hat prudent advise that fits neatly into Webers definition of capitalism in where he states that one which rests on the expectation of profit by the utilization of opportunities for exchange, that is on peaceful chances of profit and pursuit of profit and forever renewed profits through continuous, rational, capitalistic enterprise(1). Dickson and McLachlan, like many other critiques, dont take into account that although Weber attempts to prove a statistical and specific point as to the origin of capitalism, its a generalization he refers to. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism must be taken as a whole work, additions and explanations of this work given at a later date by Weber must also be included. Webers work is theoretical. It is based on one mans view of the evidence, and must be taken as a whole, and as a theory. Whether or not the Protestant ideal was the complete basis for capitalist domination can never be fully proven. Webers discussion of Protestantism, as a factor in capitalism, cannot be discredited either. Even though statistical and historical facts may prove it somewhat inconsistent, there will always be an idea before a movement, and until one man can be proven to be the founder of capitalism Webers thesis still stands. Bibliography(1)Anderson, Hughes, and Sharrock: Classic Disputes in Sociology. London: Unwin and Hyman, 1987.(2)Green,Robert W.Protestantism and Capitalism: The Weber Thesis and Its Critiques. Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1959.(3)Dickson, Tony and McLachlan, In Search of The Spirit of Capitalism: Webers Misinterpretation of Franklin, Sociology, Vol.23, No.1 (81-89).(4)Weber, Max: General Economic History. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, Inc., 1979.(5)Weber, Max: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1958.(6)Algazi, Gadi: Max Weber on Market Relations, Freedom and Coercion. Dept. of History, Tel Aviv University: WWW.Criticism.Com. ...
