Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Neo-Weberians Building on Marx
. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 8 page paper discusses the way in which Antonio Gramsci and Jurgen Habermas adapted and added to Marx's ideas to devise their own theories. Bibliography lists 6 sources.
Page Count:
8 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_HVNeoSoc.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
in which Antonio Gramsci and Jurgen Habermas adapted and added to Marxs ideas to devise their own theories. Neo-Weberism "Neo" of course means "new," so we would therefore expect that
a "neo-Weberist" is someone who examines Webers theories and uses them as a basis for his own. Apparently thats exactly whats happening, says Michael Billig, who writes that "[A]fter a
long moribund period, economic anthropology is undergoing a renaissance," with renewed interest in the study of such subjects as consumption, globalization, "neo-Marxist political economy" and "economic ideology and methodology" (Billig,
2000). And within this "reborn economic anthropology" study one persons views are coming to the fore: Max Weber (Billig, 2000). "After almost two decades in which Marxist approaches have dominated,
economic anthropologists are increasingly looking to Max Weber as the venerable ancestor who asked the most prescient questions about the relationship between economy and culture" (Billig, 2000). Neo-Weberians do
not understand culture as a product of "material forces" but rather the opposite: for them, culture is the force that drives "all of social life-including economic life" (Billig, 2000). Older
interpretations, including Marx, believed that the economic life of a "non-market-oriented society" (this must mean undeveloped countries since globalization has led to market orientation in the developed world) was "embedded"
in the society and culture (Billig, 2000). Neo-Weberians expand that; they see economics as being "embedded" in complex, capitalist societies as well (Billig, 2000). This puts the neo-Weberians in line
with the more "interpretive" direction now taken by most social sciences, including anthropology (Billig, 2000). Billig writes that neo-Weberians "stress the importance of culture, but they do not consider
culture as either a separate and isolated box apart from social, political, and economic life or a looming set of traditions and precepts immune to the innovative action of individual
...