘top down’ interpretations of Christian doctrine, as laid down by the clergy. Societies which have more individual freedom are more open to social changes. Hence why capitalism emerged first in the two Protestant countries England and Holland in the 1600s.
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism Book cover
The Protestant Ethic: necessary but not sufficient!
Weber recognised that protestantism alone did not explain why capitalism emerged in Holland and England first. He noted that Switzerland, Scotland and Hungary were also protestant countries. However these did not have other factors present which were conducive to social change.
Other factors existing in England and Holland were also important for capitalism to emerge, such as governments which supported protestantism and the availability of capital to invest. But protestantism was also an essential driver in the emergence of capitalism.
Weber also argued that Buddhism and Taoism in India and China prevented capitalism from emerging first there. India and China also had technological knowledge and labour for hire in the 1600s. However, Buddhist and Taoist religions encourage inner reflection rather than ‘a work ethic’. Hence India and China suitable belief systems for capitalism to emerge.
The Protestant Ethic
Weber argued that a particular denomination of Protestantism known as Calvinismplayed a key role in ushering in the social change of Capitalism.
Calvinism originated in the beliefs of John Calvin who preached the doctrine of predestination: God had already decided who was going to heaven (‘the elect’) before they were born. Similarly, God had also already decided who the damned were. Whether or not you were going to hell had already been decided before your birth.
This fatalistic situation raised the question of how you would know who was saved and who was damned. Fortunately, Calvinism also taught that there was a way of figuring this out. There were indicators which could tell you who was ‘elect’, and who was damned.
Simply put, the harder you worked, and the less time you spent idling and/ or engaged in unproductive, frivolous activities, then the more likely it was that you were one of those pre-chosen for a life in heaven. This is because, according to Calvinist doctrine, God valued hard-work and a ‘pure-life’ non-materialistic life.
According to Weber this led to a situation in which Calvinist communities encouraged work for the glory of God, and discouraged laziness and frivolity. Believers were motivated to stick to these ethical codes, given that hell was the punishment if you didn’t.
John Calvin: all work and no play!
Calvinism: all work and no play!
A strong value within Calvinism was asceticism and leading an ascetic lifestyle. Asceticism means leading an austere lifestyle of rigorous self-discipline and abstaining from life’s pleasures.
Hard work was a calling and Calvinists pursued it with single mindedness and with vigour.
John Wesley, leader of the Methodist revival just before the industrial revolution wrote towards the end of the 18th century:
‘For religion must necessarily produce industry and frugality, and these cannot but produce riches. We must exhort all Christians to gain what they can and to save all they can; that is, in effect to grow rich’. (Quoted in Weber, 1954.)
Calvinists disliked time-wasting, idle gossip and more sleep than was necessary. They frowned on impulsive fun and enjoyment such as pubs and gaming houses. Sport and recreation were only justified for improving fitness, not for fun. Sex was only for procreation.
Since asceticism was also a belief, people couldn’t spend their riches on enjoying themselves. Rather, they should invest profits back in their businesses to enhance capacity to meet their calling.
Over the decades, the ‘work-ethic’ of protestantism encouraged individuals and whole communities to set up businesses, and re-invest any money they earned to grow these businesses.
The Spirit of Capitalism
The attitude towards wealth in protestantism mirrored the attitude to wealth creation in capitalism.
Underlying the practice of capitalism was what Weber called the ‘Spirit of Capitalism’.
Weber saw this spirit in the works of Benjamin Franklin. He wrote works entitled ‘Necessary Hints to Those that Would be Rich’ (1736) and ‘Advice to a Young Tradesman’ (1748). In the later he wrote:
‘Remember that time is money. Time wasting, idleness and diversion lose money…. A reputation for prudence and honesty will bring credit… Business people should behave with industry and frugality and punctuality and justice in their dealings.’
The Spirit of capitalism was more than about making money, it was also a way of life and a set of ethics. Making money became both a religious ethic and a business ethic.
Capitalist enterprises are organised on rational bureaucratic lines. Capitalists conduct Business transactions in a systematic and rational manner and they monitor costs and profits closely. This single minded, rational pursuit of profits is like a sense of calling in protestantism.
The protestant idea of a regimented and disciplined life and the idea that people had a set place in life further encouraged standardised production and justified the division of labour.
Weber argued that over the following centuries, the norm of working hard and investing in your business became entrenched in European societies. These norms encouraged entrepreneurialism and a rational approach to mass production which fuelled capitalism.
Eventually the old protestant religious ideas withered away and we were left with mainly secular, capitalist societies.
Evaluations of the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
Weber’s theory of social change recognises that we need to take account of individual motivations for action in order to understand massive social structural changes.
Kautsky developed a Marxist critique of Weber. He argued that early capitalism preceded Calvinism. He sees Calvinism as developing in countries and cities where commerce and early industrialisation were already established. Then Calvinism came along to justify their already existing capitalist practices.
Critics have pointed out that the emergence of Capitalism doesn’t actually correlate that well with Protestantism. There are many historical examples of Capitalist systems having emerged in non-Protestant countries. An example of this is Italian Mercantilism a couple of centuries earlier.
There are also some Calvinist countries where capitalism developed much later on. For example Switzerland and Scotland.
However, defenders of Weber dismiss the above criticisms. They point out that if we drill down into the examples of where capitalism didn’t emerge in some calvinist countries, those countries didn’t have other necessary factors. For example in Scotland, they lacked capital investment and government policies were not favourable.
Max Weber’s Protestant Ethic: how is it relevant to A-level Sociology?
This work is one of the main studies within the beliefs in society module.
Weber (1958, first published 1904) argued that in some circumstances religion can cause social change. Religious beliefs may have united protestants in the 1600s but those same beliefs resulted in long term social changes. Moreover, the emergence of capitalism is arguably the most important social change in modern history.
This criticises Functionalist and Marxist theories of religion which argue that religion prevents social change.
Weber’s theory also criticises Marx’s theory that religion is shaped by economic factors. In Weber’s theory the reverse happens: the beliefs of protestantism laid the foundations for the capitalist economic system.
Weber’s theory is also a good example of social action theory. We can only understand why capitalism emerged by understanding the world view of protestants 400 years ago. We need to understand their religious motives and beliefs to understand capitalism.
Verstehen and the Protestant Ethic are two things Weber is well-known for
Max Weber (1864-1920) was one of the founding fathers of Sociology. Weber saw both structural and action approaches as necessary to developing a full understanding of society and social change.
For the purposes of A level Sociology we can reduce Weber’s extensive contribution to Sociology to three things:
Max Weber: Three Key Points
Firstly he argued that ‘Verstehen’ or empathatic understanding is crucial to understanding human action and social change, a point which he emphasised in his classic study ‘The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism’;
secondly, he believed we could make generalisations about the basic types of motivation for human action (there are four basic types) and
thirdly, he still argued that structure shaped human action, because certain societies or groups encourage certain general types of motivation (but within these general types, there is a lot of variation possible).
This final point can be illustrated by a quote from one of his most important works ‘Economy and Society’, first published in the 1920s, in which he said ‘Sociology is a science concerning itself with interpretive understanding of social action and thereby with a causal explanation of its course and consequences.’
Max Weber – NOT a happy bunny
Social Action and Verstehen
Weber argued that before the cause of an action could be ascertained you had to understand the meaning attached to it by the individual. He distinguished between two types of understanding.
First he referred to Aktuelles Verstehen – or direct observational understanding, where you just observe what people are doing. For example, it is possible to observe what people are doing – for example, you can observe someone chopping wood, or you can even ascertain (with reasonable certainty) someone’s emotional state from their body language or facial expression. However, observational understanding alone is not sufficient to explain social action.
The second type of understanding is Eklarendes Verstehen – or Empathetic Understanding – in which sociologists must try to understand the meaning of an act in terms of the motives that have given rise to it. This type of understanding would require you to find out why someone is chopping wood – Are they doing it because they need the firewood, are they just clearing a forest as part of their job, are they working off anger, just doing it because they enjoy it? To achieve this Weber argued that you had to get into the shoes of people doing the activity.
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
In this famous work, Weber argued that a set of religious ideas were responsible for the emergence of Capitalism in Northern Europe in the 16-17th century. Weber argued that we need to understand these ideas and how they made people think about themselves in order to understand the emergence of Capitalism. (NB The emergence of Capitalism is one the most significant social changes in human history)
The video below, from the School of Life, offers a useful summary of Max Weber’s ideas about the emergence of Capitalism
Weber’s Four Types of Action (and types of society)
Max Weber didn’t just believe that individuals shape society – societies encourage certain types of motive for action – for example, the religion of Calvinism encouraged people to save money, which eventually led to capitalism
Weber believes that there are four ideal types of social actions. Ideal types are used as a tool to look at real cases and compare them to the ideal types to see where they fall. No social action is purely just one of the four types.
Traditional Social Action: actions controlled by traditions, “the way it has always been done”
Affective Social Action: actions determined by one’s specific affections and emotional state, you do not think about the consequences
Value Rational Social Action: actions that are determined by a conscious belief in the inherent value of a type of behavior (ex: religion)
Instrumental-Rational Social Action: actions that are carried out to achieve a certain goal, you do something because it leads to a result
To illustrate these different types of action consider someone “going to school” in terms of these four ideal types: Traditionally, one may attend college because her grandparents, parents, aunts, and uncles have as well. They wish to continue the family tradition and continue with college as well. When relating to affective, one may go to school just because they enjoy learning. They love going to college whether or not it will make them broke. With value rational, one may attend college because it’s a part of his/her religion that everyone must receive the proper education. Therefore, this person attends college for that reason only. Finally, one may go to college because he/she may want an amazing job in the future and in order to get that job, he/she needs a college degree.
Max Weber was particularly interested in the later of these – he believed that modern societies encouraged ‘Instrumental-Action’ – that is we are encouraged to do things in the most efficient way (e.g. driving to work) rather than thinking about whether driving to work is the right thing to do (which would be value-rational action.
Weber believed that modern societies were obsessed with efficiency – modernizing and getting things done, such that questions of ethics, affection and tradition were brushed to one side – this has the consequence of making people miserable and leading to enormous social problems. Weber was actually very depressed about this and had a mental breakdown towards the end of his life.
Evaluations of Max Weber’s Social Action Theory
Positive – He recognized that we need to understand individual meanings to understand how societies change (unlike Marxism)
Positive – The idea that individual motives can lead to huge structural level changes such as the emergence of Capitalism is especially interesting!
Negative – Still too much focus on society shaping the individual – symbolic interactionism argues that individuals have more freedom to shape their identities.
Negative – there might well be more types of motivation than just four types
Negative – his theory of the emergence of capitalism has been criticized as there is evidence of some forms of capitalism existing BEFORE Protestantism.
Sign Posting
Max Weber’s Action Theory is a key social theory usually studies as part of the theory and methods topic for second year sociology.
For an overview of Action theories more generally, including interactionism and labelling theory please see this post which summarises social action theories.
