Anthropology of Religion 2203
Marcia Helene Hewitt
10436125
University of Western Australia
28 May 2008
Max Weber, Altman, Maus and Sahlins–a perspective on religion
and economics.
Or
Jesus Would Be Happier in Arnhem Land.
Proverbs 20:13 Love not sleep, lest thou come to poverty; open thine eyes, and thou shalt be satisfied with bread.
Proverbs 6:6 Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise:
But Jesus said: (25) "Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?…28…And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these." Matthew 25, 28.
`Any formal definition of religion is bound to contain theoretical assumptions that are contentious. "Religion" is a contested concept and there is not, and probably never will be, a universally agreed definition. Nevertheless, over the last one hundred and fifty years, anthropologists have left a legacy that amounts to a kind of matrix of analytical tools that we can now use to analyse and theorise about religion. A number of anthropologists postulate that religion is composed of, driven by, or inextricably bound up with economics. With this notion in mind, my aim is to illuminate more of Weber’s perspectives of capitalism being driven by Old Testament theology. I am also going to discuss and contrast Weber’s views with the work of Marshall Sahlins in Stone Age Economics (1972) and Altman in Hunter-Gatherer Subsistence Production (1984) to further illustrate how other anthropologists have also defined religion in terms of economic systems and economic practices.
Firstly, the task of defining religion for Max Weber was so great that he refused to define religion at all! (Weber, 1922. p.30). He stated:
"To define religion, to say what it is, is not possible at the start of a presentation such as this. Definition can be attempted, if at all, only at the conclusion of the study. The essence of religion is not even our concern, as we make it our task to study the conditions and effects of a particular type of social behaviour." ( Weber 1977 as cited in Machalak, R.).
Weber’s concern was the emergence of secular modernity, and what the role of religion was within that. Weber explored the relationship between certain strands of religious thought and economic structures. In his article The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1958) he quotes Ben Franklin (Lambek, 2005) in such a way that it is possible to find almost exact parallels from Proverbs in the Bible.
Remember that time is money. He that can earn ten shillings a day by his labour, and goes abroad, or sits idle, one half of that day, though he spends but sixpence during his diversion or idleness, ought not to reckon that the only expense; he has really spent, or rather thrown away , five shillings besides.. Ben Franklin (Weber, 1958, pg. 52).
And here are some quotes from Proverbs:
Proverbs of Solomon verse 10 ((NIV)
" Lazy hands make a man poor,
but diligent hands bring wealth"
He who gathers crops in summer is a wise son, but he who sleeps during
harvest is a disgraceful son. (verse 5)
"Diligent hands will rule
But laziness ends in slave labor" v. 24
Max Weber advanced the view that the Protestant ethic–the famous ‘work ethic’-the drive for economic success, the desire for hard work, all originated in Judeo-Christian theology. The ‘spirit of capitalism’, the set of motivations and attitudes that led to ‘rational investment’ of profits continually ploughed back, according to Weber, comes directly from Calvinist theology ( Mommsen, W.J, 2006). Free time, or leisure time, was definitely not part of the equation. The argument is that Calvinism, with its doctrine of predestination (ie the doctrine that God eternally decreed the salvation of some and the damnation of others, not in view of the good or evil deeds they would do, but simply ‘because he willed it’,) made Calvinists anxious about their salvation and that this led them to seek reassurance in attempting to succeed in their economic undertakings, in the belief that God signifies his favour by giving prosperity to the affairs of the elect. (Oberman, 1989). At the same time a Calvinist did not spend money on self-indulgence so had nothing better to do with money than plow it back into his business. (McKim, 2004) All of these ideas, originating in what is called ‘Reformed Theology’, provided the backbone of the ‘spirit of capitalism’, from Weber’s perspective. (Ghosh, P., 2003).
In Weber’s studies the phenomenon under investigation is the emergence of capitalism, which he thinks took place only in Western Europe in early modern times, being exported to other countries (e.g. China, Japan) by invasion from Europe. He examines all the cultural circumstances, looking for cases in other places which were in almost all circumstances similar to early modern Europe, hoping to find what made the difference. The other similar cultures were the ‘control’ group. His argument by the method of difference is that if such and such a culture was like early modern Europe in every respect but one, then that one will be what made the difference, it will be the cause of the emergence of capitalism He decided that what made the difference is religion; the parts of early modern Europe in which capitalism originated had a religion more favourable to rational calculation etc. than other ‘control’ cultures, otherwise pretty similar, in which capitalism did not originate. (Weber, M. 1998. ).
The underpinnings of secular modern deists such as Ben Franklin were already Judeo – Christian.. One could also say that although Ben Franklin himself did not consider himself a Christian, his conceptual schema was already formed from the Judeo-Christian tradition and so, Weber’s use of Ben Franklin’s quote was to illustrate the similitude between Biblical texts and common British/American philosophies of the time. The Puritan Work Ethic, from Weber’s perspective, was a religious axiom. Weber’s view was that the entire capitalist system is driven by the anxiety that one may or may not be ‘saved.’
An interesting contrast to seeing British/American Bostonian culture with the Weberian lens is to look at the studies of J.C. Altman and Marshall Sahlins in Arnhem Land North Western Australia. Looking at Aboriginal culture with Western analytical tools, Sahlins concluded that Arnhem land was "the original affluent culture" and that in Arnhem Land "all the people’s wants are easily satisfied." (Sahlins, 1972). Life in Arnhem Land would certainly have been Marx’s ideal society, with three hour work days and the rest of the day for painting, singing, beadwork and socializing with friends and family. Economics structures in Arnhem land couldn’t be farther away from Marx’s notions in Estranged Labor (1844) that capitalism always leads to the accumulation of capital in a few hands and the oppression of others by a monopoly! And yet Marx, with his evolutionist views on culture, would very likely have seen Arnhem Land as an inferior culture to the Boston of Ben Franklin. Altman concluded that both men and women only had to gather about 3 hours a day to obtain the necessary carbohydrates required for good health, and that therefore, using the amount of leisure time as an indicator of an affluent society, agreed with Sahlins that Arnhem land was indeed an affluent society precisely because they DID have free time! (Altman, 1984). The Boston of Ben Franklin was driven by the puritan work ethic which taught that free time was in fact a bad thing, and a quick road to poverty! In one culture, free time and food gathering time are the markers for affluence; in the Puritan Work ethic, savings are usually the mark of affluence, or equity in a house, for example.
There are other anthropologists who regard religion and economics as inextricably bound together. For instance, Maus, in his book The Gift (1925) , described Polynesian, Melanesian and northwest American potlatch, and reciprocity systems. He made the observation that it made no sense whatsoever to distinguish the religious from the economic (Maus, 1925) and that categories such as ‘religion’ and ‘economics’ were simply more of the Eurocentric lens that Western Anthropologists use to look at small scale societies.
Maus and Potlatch.
Considering the gift as a total phenomena involving the social, political and religious structures, he places the study of economic problems in pre-monetary societies in their correct context. He explains that to understand the institutions of prestation and the potlatch we must also understand two complementary factors. Total prestation he notes carries with it an obligation to repay the gift to the giver, but also implies the obligation to give presents and the obligation to receive them. (Maus, 1925, p.11). He discovered the link that exists between the material transfer of objects and social hierarchy: ‘to give is to show one’s superiority. To accept without returning or repaying more is to face subordination’ (Maus, 1925 p. 29).
He reduces various types of transfers to only one: the gift. Maus studied the nature of human transactions in societies that predate his own, and whose exchange institutions differed from his own. The idea that these premonetary societies lacked an economic market he disputes, as he concludes that market itself is a human phenomenon which is familiar to every society. Markets are, according to Maus, found before the development of merchants and before currency as we know it. These markets functioned before modern forms of Semitic, Hellenic and Roman social orders. By studying Polynesia, Melanesia and north-West America he was able to analyse reciprocal giving in detail, and concluded that prestations and counter-prestations took place under a voluntary guise but were in essence obligatory.
All these institutions reveal the same kind of social and psychological pattern. Food, women, children, possessions, land labour, charms, services, religious offices, rank…everything is stuff to be given away and repaid. In perpetual interchange of what we may call spiritual matter, these elements pass between clans and persons, for generations. (Maus, 1925).
Conclusion
Although anthropologists do not agree on the definition of religion, there are a number of anthropologists who see religion and economic systems as inextricably bound together:. Max Weber and his linking of the Protastant Work Ethic and Capitalism, Sahlins in Arnhem land studying gathering and leisure time patterns, and Maus researching northwest American Indians in addition to the Polynesian Islands. All these researchers conclude something similar; that what sometimes looks like religion or spirituality on the surface has a deeper underpinning of economic structures and practices, handed down from generation to generation. I cannot resist adding here that Weber’s thesis SHOULD have been called "The Calvinist Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism" because, as I quoted at the start of this essay, Jesus’ teaching would have fit much better the economic structures of Arnhem Land. In fact, I was going to name this essay ‘Jesus would be happy in Arnhem Land!" So if there are any critiques to be made on Weber’s analysis, I should think he would have to be clearer the difference between Old and New Testament theology, and how those are practiced in various churches. I have also noted that even though Marx would have thoroughly approved of the Arnhem Land social structuring, he would still, as a social evolutionist, have seen it as a ‘primitive’ culture, still moving forward in its evolutionary path.
References:
Altman, J.C. 1982. Hunter-gatherers and the State: the Economic Anthropology of the Gunwinggu of North Australia, unpublished PhD thesis, Australian National University.
Edwards, W.H. 1987. Traditional Aboriginal Society. Macmillian Educational Australia. South Yarra.
Ghosh, P. 2003. History of European Ideas. Max Weber’s Idea of Puritanism. Dept. of History, St. Anne’s College. Oxford. Oxz 6HS UK.
[accessed on line 27 May 2008]
Lambek A Reader in the Anthropology of Religion. 2005. Blackwell Publishing. Quote by Ben Franklin, pg. 58.
Lutz, Kaelber. 2006. The Art of Reading and Understanding Max Weber. Reflections on Recent ( and not so recent) Readers and Compilations. The Canadian Journal of Sociology. Vol. 31, Number 1, Winter 2006 pp. 131-141.
Kaplan, P. 2000. The Darker Side of the Original Affluent Society. A Culturalist Reformation. Current Anthropology.33 (1). Pp. 25-47.
Machalak, R. 1977. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Vol. 16, No. 4 Dec.
pp. 395-401.
Marx, K. 1844. Estranged Labour. P. 117. Course materials on line WebCT UWA.
Maus, Marcel. 1923. The Gift. Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. Translated by Ian Gunnison. Forward by EE Evans Pritchard. New York. Norton Library Inc.
McKim, Donald. 2004. The Cambridge Companion to John Calvin. New York.Cambridge University Press.
McGrath, Alister. 1990. A Life of John Calvin: A Study in the Shaping of Western Culture. Cambridge, Mass. Basil Blackwell.
Mommsen, W.J.2006. From Agrarian Capitalism to the ‘spirit’ of Modern Capitalism.
Max Weber’s Approaches to the Protestant Ethic." Kyklos. Germany. Helbing & Lichtenhahn Verlag.
Muller, R. 2000. The Unaccommodated Calvin; Studies in the Foundation of Theological Tradition. New York. Oxford University Press.
Oberman, Heiko Augustinus. 1989. Luther: Man Between God & the Devil. Yale University Press. New Haven.
Parsons, Talcott. 1961. Theories of Society: Foundations of Modern Sociological Theory. Free Press of Glencoe. New York.
Seddon, . 1978. Relations of Production: Marxist approaches to Economic Anthropology. Routledge. London.
Smith, Brian. 1987. Exorcising the Transcendent: strategies for Defining Hinduism and Religion in History of Religions Vol. 27, No. 1 pp. 32-55. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
Smith, Eric. 1991. "The Current State of Hunter-Gatherer Studies". In Current Anthropology. Vol. 32, No. 1 pp. 72-75. Chicago. University of Chicago Press.
Sahlins, Marshall. 1972. Stone Age Economics. Chicago: Aldine/Atherton.
Sahlins, Marshall. 1976. Culture and Practical Reason. Chicago. University of Chicago Press.
Swedberg, Richard. 2000. Max Weber & The Idea of Economic Sociology. New Jersey Princeton University Press..
Trautmann, T. 1994. The Library of Lewis Henry Morgan. Philadelphia. American Philosophical Society.
[accessed on line 20 May 2008]
Weber.1922. As cited in Religion in the Contemporary World: Alan Aldridge. Blackwell
Weber, M., Gerth, HH., Mills, C.W. 1998. Essays in sociology. London. Routledge.
Publishing.
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate