论韦伯的新教伦理——评《新教伦理与资本主义精神》

经济的发展需要一种文化伦理的支撑,资本主义的兴起和繁荣是多种因素综合作用的结果,马克斯.韦伯从一种文化伦理的视角论证了新教伦理与资本主义之间的生成关系,虽有失偏颇,但对我们有着重要而深刻的启迪意义,为我们提供了富于启迪意义的思路,并开辟了多种研究途径。     

The Romanticization of Charismatic Leadership in the Arts

ABSTRACT

This inter-disciplinary article focuses on the role, significance, and impact of charisma in cultural leadership. It brings together fresh empirical data with a critical review of the literature to investigate the role of charisma in the operation, reputation, and strategic success of arts organizations. For the first time, this article synthesizes a diverse range of literature from sociology, psychology, political science, management, and leadership studies and applies it critically to the context of the arts. This comprehensive review is compared against interviews with key stakeholders in the arts, which challenge the neo-charismatic literature on leadership and support a return to aspects of the original formulation of charisma, as envisaged by Max Weber. The article finds that charismatic leaders are seen as extraordinary individuals and are excessively romanticized by arts managers, policymakers, and audiences. It questions this normative bias and concludes that charismatic leaders should be treated with a degree of skepticism, even caution, to temper any negative impacts on "followers" and organizations.     

怀特和韦伯"文化科学"思想之比较研究

美国著名的人类学家怀特在其代表作《文化科学———人和文明的研究》一书当中提出了他有关文化科学的主要思想。经典社会学的代表韦伯在他阐述其有关社会科学方法论的主要观点时 ,亦提出了“文化科学”一名 ,并就此进行了详细的论述。值得注意的是 ,二者所理解的“文化科学”是两个不同的概念 ,需要加以严格区分 ,因为他们不仅在研究的目的、理论的诠释系统还是探讨方法上 ,都存在着明显的分歧。引进二者这个同名的术语时 ,决不能乱贴标签 ,否则将会制造出无穷的无意义的争端     

哈贝马斯与韦伯合理化理论之比较

哈贝马斯和韦伯的合理化理论是一脉相承的,但二者在世界图景假设、哲学基础、理论性质三方面部有所不同。韦伯立足于超验世界和经验世界的对立来建构其合理化理论,因此其哲学基础是意识哲学,建构的合理性是普遍真理的形式合理性。哈贝马斯的合理化理论的世界图景假设是经验世界内的系统和生活世界的对立,其哲学基础是语言哲学,建构的合理性是共识的交往合理性。     

How Well Do We Know Max Weber After All? A New Look at Max Weber and His Anglo-German Family Connections

Guenther Roth's study places Max Weber in an intricate network of ties among members of his lineage. This paper presents core findings of Roth's analysis of Weber's family relations, discusses the validity of Roth's core theses and some of the implications of his analysis for Weber as a person and scholar, and addresses how Roth's book may influence future approaches to Weber's sociology.     

现代官僚制的经济性和工具性——马克斯·韦伯的现代官僚制理论及启示

对现代官僚制作全面深刻的理解,有赖于对其理论的奠基人马克斯·韦伯之理论文本的深入剖析。本文通过对马克斯·韦伯现代官僚制理论的梳理后认为,经济性是现代官僚制兴起的原因,工具性则是官僚制的本质,这种本质又直接导致了现代官僚制的自我权力化并产生了政治与行政之争,而制度之下的人也随之被工具化。现代官僚制在创造了惊人的管理效率的同时,也产生了大量的问题。如何在现代官僚制下实现“人是目的”这一主题,则是马克斯·韦伯理论的永久命题。     

当代中国语境下的法治思维

法治思维作为一个时兴概念在当下中国被不断提及,并成为社会治理领域的正当性话语,因此需立足于法治的基本要求,结合法治实践的个案场景,在发现当代中国法治建设薄弱环节的同时探讨法治思维的运用问题。而法治思维内涵的既有界定往往抽象而不具可操作性。因此,法治思维是以规则为中心,合法性判断为优先,限制权力保障权利,坚持正当程序的思维方式。要注意反思当代中国社会治理中与法治思维相左的四类主要问题:领导意志对法律执行的扭曲,法外利益与纠纷解决的乱象,公权力过于强势的现状,重结果轻程序的思维传统。     

试析马克斯·韦伯经济伦理思想的局限性

通过剖析了马克斯.韦伯经济伦理思想的缺陷,进而对其进行了批判。批判韦伯论述的研究视角单一性、"欧洲中心主义"的片面性、对东方宗教伦理认识的粗浅性、忽视资本主义的贪婪攫取性、以宗教伦理解决资本主义困境方式的局限性、经济伦理思想体系的矛盾性。借鉴马克思对资本主义的批判,认为要解决现代资本主义社会的危机,只能以对资本主义制度本身改造为前提。     

Normes,débat et délibération dans la démocratie parlementaire : Max Weber et Jürgen Habermas

ABSTRACT

This article analyzes the significance of the norm in the conceptions of Max Weber, sociologist and author of the classical work Economy and Society, and of Jürgen Habermas, philosopher and sociologist of the Frankfurt School. Both authors have in fact dedicated specific studies to the sociology of right and have conferred a central function on the norms in order to guarantee a correct functioning of parliamentary democracy. For Weber and Habermas, the norm exists in a constitutive tension between facticity and normativity, i.e. between its factual influence on society and its theoretical legitimacy. Weber distinguishes between the juridicial and the sociological meaning of the norm, which is respectively related to its normative value and to its effects on society. For Habermas, the norm is adhered to, but it also has to be legitimized, and this can only be reached as a consequence of a democratic debate that produces consensus. In the political sphere, Weber and Habermas stress the importance of an interaction between legality and political discussion, democratic procedures and their process of institutionalization, thus emphasizing the necessity of guaranteeing a political debate subject to rules. Nevertheless, their ideas of democracy partially differ. Weber conceives of a democracy based on a majority, whereas Habermas stresses the necessity of reaching an agreement. This article analyzes the different models of democracy articulated by Weber and Habermas, their significance, and the possibility of integration between them.