So to this point we have discussed what Durkheim and Marx said about modern forms of suffering. Now we turn to a third highly influential social theorist Max Weber. In many ways, Weber is an intermediary between Durkheim and Marx. On the one hand, like Durkheim, Weber was concerned about matters of meaning. On the other, like Marx, he was concerned about matters of power. However, unlike Durkheim who focused on how specialization undermines shared meanings, an unlike Marx who focused on how markets or commodification, creates power imbalances. Weber focused on how rationalization both disempowers individuals and robs their lives of meaning. Weber argued that we live in a time that is increasingly dominated by rationalization that has led to the disenchantment of the world. By rationalization, he means society is increasingly organized to maximize efficiency and predictability. I will say what that means in more concrete terms in a bit. By disenchantment, Weber refers to the loss of mystery and wonder. Disenchantment has increased, according to Weber, as human societies have developed scientific techniques for controlling nature and explaining reality. Ironically, the factor that most contributed to the disenchantment of the world, Weber argues, was religion. One of the major challenges facing most religions is to explain how seemingly undeserved suffering like that caused by the earthquake in Haiti, could exist in a world created by supernatural beings. At first, religion suggested suffering was a form of divine punishment. However, most religions grew uncomfortable portraying gods in such cruel terms, and over time developed a different explanation of human suffering that suggested it was due to factors other than strictly spiritual ones. For example, rather than suggesting that poverty and illness were caused by deities, religions began attributing these forms of suffering to economic dynamics and biophysical processes. In particular, the Protestant doctrine of individual salvation contributed to this new religious understanding of suffering, Weber argued. According to it, individuals can overcome the suffering of this world and receive God's blessings through a strong work ethic. That is, people who acted out their faith through hard work would be compensated with riches on Earth or in heaven. This doctrine had two effects according to Weber. On the one hand, it's emphasis on unrelenting work and disciplined behavior as a way to acquire God's blessings fueled the creation of a more efficient and better organized economic system in the form of capitalism, that enabled people to maximize their productivity. On the other hand, this doctrine discouraged individuals from relying entirely on religion to solve their problems, or make sense of their lives. Instead, they relied increasingly on science and technology to function and understand their existence. Now, in the eyes of scholars like Marx, this latter effect or move away from religion was a positive one in that it allowed individuals to gain control of their lives and explore new aspects of their existence in a way that had not been allowed by religions in the past. According to them, rationalization made it possible for humans to master their world and rid it of all superstitious beliefs. Weber, however, was not so enthusiastic. He suggested that while science provides countless discoveries and new technical means to manipulate the physical world, scientific progress does not necessarily lead to enlightenment, freedom, or happiness for humankind. He was especially critical of those who would replace religion with what he called the God of science, or suggest scientific progress can make individuals more fulfilled. He writes, who still believes that the findings of astronomy, biology, physics or chemistry could teach us anything about the meaning of the world? In his eyes, although science destroyed the illusions of religion and revealed the complexities of the universe, it did not provide any comfort, relief, solace, or any overarching understanding of its own. In that respect, Weber suggested, we are perhaps worse off than primitive people who view the universe as all inspiring. As technology becomes more sophisticated, he argued, we know less and less about how it actually works. Ordinary citizens also have very little control over its design, yet we become more dependent on technology to simply function every day and to perform the most mundane tasks. In addition, rationalization does not rid individuals of existential anxiety. In fact, many now believe that their self worth is defined by how productive they are as workers or successful as students. Finally, Weber suggested, that as a result of rationalization, modern individuals tend to see all things, including people as objects that can be controlled, manipulated, and ultimately disposed of. So how exactly does rationalization structure our world in such an impersonal and dehumanizing fashion? According to Weber, the most important instrument through which rationalization is implemented is the bureaucratic model of organization. Bureaucracies routinize activities and organize them into very detailed hierarchical division of Labor. A prime example of bureaucracy can be found in the army, with its layers of command and its clearly defined functions. What made the bureaucratic form of organization so revolutionary an effective were its two chief characteristics. First, it's impersonal nature, that is, its use of impartial objective criteria and rendering decisions. And second, bureaucracies concentrate power in the hands of those who run them, which is to say it is organized like a top down pyramid. For Weber, bureaucratic organization threatened to encompass all institutions of modern society, including the economy, the state, the military, and the university. The world was being engulfed by this new form of organization, turning people into cogs in a giant, impersonal machine. The other chief means through which rationalization is implemented according to Weber, is technology, that enables those at the top of bureaucracies to control their subordinates, and if they desire, to commit acts of violence against them. Because large scale and technically sophisticated organizations are more difficult to manage. Weber also worried that they can create new and unforeseen dangers for society at large. So let's summarize what these three theorists had to say about the different forms and causes of suffering in modern society. According to Durkheim, suffering takes the form of a growing sense of isolation and deviance caused by specialization. According to Marx, suffering takes the form of poverty and inequality caused by commodification. And according to Weber, suffering takes the form of meaninglessness, systematic violence, and unforeseen dangers caused by rationalization.
