WAX WEBER

UNIT 2
The influential sociologist Max Weber proposed a theory of authority that included three types.
He pioneered a path towards understanding how authority is legitimated as a belief system. His
essay “The three types of legitimate rule”, translated in English and published posthumously in
1958, is the clearest explanation of his theory.
Weber’s three types of authority are traditional, charismatic, and legal-rational authority.
Traditional authority is legitimated by the sanctity of tradition. The ability and right to rule is
passed down, often through heredity. It does not change overtime, does not facilitate social
change, tends to be irrational and inconsistent, and perpetuates the status quo. The creation of
new law opposite traditional norms is deemed impossible in principle.” Traditional authority is
typically embodied in feudalism or patrimonialism. In a purely patriarchal structure, “the
servants are completely and personally dependent upon the lord”, while in an estate system (i.e.
feudalism), “the servants are not personal servants of the lord but independent men”. But, in
both cases the system of authority does not change or evolve.
Charismatic authority is found in a leader whose mission and vision inspire others. It is based
upon the perceived extraordinary characteristics of an individual. Weber saw a charismatic
leader as the head of a new social movement, and one instilled with divine or supernatural
powers, such as a religious prophet. Weber seemed to favor charismatic authority, and spent a
good deal of time discussing it
Charismatic authority is “routinized” in a number of ways according to Weber: orders are traditionalized, the
staff or followers change into legal or “estate-like” (traditional) staff, or the meaning of charisma itself may
undergo change.
Legal-rational authority is empowered by a formalistic belief in the content of the law (legal) or natural law
(rationality). Obedience is not given to a specific individual leader - whether traditional or charismatic - but a set
of uniform principles. Weber thought the best example of legal-rational authority was a bureaucracy (political or
economic). This form of authority is frequently found in the modern state, city governments, private and public
corporations, and various voluntary associations. In fact, Weber stated that the “development of the modern
state is identical indeed with that of modern officialdom and bureaucratic organizations just as the development
of modern capitalism is identical with the increasing bureaucratization of economic enterprise (Weber 1958, 3).
However, no authority structure, Weber wrote, could actually be exclusively bureaucratic, because some
positions would be held by a variety of charismatic leaders. He also stated that non-bureaucratic legal authority
could be found in organizations that have rotating office holders, such as “Parliamentary and committee
administration and all sorts of collegiate and administrative bodies” (Weber 1958, 3). Weber’s feelings about
bureaucracies sometimes came through in his writing and he tended to view the move towards legal-rational
authority as a move into an “iron cage”.
Max Weber identified and explained three distinct types of authority.

Weber’s Three Types of Authority

Traditional Charismatic Legal-Rational

Legitimized by long-standing Authority resides in the

Source of Power Based on a leader’s personal qualities
custom office, not the person

Leadership Style Historic personality Dynamic personality Bureaucratic officials

Patriarchy (traditional positions

Example of authority), royal families
with no political power but
social influence
U.S. presidency and
Napoleon, Jesus Christ, Mother
Congress, Modern
Teresa, Martin Luther King, Jr.
British Parliament
TYPES OF LEGAL THOUGHTS AND
MAX WEBER
Legal Positivism: Weber's work contributed to the development of legal positivism by
emphasizing the importance of legal formalism and the rationalization of law. He argued that
modern legal systems are characterized by the separation of law from morality and the
increasing reliance on formal rules and procedures. Weber's concept of the "rational-legal
authority" as one of the three types of authority (alongside traditional and charismatic
authority) reflects his view of law as a rational and legitimate form of social control.
Sociological Jurisprudence: Weber's sociological approach to law had a profound impact on
sociological jurisprudence. He examined the relationship between law and society, emphasizing
how social, economic, and cultural factors influence legal systems and legal decision-making.
Weber's concept of the "ideal type" provided a methodological framework for studying legal
phenomena by abstracting and analyzing their essential characteristics.
Legal Rationalism: Weber's emphasis on the rationalization and bureaucratization of law contributed to the
development of legal rationalism. He argued that modern legal systems are characterized by the increasing
specialization, formalization, and rationalization of legal rules and procedures. Weber's analysis of the rise of
the modern state and its legal system helped to shape understandings of the role of law in governing
complex societies.
Historical Jurisprudence: Weber's historical sociology of law provided insights into the historical
development of legal systems and institutions. He examined how historical processes, such as the rise of
capitalism and the Protestant Reformation, influenced the evolution of legal norms and practices. Weber's
comparative analysis of legal systems across different societies shed light on the diversity of legal traditions
and the ways in which historical contexts shape legal frameworks.
Critical Legal Studies: Although Weber himself did not directly contribute to critical legal studies, his ideas on
the relationship between law and power have been influential in this field. Weber's concept of "power" as
the ability to impose one's will on others and his analysis of the role of bureaucracy in modern societies have
been used by critical legal scholars to critique traditional legal doctrines and institutions, highlighting issues
of inequality, oppression, and social control.
The Sociological book of Economy and Society (1922) had been listed as the most important see
e 20th century by the International Sociological Association in 1998. In the book Weber has
defined the term ‘Sociology’...is a science concerning itself with the interpretive understanding
of social action and thereby with a causal explanation of its course and consequences. We shall
speak of “action” insofar as the acting individual attaches a subjective meaning to his behavior...
Social action, like all actions, may be oriented in the following four ways:
Instrumentally rational (zweckrational), that is, determined by expectations as to the behavior of
objects in the environment and of other human beings; these expectations are used as
"conditions" or "means" for the attainment of the actor’s own rationally pursued and calculated
ends; (2) Value-rational (wertrational), that is, determined by a conscious belief in the value for
its own sake of some ethical, aesthetic, religious, or other form of behavior, independently of its
prospects of success; (3) Affectual (especially emotional), that is,determined by the actor's
specific affects and feeling states; (4) Traditional, that is, determined by ingrained habituation.
The Elements of Rationalization: wide he Rationalization would dominate through three
procedures:
1. The control of the world through calculation and the collection and recording of information,
2. The systematization of meaning and value into an overall consistent scheme.
3. The methodological living of daily life according to rules.
Rationality means following a rule, or an abstract moral principle, rather than acting on impulse,
randomness or emotionality. Rationality means building up a logically consistent conclusion.
pattern linking our thoughts and actions and following this pattern to its It means commitment
to consistency in linking our words and actions, our aims and like activities; it entails creating an
efficient ordering of means to ends. As a consequence was faced an inevitable, systematization
of belief, the elimination of logical inconsistencies, the disarming pf the magical and mystical,
and a movement away from peculiar or local pattern of thinking to more abstract or universal
forms
it, as well as the argument that the ‘Content’ of any moral judgment is fully revealed only in
understanding the context of the social network and determinations of actual social historical
situation. Our knowledge will therefore need to consider a duality; the internality of action and
the situation of that action within the vast picture of social development” Weber emphasized
the peculiarly *rational’ quality of legal institutions in modern Western societies. He saw law as
passing through stages ranging from charismatic legal revelation through what he called ‘law
prophets’ to as ‘ systematic elaboration of law and professionalized administration of justice by
persons who have received their legal training in a learned and formally logical manner’
This applies also to Weber's ideas concerning types of irrationality and rationality that
characterize legal systems. Legal irrationality, that is a failure to be guided by general rules, may
be formal, as where decisions are determined by means beyond the control of reasoning or
substantive, where the decision- maker is guided only by reaction to the individual case. A legal
system exhibited substantive rationality when it was guided by principles albeit of an ideological
system other that that of the law itself, for example religion or justice. Weber saw natural law in
its revolutionary, rather that reactionary form. Its role was to legitimate legal change and as such
is necessary factor in the rationalization of law. It was Weber thought, the absence of natural
law which impeded the progress to rationalization of
both Chinese and Judaic law. ” Weber'sSociologyof Lawhas for its main theme the analysis of the
transformation of law froma "charismatic"finding of law to a state of rationalization. This
transformation is followedupinvariouslegalphenomena in the gradual distinction of public from
private law whichis howevera distinction shifting with the development and principles of
government. In the evolutionfrom the decision of individual cases to general principles and
eventually a systematizationof law. In the development from the early formal status contract to
the elastic and formless purpose-contract; from the autonomous legal personality of the middle
aged to the modern state monopoly of the creation of legal personality. All these are legal
developments closely linked with social, political and economic factors. Thus a development of
an exchange economy with its increasing use of money leads to the development to the modern
contract with its free assignability. The most interesting part of Weber's analysisis concerned
with the influence of legal professionalism and of different forms of political government on the
development of law.
The theoretical conclusions which Weber derives from his comparative sociological
investigations are that law in general develops from a charismatic revelation by “prophets of
law" to an empirical creation and administration by a special class of legal advisors, further to a
law imposed by wordly or theocratic powers and eventually to a rationalize system of law-giving
and professional administration of justice by experts. Correspondingly, legal technique develops
form magically rooted formalism through the utilitarian rationalization sponsored by modern
absolutist government towards the logical rationality of modern law.
When Weber observed that social life in the modern era had become more and more rationalized in
a purposive-rational sense, he not only contemplated the central role of economy, state, and
bureaucracy, but along with it also discussed the role of law as the basis of modern political
authority. Weber specifically outlined the characteristics of a formally rationalized legal system that is
primarily guided by the application of procedures. His analysis of law is an intrinsic part of his
sociology, in terms of both its perspective to the study of society and its theoretical propositions on
the conditions of modern society. Weber's Sociology of Law reveals an approach which, without
preconceived yaluations, has points of contact with Maine's Historical Jurisprudence on one hand
and the Marxist approach to law on the other. It demonstrates the interdependence of law with
political, economical and social forces. ’ Weber's theory seems incapable of embracing welfare state
concepts and seems irreversibly committed to a model of capitalism tied to laissez-faire economies.
Weber's theory has not been able to express that; the laws would fail where the legal system was
insufficiently autonomous or legal reasoning insufficiently legalistic. However, Max Weber has made a
valuable contribution to Jurisprudence and earned for himself a remarkable place among the
influential sociological jurists.