maria weber thesis

• < Previous

Home > University Libraries > Theses and Dissertations > 324

University of the Pacific Theses and Dissertations

Captain charles maria weber, pioneer.

J. T. Aungst , University of the Pacific

Date of Award

Document type, degree name.

Master of Arts (M.A.)

I have chosen to portray the life of a man about whom no book has been written. His very name is known to few outside of San Joaquin County, yet his part in laying the foundation for an American California, and developing a goodly portion of it, was considerable.

NOTE: The copy of this thesis was poor and difficult to scan. We apologize for the quality of the text.

Recommended Citation

Aungst, J. T.. (1934). Captain Charles Maria Weber, pioneer . University of the Pacific, Thesis. https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/324

Since July 31, 2017

Included in

History Commons , Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons

Rights Statement

No Known Copyright. URI: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/ The organization that has made the Item available reasonably believes that the Item is not restricted by copyright or related rights, but a conclusive determination could not be made. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use.

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Collections
• Disciplines

Author Corner

• Submit Research
• Graduate School website

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

UT Electronic Theses and Dissertations

Permanent URI for this collection https://hdl.handle.net/2152/11

This collection contains University of Texas at Austin electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs). The collection includes ETDs primarily from 2001 to the present. Some pre-2001 theses and dissertations have been digitized and added to this collection, but those are uncommon. The library catalog is the most comprehensive list of UT Austin theses and dissertations.

Since 2010, the Office of Graduate Studies at UT Austin has required all theses and dissertations to be made publicly available in Texas ScholarWorks; however, authors are able to request an embargo of up to seven years. Embargoed ETDs will not show up in this collection. Most of the ETDs in this collection are freely accessible to all users, but some pre-2010 works require a current UT EID at point of use. Please see the FAQs for more information. If you have a question about the availability of a specific ETD, please contact [email protected].

Some items in this collection may contain offensive images or text. The University of Texas Libraries is committed to maintaining an accurate and authentic scholarly and historic record. An authentic record is essential for understanding our past and informing the present. In order to preserve the authenticity of the historical record we will not honor requests to redact content, correct errors, or otherwise remove content, except in cases where there are legal concerns (e.g. potential copyright infringement, inclusion of HIPAA/FERPA protected information or Social Security Numbers) or evidence of a clear and imminent threat to personal safety or well-being.

This policy is in keeping with the  American Library Association code of ethics  to resist efforts to censor library resources, and the  Society of American Archivists code of ethics  that states "archivists may not willfully alter, manipulate, or destroy data or records to conceal facts or distort evidence."

Recent Submissions

• 1 (current)

Pardon Our Interruption

As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:

• You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
• You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
• You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
• A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .

To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.

WORLDWIDE shipping

FREE UK delivery over £35

PROUDLY INDEPENDENT since 2001

Coming soon. Carl Maria von Weber: Der Freischütz

Mauro Peter (tenor), Nikola Hillebrand, Christof Fischesser, Katharina Ruckgaber, Moritz von Treuenfels, Bregenzer Festspielchor, Prague Philharmonic Choir, Wiener Symphoniker, Philipp Stölzl, Enrique Mazzola

• Release Date: 4th Oct 2024
• Catalogue No: 768404
• Label: C Major

Region: All

Due for release on 4th Oct 2024

Order now and we will deliver it when available

Weber: Der Freischütz

Download queue

• Clear completed

Suggested Searches

• Climate Change
• Expedition 64
• Mars perseverance
• SpaceX Crew-2
• International Space Station
• View All Topics A-Z

Humans in Space

Earth & climate, the solar system, the universe, aeronautics, learning resources, news & events.

Hubble Examines a Busy Galactic Center

NASA Earth Scientists Take Flight, Set Sail to Verify PACE Satellite Data

What’s Up: September 2024 Skywatching Tips from NASA

• Search All NASA Missions
• A to Z List of Missions
• Upcoming Launches and Landings
• Spaceships and Rockets
• Communicating with Missions
• James Webb Space Telescope
• Hubble Space Telescope
• Why Go to Space
• Commercial Space
• Destinations
• Living in Space
• Explore Earth Science
• Earth, Our Planet
• Earth Science in Action
• Earth Multimedia
• Earth Science Researchers
• Pluto & Dwarf Planets
• Asteroids, Comets & Meteors
• The Kuiper Belt
• The Oort Cloud
• Skywatching
• The Search for Life in the Universe
• Black Holes
• The Big Bang
• Dark Energy & Dark Matter
• Earth Science
• Planetary Science
• Astrophysics & Space Science
• The Sun & Heliophysics
• Biological & Physical Sciences
• Lunar Science
• Citizen Science
• Astromaterials
• Aeronautics Research
• Human Space Travel Research
• Science in the Air
• NASA Aircraft
• Flight Innovation
• Supersonic Flight
• Air Traffic Solutions
• Green Aviation Tech
• Drones & You
• Technology Transfer & Spinoffs
• Space Travel Technology
• Technology Living in Space
• Manufacturing and Materials
• Science Instruments
• For Kids and Students
• For Educators
• For Colleges and Universities
• For Professionals
• Science for Everyone
• Requests for Exhibits, Artifacts, or Speakers
• STEM Engagement at NASA
• NASA's Impacts
• Centers and Facilities
• Directorates
• Organizations
• People of NASA
• Internships
• Our History
• Doing Business with NASA
• Get Involved

NASA en Español

• Aeronáutica
• Ciencias Terrestres
• Sistema Solar
• All NASA News
• Video Series on NASA+
• Newsletters
• Social Media
• Media Resources
• Upcoming Launches & Landings
• Virtual Guest Program
• Image of the Day
• Sounds and Ringtones
• Interactives
• STEM Multimedia

NASA Invites Social Creators to Experience Launch of Europa Clipper Mission

Persevering Through the Storm

NASA’s Hubble, MAVEN Help Solve the Mystery of Mars’ Escaping Water

NASA Astronaut Don Pettit’s Science of Opportunity on Space Station

NASA, Boeing Optimizing Vehicle Assembly Building High Bay for Future SLS Stage Production

NASA Seeks Input for Astrobee Free-flying Space Robots

NASA Summer Camp Inspires Future Climate Leaders

NASA Mission Gets Its First Snapshot of Polar Heat Emissions

Artemis IV: Gateway Gadget Fuels Deep Space Dining

NASA’s Hubble, Chandra Find Supermassive Black Hole Duo

NASA’s Webb Reveals Distorted Galaxy Forming Cosmic Question Mark

NASA Tunnel Generates Decades of Icy Aircraft Safety Data

Research Plane Dons New Colors for NASA Hybrid Electric Flight Tests 

NASA G-IV Plane Will Carry Next-Generation Science Instrument

OSAM-1 Partnership Opportunity: Request for Information 

NASA to Support DARPA Robotic Satellite Servicing Program

NASA JPL Developing Underwater Robots to Venture Deep Below Polar Ice

How to Apply to the NASA MINDS Challenge

About NASA MINDS

NASA MINDS FAQ

La NASA invita a los medios al lanzamiento de Europa Clipper

El X-59 de la NASA avanza en las pruebas de preparación para volar

La NASA invita a creadores de las redes sociales al lanzamiento de la misión Europa Clipper

In mississippi, solar scientist maria weber shares the wonders of physics and astronomy.

Vanessa Thomas

Deep in the Sun’s interior, magnetic fields brew. They stretch and twist and form loops that can rise to the Sun’s surface, blocking heat from reaching it. These resulting cooler areas appear as dark splotches called sunspots. This same tangling and twisting of magnetic fields can also cause explosive activity like solar flares and coronal mass ejections, which send magnetic fields traveling throughout our solar system. On Earth, these bursts of energy may interfere with radio and GPS signals, and in space, they pose a threat to astronauts.

Dr. Maria Weber spent the first part of her career as a solar physicist studying, among other things, the magnetism that might give the Sun its spots and drive some of this explosive activity. Weber used simulations to model these ropes of magnetism and compared her findings to observations from NASA’s Sun-facing satellites and other sources. Now, she’s a physics professor at Delta State University in Mississippi and director of the school’s Wiley Planetarium .

(The following interview has been edited for length and clarity.)

How did you decide to become a solar physicist?

I grew up in Indiana, and I never thought I’d be a scientist. I was always just interested in physics because I thought it was cool to see how equations describe the world and the universe. But I didn’t think I would end up pursuing research or getting a PhD in science, I thought I would be a teacher. I decided to major in physics and philosophy in college.

As an undergrad, I did research at the National Solar Observatory for two summers. That introduced me to the world of solar astronomy and solar physics. I loved that experience. It was a close-knit group of astronomers because we were at an observatory on top of a mountain. I got to know a lot of people in the community, and that made me want to stay involved. It was just a lucky experience one summer that I was accepted to do solar physics, and it just stuck.

What was your research area?

I studied how magnetism makes its way to the Sun’s surface and mapped that with the properties of sunspots that we observe. The work is based on the idea that our Sun creates bands of magnetism in its interior, and then little loops of that magnetism rise to the surface, producing sunspots. The processes that those ropes of magnetism encounter as they make their way to the surface determine the location and tilt of sunspots.

My part of it was trying to make that connection between the Sun’s magnetism and what we see on the surface. I essentially turned different knobs in the simulation to adjust various parameters and looked at the effects near the surface of my simulation. Then I could compare those to solar observations from NASA missions like the Solar Dynamics Observatory and other sources.

Why is this work important?

If you observe a solar storm happening or a flare or coronal mass ejection, you have anywhere from 12-ish hours to a couple days before that thing is going to come and impact Earth if Earth is in its path. Wouldn’t it be cool if we could get several more days of warning, very accurately? If we can get a good handle on predicting these solar storms, we can be better prepared here on Earth to deal with them.

What do you do now?

I’m a physics professor and director of a planetarium in Mississippi. I loved research, but that was not all of me. I got so much pleasure out of doing outreach and astronomy communication work that I started thinking about what it would be like to work in a museum or a planetarium full-time. I found this opportunity in Mississippi where I get to be a professor and the director of a planetarium.

I’m still doing some things that relate to my expertise as a solar physicist, but I’ve got so much teaching that there’s not a whole lot of time left over for research. I also don’t have access to supercomputers like I used to. I knew that when I took this job. For me, I thought it would be worth it for the opportunity to see what I could do with a planetarium of my own. And in Mississippi, in our region, students don’t have a whole lot of access to science education resources in the schools. That’s one thing we can offer with our planetarium here.

How does being a solar physicist affect your view of the world?

I was learning all this stuff about the Sun, and then I realized, Hey, the Sun is not the only star . The Sun is one of 400 billion stars in our galaxy. A lot of the things we know about the Sun we can apply to other stars too, but there are just so many other possibilities for stellar behavior out there. It turns out that maybe our Sun is in some ways typical, and in some ways atypical. Thinking about how the Sun fits in with everything kind of makes me think about how we fit in with everything.

By Anna Blaustein NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center , Greenbelt, Md.

Calvinist Predestination and the Spirit of Capitalism: The Religious Argument of the Weber Thesis Reexamined

• Theoretical / Philosophical Paper
• Published: 20 September 2018
• Volume 41 , pages 565–602, ( 2018 )

Cite this article

• Milan Zafirovski   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6823-8977 1  

2096 Accesses

6 Citations

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The paper reconsiders the Weber Thesis of a linkage between Calvinism and capitalism. It first restates this sociological Thesis in terms of the Calvinist doctrine of predestination as its theological core and premise in virtue of being treated as the crucial religious factor of the spirit of modern capitalism. Consequently, it proposes that the Weber Thesis’ validity and consistency depends on that doctrine, succeeding or failing as a sociological theory with the latter depending on whether or not it is unique in theological terms, as well as economic-social consequences. For that purpose, it reexamines and compares the Calvinist doctrine of predestination with the pre-Calvinist versions and infers that it is basically identical to or compatible with these. It then draws the implications for the Weber Thesis in respect of the degree of its validity or consistence. It concludes that the Weber Thesis likely is fail as a sociological-economic theory with the Calvinist doctrine of predestination to the extent that the latter is its theological ground and revealed not to be unique and new theologically and probably in terms of its societal effects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Epilogue: Capitalist Rationalities and Religious Moralities—An Agonistic Plurality

Religion and the Spirit of Capitalism. Remarks to the Function of Religion in Modern Societies

The Future of Religion and Secularity in Sociology’s History

Explore related subjects.

• Medical Ethics

In Weber’s ( 1930 : 99) view, the Calvinist doctrine of predestination represents a ‘causal factor’ because of its ‘influence on other historical processes,’ including the spirit of capitalism, suggesting that, as an instance of ‘judgments of historical imputation,’ in respect of the ‘significance which is to be attributed to that dogma by virtue of its cultural and historical consequences, it must certainly be rated very highly’.

According to Weber ( 1968 : 575, 1978 : 1122), ‘all that remained of (the doctrine of predestination) in Occidental ascetic Protestantism was a remains ( caput mortuum ), the contribution which this doctrine of grace made to the rational capitalistic orientation (i.e., to) the concept of the methodical demonstration of vocation in one's economic conduct (forming) the dogmatic foundations of inner-worldly asceticism.’.

This applies, above all. to Weber’s initial essay the Protestant Ethic (including his replies to early critics) and to some extent his later work Economy and Society in which he also emphasizes the “contribution” of the doctrine of predestination yet diagnosed as “presumed dead” ( caput mortuum ) during his time, to the rise and expansion of capitalism. However, it does not apply to his lectures on General Economic History in which Weber presents his mature, “last” theory of the factors of the evolution of capitalism and even does not consider and mention that theological dogma as relevant (Collins 1980 ).

Parsons ( 1935 : 690) proposes that for Weber “ascetic Protestantism placed peculiarly powerful “psychological sanctions” on certain types of conduct and the source of these sanctions lies in the way in which Protestant dogma, above all the doctrine of predestination, canalized the individual’s attitudes and conduct in a certain peculiar direction–that of systematic, rational mastery over the external environment, and lent these attitudes a very special ethical intensity (as) the central core of Weber’s thesis. Tawney ( 1930 : 10) comments that Weber takes ‘as his theme, not the conduct of Puritan capitalists, but the doctrines of Puritan divines’, in particular the predestination doctrine. Previously in 1914, Scheler ( 1964 : 17) registers the specific connection (of the spirit of capitalism) with Calvin’s doctrine of “predestination” in the “confirmatory” value of wealth for “certitude of salvation” (being of the elect) within Weber’s framework. Giddens ( 1976 : xiif.) comments that ‘of the elements in Calvinism that Weber singles out for special attention, perhaps the most important, for his thesis, is the doctrine of predestination: that only some human beings are chosen to be saved from damnation, the choice being predetermined by God. From this torment, Weber holds, the capitalist spirit was born.” Fourcade and Healy ( 2007 : 295) comment that “Weber was careful to show that the rational search for profit he observed among the protocapitalist Calvinists did not follow logically from their religious worldview. Rather, their actions made psychological sense as a way to relieve the salvational anxiety their harsh religious doctrines (of predestination, etc.) tended to produce”.

Benedict ( 2014 : 200) remarks that ‘the great spur to such behavior within Calvinist religious culture, (Weber) believed, was the doctrine of predestination (which) brought believers face to face with the alarming question: am I predestined to salvation or damnation?’ van den Brink ( 2014 : 221) suggests that ‘Calvin’s ‘terrifying’ doctrine of predestination was combined with the conviction that the sustained attempt to lead a disciplined (‘sanctified’) life was a clear sign of one’s being among the elect’. Graafland ( 2014 :178) comments that, according to ‘Max Weber’s famous thesis,’ ‘because of Calvin’s doctrine of double predestination, people were desperate for signs that they belonged to the elect, and worldly success became one such sign.’ Also, according to Gorski ( 2003 : 26), for Weber the ‘Protestant ethic is rooted in Calvinist theology, specifically, the Calvinist doctrine of double predestination’.  

Scheler ( 1964 : 18) remarks that Calvinism placed “the excessive premium of “confirmed” certitude of salvation upon the action of acquiring and earning (wealth) as the most important manifestation of God’s power over the world and in his elect. (Thus) the source of the restless desire to work and to earn money is the perpetually harassing, wretched doubt of the individual as to whether he was elected to heaven or condemned to hell”. Troeltsch ( 1966 : 136) states that ‘since the aggressively active ethic inspired by the doctrine of predestination urges the elect to the full development of his God-given powers, and offers him this as a sign by which he may assure himself of his election, work becomes rational and systematic”. Generally, for Troeltsch ( 1966 : 64) the “consciously elect man feels himself to be the destined lord of the world, who in the power of God and for the honour of God has it laid on him to grasp and shape the world”. Also, Tawney 1962 : 38f.) proposes referring to Weber’s Thesis that “Calvin did for the Bourgeoisie of the 16th century what Marx did for the proletariat of the 19th century (i.e.) the doctrine of predestination satisfied the same hunger for an assurance that the forces of the universe are on the side of the elect as was to be assuaged in a different age by the theory of historical materialism”.

Benedict ( 2014 : 200) remarks that ‘after three generations of research devoted to pertinent aspects of this topic, the preponderance of the evidence clearly seems to be running in favor of the view that features distinctive to the theological or religious makeup of Calvinism or of the Reformed tradition more generally cannot convincingly be shown to have provided an important stimulus to rational capitalist accumulation or economic success.’ Also, van den Brink ( 2014 : 221f.) registers that ‘whereas (Weber’s) essay continues to serve as a classic in sociology, in economic historiography it has been largely marginalized’.

Young ( 2009 : 384) comments that “Weber argued that the unique (predestination) theology of Protestantism nurtured a capitalist orientation in which saving, investment, and hard work were valued for their own moral content”.

Benedict ( 2002 : xviii) objects that “the new social or anthropological history of early modern religion has revealed how risky it is to infer the psychological experience and social behavior of the members of a given faith from its theology—essentially the method of Weber” specifically used in respect of the Calvinist doctrine of predestination.

Scheler ( 1964 : 16f.) states that “neither Protestantism nor Calvinism “has given birth” to the bourgeois spirit, but in Calvinism the bourgeois spirit broke through the religious barriers which the Catholic Church (and Aquinas) had put in its way,” thus qualifying Weber and disagreeing with Sombart ( 1928 ) who contended that Catholicism, notably Thomism, had opposite, positive effects on the spirit of capitalism. Moreover, in stating that “the receptiveness for and dissemination of (Calvinist) doctrines was doubtlessly prepared and conditioned by the “bourgeois” type which at this time had become dominant” ( 1964 : 16), Scheler effectively disconfirms Weber’s Thesis and confirms Sombart’s argument that capitalism precedes Calvinism, despite Scheler’s opposite declaration and seeming inconsistencies (see note 3).

In general, this holds because of what Durkheim, Pareto, and Mill suggest as a sociological rule of explanation and prediction positing an equivalence of the cause and the effect, i.e., Sorokin’s ( 1970 ) “patterns of uniformity” of causal relations. This is in the sense that the same cause can only produce and explain equivalent, uniform effects under all typical societal conditions and historical conjunctures in which it operates, excluding major “pathological” disturbances, rather than certain consequences in one case and different ones in other cases negating the notion of causation and explanation. If this rule is valid, as a corollary the doctrine of predestination, regardless of its Calvinist and pre- and non-Calvinist variations, must generate via its consequent asceticism or otherwise the same imputed effect, the spirit of capitalism under all societal conditions and historical conjunctures in which it was held, thus both in pre- and non-Calvinism and Calvinism, before (AD 487, 987 or 1496) and during and after the latter (1560 or 1640 or 1776, etc.). Conversely, on these grounds the same doctrine cannot generate that effect only under one set of social–historical conditions such as during Calvinism, but not in all others like in pre- and non-Calvinism such as early Christianity, Catholicism, and Lutheranism (plus Islam), as per Weber’s Thesis. One can object that the same cause, in this case religious ideas and beliefs like predestination, can produce different effects under varying social conditions and historical circumstances, specifically in pre-Reformation and Reformation societies and times. Yet, the burden of proof is on those arguing this to demonstrate that pre-Reformation, particularly Renaissance, and Reformation Europe, the late 15th century and the 16th and 17th centuries were so different in economic as well as non-economic terms that the same doctrine of predestination had radically differential effects on economy and society in the latter as opposed to the former society and period. In fact, Weber and Weberians do not systematically demonstrate such relevant differences in social-economic conditions between the two—say, between Renaissance Italy and Calvin’s France and Geneva or Baxter’s Puritan England—likely because they did not exist to the degree to infer the drastically differential outcomes of the doctrine of predestination for economy and society.

This also holds true generally so long as Durkheim–Pareto–Sorokin’s explanatory rule of the same cause producing and explaining, under identical or similar conditions, identical, and not drastically different, effects is valid.

Weber ( 1930 : 98) describes predestination as the “most essential,” “most characteristic” and “basic” theological doctrine of Calvinism, and yet implies that Calvin did not invent but rather adopted that dogma directly from Augustine (and Luther) and indirectly from Muhammad. Weber ( 1930 : 221) points to “Augustine’s first attempt to develop the doctrine” of predestination expressing the “feeling of certainty that (religious) grace is the sole product of an objective power, and not in the least to be attributed to personal worth,” and identifies its “Biblical foundation” (“principally the first chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians”). Curiously, Weber ( 1968 : 572–573) joins Augustine and Muhammad (plus Luther) in respect of their shared “faith in predestination” and thus regards them as pre-Calvinist believers in that dogma and respective direct and indirect influences on Calvin’s version. In turn, Weber ( 1930 : 102) suggests that during Calvin’s life (unlike Luther) “the significance of the doctrine for him increased, perceptibly in the course of his polemical controversies with theological opponents. It is not fully developed until the third edition of his Institutes, and only gained its position of central prominence after his death in the great struggles which the Synods of Dordrecht and Westminster sought to put an end to”. Within the Weber Thesis, this implies that the doctrine of predestination had existed both in Christianity and Islam (Augustine and Muhammad) long before Calvin and Calvinism, and yet only its later Calvinist version operated, through the consequent ascetic ethic of hard labor in a calling as proof of “election,” as the religious “causal factor” of the origin of the spirit of capitalism. However, Weber does not explain and elaborate how and why the doctrine did so only in the late Calvinist version but not in its early pre-Calvinist versions, or simply avoids dealing with and seemingly unrecognizing this problem. It seems as if it never occurs to Weber to ask why and how the same doctrine produced its assumed effect in the Calvinist case, but not in the cited pre- and non-Calvinist cases.

Rawls and ebrary Inc. ( 2010 : 264) recounts that ‘unless one made an exception of oneself and assumed one would be saved, I came to feel the doctrine of predestination s terrifying once one thought it through and realized what it meant. Double predestination as expressed in its rigorous way by St. Augustine and Calvin seemed especially terrifying, though I had to admit it was present in St. Thomas and Luther also, and actually only a consequence of predestination itself’.

Walker ( 1937 : 13) suggests that Calvinism and the Reformation generally represented in theological terms a re-statement and re-emphasis of certain parts of Catholic theology, especially Predestination and Original Sin.

Collins ( 1980 : 925f.) comments that Weber’s “original thesis about Calvinism” is presented in the Protestant Ethic and consists in the “argument that the Calvinist doctrine of predestination gave the psychological impetus for rationalized, entrepreneurial capitalism,” but describes it as “only a fragment of Weber’s full theory” or “well-rounded model” outlined in General Economic History.

Parsons ( 1938 : 660) adds that a human “eternal fate is settled by Predestination, but he can become certain of salvation through proving his faith by active labor in the vineyard, by doing God’s will. (So) rational, systematic, workmanlike labor in a worldly calling has had this significance to ardent believers in Calvinism and related religious movements”. Similarly, Bendix ( 1977 : 58f.) comments that for Weber among Protestant theological doctrines “especially” the Calvinist doctrine of predestination “contained implicit incentives” for “the new worldly orientation”. Also, McCleary and Barro ( 2006 : 52f.) referring to Weber remark that “Calvin emphasized predestination but thought that economic success and religious faith provided signals that a person had been chosen for salvation. Calvinist Protestantism, with its emphasis on predestination, seems at first glance to be weak on economic incentives. After all, according to Calvin, a person is either one of the elect or not, and no good works or other worldly acts can do anything about it. However, the uncertainty about salvation is also stressed, as is the motivation to gain some kind of sign that one has been chosen. The Reformed churches, which closely follow Calvin’s theology, stress outward or social signs of salvation. Human industry and thrift that result in material success are the clearest possible signals that God has chosen the person as one of the elect who will be saved”.

Ay and Dolphin ( 1994 : 164) comment that “Weber links this (economic) asceticism with John Calvin’s doctrine of predestination,” means ( 1965 : 4) that “Weber stresses the idea of election and predestination as being Protestant ideas instrumental in the rise of capitalism,” and MacKinnon identifies Weber’s focus on “Calvin’s predestinarianism” ( 1988 : 143) and then the “predestinarian content” of orthodox Calvinism ( 1990 : 191).

Critics may comment that Calvinism thereby makes ridicule (Giddens 1984 ) of what Parsons ( 1951 ) claims as the “universalism-achievement” complex supposedly defining America as the historically Puritan society (Clemens 2007 ; Munch 2001 ) in an invidious distinction from that of “particularism-ascription” presumably characterizing Catholic Spanish America, though he was reportedly ambivalent toward his “Puritan heritage” (Alexander 1983 ). In turn, non-Calvinists like liberals and secularists a la Jefferson et al. may remark that the “universalism-achievement” nexus defines America not because but in spite and opposition of Puritanism, including the dogma of predestination, and instead is primarily due to the ideals and legacy of the Enlightenment and its liberalism and secularism (Dombrowski 2001 ; Kloppenberg 1998 ).

Troeltsch ( 1966 : 63f.) proposes that Calvinism “more and more made this doctrine the focus of its system, and in its great historical conflicts drew thence the strong support of the consciousness of election; sacrificing for this, however, rationality and universal love as elements of its conception of God; whereas, Lutheranism, in defending the two latter interests, progressively weakened down the doctrine of predestination, thereby, however, taking from its thought the heroic, the iron element”.

Mathews ( 1912 : 303) remarks that “with Augustine the absolute sovereignty of God (and so predestination) became the central element of the theology (as) in Augustine’s City of God in which the entire Christian dispensation is definitely cast in the political mold. This unmodified absolute monarchy of God was the starting-point of all theological discussions throughout the Roman Catholic church and thence passed over into the Protestant Augustinianism of Luther and Calvin”. Hunter ( 1914 : 233) notes that these doctrines like predestination “with which Calvinism is popularly identified did not originate with Calvin at all. He inherited them, and much else, from Augustine,” and Buckham ( 1918 : 293) describes Calvinism as the “most pronounced Protestant form of Augustinianism”. Bouma ( 1947 : 45) formulates a sort of motto or bumper-sticker of Calvinism—”Not Kant, but Pascal. Not Hegel, but Calvin. Not Feuerbach, but Augustine,” and Tyacke ( 1987 : 204) reports that “Augustine was the author most usually cited by Calvinists” in late 16th century England.

Augustine implies this in stating that “it is not that God is ignorant, and reads in the book to inform Himself, but rather His infallible prescience is the book of life in which (things) are written, that is to say, known beforehand (any human works)”.

Augustine, citing the Biblical passage “many are called, but few are chosen,” asserts “many reprobate are in this world mixed with the elect” until the “wicked must be separated from the good”. Also, he calculates that “from Adam to Noah there are ten generations. And to Noah three sons are added, of whom, while one fell into sin, two were blessed by their father; so that, if you deduct the reprobate and add the gracious sons to the number, you get twelve—a number signalized in the case of the patriarchs and of the apostles (so) the whole human race, with the exception of eight persons, deserved to perish in the deluge (for) all the sins of men (i.e.) all who belong to the city which lives according to man, not according to God, are reprobate”. Cynics may add that this number of the “elect” amounts not even to Weber’s ( 1930 : 121) “spiritual aristocracy of the predestined saints of God within the world” but to a “heavenly” hyper-oligarchy or autocracy as it seems that ultimately the only one “saved” is Augustine at this point or Calvin et al. later. On this account, Augustine sounds like the first “Calvinist,” the theological father of Calvin.

Weber’s influential contemporary Scheler ( 1964 : 14) remarks that the “doctrine of predestination was the doctrine of Augustine” long before Calvin and Calvinism, though does not mention Aquinas’ codification.

Zwingli asserts that ‘predestination is born of providence, nay is providence,’ thus virtually citing Aquinas. However, Weber ( 1930 : 217) remarks that Zwinglianism ‘after a short lease of power it rapidly lost in importance’.

Hobsbaum ( 1972 : 26) implies this remarking that Calvinism “centres and turns upon the doctrine of Predestination: a marginal matter in St. Augustine, a special application of Providence in Aquinas, but taken as his central dogma by Calvin”. Theologian Trinterud ( 1955 : 267) explicitly states that “double predestination” as well as “many other “Calvinistic” ideas and practices were gratefully borrowed by Calvin from his predecessors”.

Weber ( 1930 : 101) admits this shared element in commenting that the “phenomenon of the religious sense of grace is combined, in the most active and passionate of those great worshippers which Christianity has produced again and again since Augustine, with the feeling of certainty that that grace is the sole product of an objective power, and not in the least to be attributed to personal worth,” mentioning also Calvin as well as Luther, while omitting Aquinas.

Calvin’s hostility to Aquinas’ is especially perplexing in contrast to his enthusiasm for Augustine’s version of predestination. This is because of almost no profound differences between Calvin’s and Aquinas’ versions, including the “number of the elect” and the role of “good works” in salvation, and the latter mostly develops, as he states, that of Augustine. It is remarkable that Calvin with all his famed theological erudition and “logical mind” could overlook not only that his version was mostly continuous with that of Aquinas, but even more the latter with Augustine’s, the second omission probably leading to the first. Conversely, if Calvin realized that Aquinas’ version actually elaborated rather than deviated from that of Augustine in the core elements, he would probably have not dismissed the first the way he did.

Beza was probably more correct not just because of being an orthodox Calvinist theologian. He was a disciple and “brother in arm” of Calvin following him in the “water and fire” such as Geneva and representing him in France after the exile, thus knowing and witnessing personally his ideas, feelings, and actions almost four centuries before Weber writing the Protestant Ethic , although his mother (Helene Fallenstein ) was of a French Calvinist, Huguenot descent (the Souchays).

In Franklin’s words, referring to Calvinism: “Surely it is not more difficult to believe the World was made by a God of Wood or Stone, than that the God who made the World should be such a God as this,” described as “contrary to the very Notion of a wise and good Being” (cited in Slack 2013 : 365).

Pareto’s ( 2000 : 35) implicit description of the doctrine of predestination and theology in general as a “cage for the insane” seemingly parallels Weber’s ( 1930 : 181) of capitalism as an “iron cage,” yet a rational one. Cynics may comment that Weber’s Thesis is that Calvinism as a theological “cage for the insane” religiously determines capitalism as an economic “iron cage”.

In Sombart’s (1913: 42) words, “the doctrine of predestination had the effect of imposing a life to Calvinists strictly in accordance with the requirements of the Church. The man in sound mind, obeying only simple logic would say that since his will and his conduct cannot change his fate, he cannot assure salvation or escape from the condemnation, all live according to His good pleasure, but for (others) sanity was completely broken and they were in a state bordering on madness”. Similarly, Mitchell ( 1914 : 34) remarks that “Calvinism developed a similarly reactionary exaltation of poverty, and in its Puritan strains filled the week so full of religious exercises as to leave scant time for an “excess of worldly cases and business” citing Sombart.

Means ( 1965 : 4) comments that “Weber stresses the idea of election and predestination as being Protestant ideas instrumental in the rise of capitalism. These ideas, however, go back to the life of the early church and the Pelagian and Augustinian controversy” and cites a theologian’s statement that “one can hardly blame Professor Max Weber, who was not a theologian for making the mistake many theologians have made and treating the doctrine of election as the distinctive mark of Calvinism. Luther, Zwingli, and indeed all the reformers shared the view of Augustine, and the majority of the great Catholic doctors agreed on this point with Calvin”. Also, Walzer ( 1965 : 21f.) suggests that Calvin’s “innovation was far less important in theology than in moral conduct and social organization”.

Samuelsson ( 1961 : 151) notes that the doctrine of predestination “permeates the whole of Pauline Christianity and was not invented by Calvin or the Puritans”. Hyma ( 1938 : 338) reports that, for example, in Holland under Calvinism the “doctrine of predestination itself was held dear, not so much because of the authority of Calvin as of the manner in which Paul had discussed it in his Epistle to the Romans”. Also, Kaplan ( 1994 : 661) registers that since Calvin to his Dutch followers “all Calvinists assented to” rather than invented strictly speaking the doctrine of predestination.

Weber ( 1930 : 99) remarks that the “Calvinist great synods of the seventeenth century, above all those of Dordrecht and Westminster, besides numerous smaller ones, made (the) elevation (of the doctrine of predestination) to canonical authority the central purpose of their work”.

Samuelsson ( 1961 : 97) observes that “as late as 1647, at all events, the Confession of Westminster (cited at length by Weber) clings to the same conception of predestination as Calvin held” and to that extent to those of Augustine and Aquinas.

Troeltsch ( 1966 : 63) implies that the doctrine of predestination existed before Calvinism stating that early Christianity aims at “excluding all human effort and making salvation independent of man and dependent on God alone”. Troeltsch ( 1966 : 63) adds that “in the interest of assurance of salvation the doctrine of Predestination becomes the central doctrine of Protestantism,” including Luther and Calvin alike (plus Zwingli).

Benedict ( 2002 : 8) notes that “minority voices within the (pre-Calvinist Christian) church upheld a doctrine of predestination (joined with) an Augustinian pessimism about the power of the will to contribute to salvation”. Also, Davis ( 2010 : 6) remarks that “predestination had a long history as a doctrine within the Christian tradition long before the early Protestants came along. They found Augustine persuasive on this point”.

I credit an anonymous reviewer for this statement and the discussion that follows.

Young ( 2009 : 388–393) implies this in finding that, while Weber emphasized a “specific (predestination) theology” as the basis of in-world asceticism, “there is no evidence of a Protestant ethic supporting economic growth; the coefficient for Protestant share is consistently negative and nonsignificant”.

Weber ( 1978 : 1125) argues that the ‘development of French bourgeois capitalism was closely linked with the Huguenot movement’ during Calvin’s life and later. Echoing Weber Troeltsch ( 1966 : 132) notes that “Calvin and his successors rejected the Canon-law prohibition of interest, and did away with the burdensome restrictions on investment”.

Weber ( 1930 :156) describes Baxter as a “Presbyterian and an apologist of the Westminster Synod, but at the same time, like so many of the best spirits of his time, gradually grew away from the dogmas of pure Calvinism,” including the dogma of predestination “whose terrible seriousness deeply influenced (his) youthful development”.

Weber ( 1930 : 102) comments that “at the time of Luther’s greatest religious creativeness, when he was capable of writing his On Freedom of the Christian, God’s secret decree (of predestination) was also to him most definitely the sole and ultimate source of his state of religious grace”.

I credit an anonymous reviewer for this comment.

Weber ( 1930 : 138) suggests that restless labor has historically been an “approved ascetic technique,” as especially applied in medieval monasteries outside society manifesting other-worldly asceticism, and then released and expanded by Calvinism to all social life expressing inner-worldly asceticism.

I give credits to an anonymous reviewer for these qualifications.

According to MacKinnon ( 1988 : 171) “in 17th century Calvinism there is no crisis of proof, no irrationally textured psychological sanction, no unintendedness and above all—no holy approval and blessing for the successful pursuit of a worldly calling”.

Pareto ( 2000 : 55) uses the phrase “kill in the name of the Divine master” with reference to medieval Christian warriors.

Samuelsson ( 1961 : 97) objects that “why it should be only in Calvin and Calvinism, not in St. Paul, Augustine or Luther, that the idea of the ‘sanctity of labor” came to be used, Weber is unable to explain”.

Benedict ( 2002 : 20) finds that the ascetic, rational “style of piety was strikingly absent or muted in many (European) Reformed churches, even though predestinarian theology was no weaker (than in Puritanism)” and infers that “rationalized self-discipline” emphasized by Weber “did not arise simply as a logical, if unintended, consequence of the doctrine of predestination”.

Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., Robinson, J., & Yared, P. (2005). The rise of europe: Atlantic trade, institutional change, and economic growth. American Economic Review, 95, 546–579.

Google Scholar  

Akerlof, G. (2007). The missing motivation in macroeconomics. American Economic Review, 97, 5–36.

Alesina, A., & Giuliano, P. (2015). Culture and institutions. Journal of Economic Literature, 53 (4), 898–944.

Alexander, J. (1983). Theoretical logic in sociology . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Alexander, J. (1998). Neofunctionalism and after . Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Ay, K.-L., & Dolphin, A. (1994). Geography and mentality some aspects of Max Weber’s protestantism thesis. Numen, 41, 163–194.

Becker, H. (1940). Constructive typology in the social sciences. American Sociological Review, 5 (1), 40–55.

Becker, S., & Woessmann, L. (2009). Was weber wrong? A human capital theory of protestant economic history. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124, 531–596.

Bell, D. (1977). The return of the sacred? The argument on the future of religion. The British Journal of Sociology, 28, 419–449.

Bellamy, J., & Holleman, H. (2012). Weber and the environment: Classical foundations for a postexemptionalist sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 117, 1625–1673.

Bénabou, R., Ticchi, D., & Vindigni, A. (2015). Religion and innovation. American Economic Review, 105 (5), 346–351.

Bendix, R. (1977). Max Weber . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Benedict, P. (2002). Christ’s churches purely reformed . New Haven: Yale University Press.

Benedict, P. (2014). Calvinism and the making of the modern european economic mind: A comment and call for more research. In G. van den Brink & H. M. Höpfl (Eds.), Calvinism and the making of the European mind (pp.199–209). Brill: Boston.

Benedict, P., & Backus, I. (Eds.). (2011). Calvin and his influence, 1509–2009 . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bouma, C. (1947). Calvinism in American theology today. The Journal of Religion, 27, 34–45.

Buckham, J. (1918). Pilgrim tercentenary and theological progress. The Harvard Theological Review, 11, 285–306.

Calvin, J. 1536. Christianæ religionis institutio . Basel (online edition).

Calvin, J. 1560 (1888). Institution de la religion Chréttienne . Paris: Librairie de la Suisse Française (online edition).

Camic, C. (1986). The matter of habit. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 1039–1087.

Campbell, C. (2009). Distinguishing the power of agency from agentic power: A note on weber and the “Black Box” of personal agency. Sociological Theory, 27 (4), 407–418.

Clemens, E. (2007). Toward a historicized sociology: Theorizing events, processes, and emergence. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 527–549.

Cohen, J. (1980). Rational capitalism in renaissance Italy. American Journal of Sociology, 85, 1340–1355.

Cohen, J. (2002). Protestantism and capitalism . New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Collins, R. (1980). Weber’s last theory of capitalism: A systematization. American Sociological Review, 45, 924–942.

Collins, R. (1997). An Asian route to capitalism: Religious Economy and the origin of self-transforming growth in Japan. American Sociological Review, 6, 843–865.

Dahrendorf, R. (1959). Class and class conflict in industrial society . Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Davis, W. M. (1978). “Anticritical last word on the spirit of capitalism,” by Max Weber. The American Journal of Sociology, 83 (5), 1105–1131.

Davis, T. (Ed.) (2010). Introduction. John Calvin's American Legacy (pp. 3–18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

De Greef, W. (2008). The writings of John Calvin . Westminster: John Knox Press.

Dobbin, F. (2005). Comparative and Historical approaches to economic sociology comparative and historical approaches to economic sociology. In N. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The handbook of economic sociology (pp. 26–48). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Dombrowski, D. (2001). Rawls and religion . New York: State University of New York Press.

Dromi, S. (2016). Soldiers of the cross. Sociological Theory, 34 (3), 196–219.

Ekelund, R., Hébert, R., & Tollison, R. (2002). An economic analysis of the protestant reformation. The Journal of Political Economy, 110, 646–671.

Foster, H. (1923). Liberal calvinism; The remonstrants at the synod of dort in 1618. The Harvard Theological Review, 16 (1), 1–37.

Fourcade, M. (2011). Cents and sensibility: Economic valuation and the nature of “Nature”. American Journal of Sociology, 116, 1721–1777.

Fourcade, M., & Healy, K. (2007). Moral views of market society. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 285–311.

Friedman, B. (2011). Economics: A moral inquiry with religious origins. American Economic Review, 101, 166–170.

Garrard, G. (2003). Rousseau’s counter-enlightenment . Albany: State University of New York Press.

Giddens, A. (1976). Introduction to weber, max. The Protestant Ethic and the spirit of capitalism (pp. 7–24). London: Routledge.

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Gorski, P. (2000). The mosaic moment: An Early modernist critique of modernist theories of nationalism. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 1428–1468.

Gorski, P. (2003). Disciplinary revolution . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Graafland, J. (2014). Weber revisited: Critical perspectives from calvinism on capitalism in economic crisis. In G. van den Brink & H. M. Höpfl (Eds.), Calvinism and the making of the European mind (pp. 177–198). Boston: Brill.

Greif, A. (2006). Family structure, institutions, and growth: The origins and implications of western corporations. American Economic Review, 96, 308–315.

Gross, N. (2009). A pragmatist theory of social mechanisms. American Sociological Review, 74, 358–379.

Grossman, H. (2006). The beginnings of capitalism and the new mass morality. Journal of Classical Sociology, 6, 201–213.

Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2006). Does culture affect economic outcomes? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 23–48.

Habermas, J. (2001). The postnational constellation . Cambridge: MIT Press.

Harrold, F. (1936). The nature of Carlyle’s calvinism. Studies in Philology, 33, 475–486.

Heller, H. (1986). The conquest of poverty . Leiden: Brill.

Hillmann, H. (2008). Mediation in multiple networks: Elite mobilization before the English civil war. American Sociological Review, 73, 426–454.

Hobsbaum, P. (1972). Calvinism in action: The super-ego triumphant. The Hudson Review, 25, 23–50.

Holton, R. J. (1983). Max weber, “Rational Capitalism”, and renaissance Italy: A critique of cohen. American Journal of Sociology, 89, 166–180.

Hornung, E. (2014). Immigration and the diffusion of technology: The huguenot diaspora in prussia. American Economic Review, 104 (1), 84–122.

Hunter, M. (1914). Has calvinism a future? The Biblical World, 44, 231–238.

Hyma, A. (1938). Calvinism and capitalism in the Netherlands, 1555–1700. The Journal of Modern History, 10, 321–343.

Iyer, S. (2016). The new economics of religion. Journal of Economic Literature, 54 (2), 395–441.

Jonassen, C. (1947). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism in Norway. American Sociological Review, 12, 676–686.

Juergensmeyer, M. (2003). Terror in the mind of god . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kalberg, Stephen. (1980). Max Weber’s types of rationality: Cornerstones for the analysis of rationalization processes in history. American Journal of Sociology, 85, 1145–1179.

Kaplan, B. (1994). “Remnants of the Papal Yoke”: Apathy and opposition in the Dutch reformation. The Sixteenth Century Journal, 25, 653–669.

Kaufman, J. (2008). Corporate law and the Sovereignty of States. American Sociological Review, 73, 402–425.

Keister, L. (2008). Conservative protestants and wealth: How religion perpetuates asset poverty. American Journal of Sociology, 113, 1237–1271.

Kloppenberg, J. (1998). The virtues of liberalism . New York: Oxford University Press.

Landes, D. (1998). The wealth and poverty of nations . New York: Norton.

MacKinnon, M. (1988). Calvinism and the infallible assurance of grace: The Weber thesis reconsidered. British Journal of Sociology, 39, 143–177.

MacKinnon, M. (1990). Weber, western christianity, and “Wirtschaftsethik”: A corrective to eisenstadt. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 15, 186–193.

Mansbach, R. (2006). Calvinism as a precedent for Islamic radicalism. Brown Journal of World Affairs, 12, 103–115.

Mathews, S. (1912). The social origin of theology. American Journal of Sociology, 18, 289–317.

Maurer, H. (1924). The sociology of protestantism. American Journal of Sociology, 30, 257–286.

Maurer, H. H. (1925). Studies in the Sociology of Religion II. Religion and American Sectionalism. The Pennsylvania German. The American Journal of Sociology , 30 (4), 408–438.

McCleary, R., & Barro, R. (2006). Religion and economy. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 49–72.

McKinnon, A. (2010). Elective affinities of the protestant ethic: Weber and the chemistry of capitalism. Sociological Theory, 28, 108–126.

Means, R. (1965). Weber’s thesis of the protestant ethic: The ambiguities of received doctrine. The Journal of Religion, 45, 1–11.

Merton, R. (1968). Social theory and social structure . New York: Free Press.

Mitchell, W. (1914). Human behavior and economics: A survey of recent literature. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 29, 1–47.

Mullan, D. (1995). Theology in the church of scotland 1618-c. 1640: A Calvinist consensus? The Sixteenth Century Journal, 26 (3), 595–617.

Munch, R. (1981). Talcott parsons and the theory of action. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 709–739.

Munch, R. (2001). The ethics of modernity . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

Pareto, V. ( 2000 (1901)). The rise and fall of elites . New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

Parker, C. (2014). Diseased bodies, defiled souls: Corporality and religious difference in the reformation. Renaissance Quarterly, 67 (4), 1265–1297.

Parsons, T. (1935). H. M. Robertson on Max Weber and his school. Journal of Political Economy, 43, 688–696.

Parsons, T. (1938). The role of ideas in social action. American Sociological Review, 3, 652–664.

Parsons, T. (1947). Introduction to Max Weber: The theory of social and economic organization (pp. 3–86). New York: The Free Press.

Parsons, T. (1951). The social system . New York: Free Press.

Parsons, T. 1967 (1937). The structure of social action . New York: The Free Press.

Parsons, T., & Smelser, N. (1956). Economy and society . New York: The Free Press.

Pellicani, L. (1988). Weber and the myth of calvinism. Telos, 20, 57–85.

Peltonen, M. (2008). The Weber thesis and economic historians. London, Max Weber Studies (pp. 79–98).

Rachfahl, F. (2001 (1909)). Review of the protestant ethic. In D. J. Chalcraft & A. Harrington (Eds.), The protestant ethic debate (pp. 55–59). Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Rawls, J., & ebrary, Inc. (2010). On my religion . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Robertson, H. M. (1933). Aspects of the rise of economic individualism . Cambridge: At the University Press.

Samuelsson, K. (1961). Religion and economic action . New York: Basic Books.

Scheler, M. 1964 (1914). The thomist ethic and the spirit of capitalism. Sociological Analysis , 25 , 4–19.

Scoville, W. (1953). The Huguenots in the French economy, 1650–1750. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 67, 423–444.

Slack, K. (2013). On the origins and intention of Benjamin Franklin’s “On the Providence of God in the Government of the World”. The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 137 (4), 345–379.

Smelser, N. (1997). Problematics of sociology . California: University of California Press.

Smelser, N., & Swedberg, R. (2005). The sociological perspective on the economy. In N. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The handbook of economic sociology (pp. 3–26). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Snyder, B. (2013). From vigilance to busyness: A Neo-Weberian approach to clock time. Sociological Theory, 31 (3), 243–266.

Sombart, W. (1928 (1913)). Le bourgeois . Paris: Éditions Payot.

Sorokin, P. (1970). Social and cultural dynamics . Boston: Porter Sargent.

Squicciarini, M., & Voigtländer, N. (2015). Human capital and industrialization: Evidence from the age of enlightenment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130 (4), 1825–1883.

Stark, R. (1964). Class, radicalism, and religious involvement in Great Britain. American Sociological Review , 29 (5), 698–706.

Stark, W. (1968). Place of catholicism in Max Weber’s sociology of religion. Sociological Analysis, 29 (4), 202–210.

Stokes, R. (1975). Afrikaner calvinism and economic action: The weberian thesis in South Africa. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 62–81.

Swedberg, R. (1998). Max Weber and the idea of economic sociology . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Swedberg, R. (2003). Principles of economic sociology . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Swedberg, R. (2005). The economic sociology of capitalism: An introduction and agenda. In V. Nee & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The economic sociology of capitalism (pp. 3–40). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51, 273–286.

Tawney, R. (1930). Foreword to Weber, Max, The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (pp. 1–11). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Tawney, R. 1962 (1920). Religion and the rise of capitalism . New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.

Treasure, G. (2013). The huguenots . Princeton, NJ: Yale University Press.

Trinterud, L. (1955). Review of the history and character of calvinism by John McNeill. Theology Today, 12, 267–268.

Troeltsch, E. (1966 (1912)). Protestantism and progress . Boston: Beacon Press.

Tyacke, N. (1987). The rise of arminianism reconsidered. Past and Present, 115, 201–216.

Vaisey, S. (2009). Motivation and justification: A dual-process model of culture in action. American Journal of Sociology, 114, 1615–1675.

van den Brink, G. (2014). Calvinism and the European mind: Pitfalls and prospects in contemporary research. In G. van den Brink & H. M. Höpfl (Eds.), Calvinism and the making of the European mind (pp. 213–229). Boston: Brill.

Walker, G. (1937). Capitalism and the reformation. Economic History Review, 8, 1–19.

Walzer, M. (1963). Puritanism as a revolutionary ideology. History and Theory, 3, 59–90.

Walzer, M. (1965). The revolution of the saints . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Weber, M. (1930 (1905/1920)). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism . New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Weber, M. (1968 (1920)). Economy and society . New York: Bedminster Press.

Weber, M. (1978 (1910)). Anticritical last word on the spirit of capitalism. American Journal of Sociology , 83 , 1105–1131.

Wuthnow, R. (2005). Religion and economic life. In N. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The handbook of economic sociology (pp. 603–626). Princeton: Princeton University.

Young, Cristobal. (2009). Model uncertainty in sociological research: An application to religion and economic growth. American Sociological Review, 74, 380–397.

Zaret, D. (1985). The heavenly contract . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Zaret, D. (1989). Religion and the rise of liberal-democratic ideology in 17th century England. American Sociological Review, 54, 163–179.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Sociology, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, 76203, USA

Milan Zafirovski

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Milan Zafirovski .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Zafirovski, M. Calvinist Predestination and the Spirit of Capitalism: The Religious Argument of the Weber Thesis Reexamined. Hum Stud 41 , 565–602 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-018-9481-9

Download citation

Published : 20 September 2018

Issue Date : 31 December 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-018-9481-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Predestination
• Weber’s Thesis
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Request Info
• Majors and Programs
• Online Degrees
• Training & Certifications
• Future Students
• Current Students
• About 
• Give to SLU
• Search & Directory

Maria Weber, M.S.

Director, Cybersecurity; Interim Director of Information Systems

M.S. Applied Analytics, Saint Louis University.

B.S. Computer Science and Engineering, Universidad Fermin Toro, Venezuela

Practice Areas

Networking, Wireless, Security, Software-Defined Networking in a Wide Area Network, Applied Analytics, and Automation.

Research Interests

• Information Systems
• Cloud Computing
• Virtualization

Professional Organizations and Associations

• Association for Computing Machinery's Council on Women in Computing
• Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Computer Society Women in Engineering

[email protected]

The Protestant Ethic Thesis

Donald frey, wake forest university.

German sociologist Max Weber (1864 -1920) developed the Protestant-ethic thesis in two journal articles published in 1904-05. The English translation appeared in book form as The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism in 1930. Weber argued that Reformed (i.e., Calvinist) Protestantism was the seedbed of character traits and values that under-girded modern capitalism. This article summarizes Weber’s formulation, considers criticisms of Weber’s thesis, and reviews evidence of linkages between cultural values and economic growth.

Outline of Weber’s Thesis

Weber emphasized that money making as a calling had been “contrary to the ethical feelings of whole epochs…” (Weber 1930, p.73; further Weber references by page number alone). Lacking moral support in pre-Protestant societies, business had been strictly limited to “the traditional manner of life, the traditional rate of profit, the traditional amount of work…” (67). Yet, this pattern “was suddenly destroyed, and often entirely without any essential change in the form of organization…” Calvinism, Weber argued, changed the spirit of capitalism, transforming it into a rational and unashamed pursuit of profit for its own sake.

In an era when religion dominated all of life, Martin Luther’s (1483-1546) insistence that salvation was by God’s grace through faith had placed all vocations on the same plane. Contrary to medieval belief, religious vocations were no longer considered superior to economic vocations for only personal faith mattered with God. Nevertheless, Luther did not push this potential revolution further because he clung to a traditional, static view of economic life. John Calvin (1509-1564), or more accurately Calvinism, changed that.

Calvinism accomplished this transformation, not so much by its direct teachings, but (according to Weber) by the interaction of its core theology with human psychology. Calvin had pushed the doctrine of God’s grace to the limits of the definition: grace is a free gift , something that the Giver, by definition, must be free to bestow or withhold. Under this definition, sacraments, good deeds, contrition, virtue, assent to doctrines, etc. could not influence God (104); for, if they could, that would turn grace into God’s side of a transaction instead its being a pure gift. Such absolute divine freedom, from mortal man’s perspective, however, seemed unfathomable and arbitrary (103). Thus, whether one was among those saved (the elect) became the urgent question for the average Reformed churchman according to Weber.

Uncertainty about salvation, according to Weber, had the psychological effect of producing a single-minded search for certainty. Although one could never influence God’s decision to extend or withhold election, one might still attempt to ascertain his or her status. A life that “… served to increase the glory of God” presumably flowed naturally from a state of election (114). If one glorified God and conformed to what was known of God’s requirements for this life then that might provide some evidence of election. Thus upright living, which could not earn salvation, returned as evidence of salvation.

The upshot was that the Calvinist’s living was “thoroughly rationalized in this world and dominated by the aim to add to the glory of God in earth…” (118). Such a life became a systematic living out of God’s revealed will. This singleness of purpose left no room for diversion and created what Weber called an ascetic character. “Not leisure and enjoyment, but only activity serves to increase the glory of God, according to the definite manifestations of His will” (157). Only in a calling does this focus find full expression. “A man without a calling thus lacks the systematic, methodical character which is… demanded by worldly asceticism” (161). A calling represented God’s will for that person in the economy and society.

Such emphasis on a calling was but a small step from a full-fledged capitalistic spirit. In practice, according to Weber, that small step was taken, for “the most important criterion [of a calling] is … profitableness. For if God … shows one of His elect a chance of profit, he must do it with a purpose…” (162). This “providential interpretation of profit-making justified the activities of the business man,” and led to “the highest ethical appreciation of the sober, middle-class, self-made man” (163).

A sense of calling and an ascetic ethic applied to laborers as well as to entrepreneurs and businessmen. Nascent capitalism required reliable, honest, and punctual labor (23-24), which in traditional societies had not existed (59-62). That free labor would voluntarily submit to the systematic discipline of work under capitalism required an internalized value system unlike any seen before (63). Calvinism provided this value system (178-79).

Weber’s “ascetic Protestantism” was an all-encompassing value system that shaped one’s whole life, not merely ethics on the job. Life was to be controlled the better to serve God. Impulse and those activities that encouraged impulse, such as sport or dance, were to be shunned. External finery and ornaments turned attention away from inner character and purpose; so the simpler life was better. Excess consumption and idleness were resources wasted that could otherwise glorify God. In short, the Protestant ethic ordered life according to its own logic, but also according to the needs of modern capitalism as understood by Weber.

An adequate summary requires several additional points. First, Weber virtually ignored the issue of usury or interest. This contrasts with some writers who take a church’s doctrine on usury to be the major indicator of its sympathy to capitalism. Second, Weber magnified the extent of his Protestant ethic by claiming to find Calvinist economic traits in later, otherwise non-Calvinist Protestant movements. He recalled the Methodist John Wesley’s (1703-1791) “Earn all you can, save all you can, give all you can,” and ascetic practices by followers of the eighteenth-century Moravian leader Nicholas Von Zinzendorf (1700-1760). Third, Weber thought that once established the spirit of modern capitalism could perpetuate its values without religion, citing Benjamin Franklin whose ethic already rested on utilitarian foundations. Fourth, Weber’s book showed little sympathy for either Calvinism, which he thought encouraged a “spiritual aristocracy of the predestined saints” (121), or capitalism , which he thought irrational for valuing profit for its own sake . Finally, although Weber’s thesis could be viewed as a rejoinder to Karl Marx (1818-1883), Weber claimed it was not his goal to replace Marx’s one-sided materialism with “an equally one-sided spiritualistic causal interpretation…” of capitalism (183).

Critiques of Weber

Critiques of Weber can be put into three categories. First, Weber might have been wrong about the facts: modern capitalism might have arisen before Reformed Protestantism or in places where the Reformed influence was much smaller than Weber believed. Second, Weber might have misinterpreted Calvinism or, more narrowly, Puritanism; if Reformed teachings were not what Weber supposed, then logically they might not have supported capitalism. Third, Weber might have overstated capitalism’s need for the ascetic practices produced by Reformed teachings.

On the first count, Weber has been criticized by many. During the early twentieth century, historians studied the timing of the emergence of capitalism and Calvinism in Europe. E. Fischoff (1944, 113) reviewed the literature and concluded that the “timing will show that Calvinism emerged later than capitalism where the latter became decisively powerful,” suggesting no cause-and-effect relationship. Roland Bainton also suggests that the Reformed contributed to the development of capitalism only as a “matter of circumstance” (Bainton 1952, 254). The Netherlands “had long been the mart of Christendom, before ever the Calvinists entered the land.” Finally, Kurt Samuelsson (1957) concedes that “the Protestant countries, and especially those adhering to the Reformed church, were particularly vigorous economically” (Samuelsson, 102). However, he finds much reason to discredit a cause-and-effect relationship. Sometimes capitalism preceded Calvinism (Netherlands), and sometimes lagged by too long a period to suggest causality (Switzerland). Sometimes Catholic countries (Belgium) developed about the same time as the Protestant countries. Even in America, capitalist New England was cancelled out by the South, which Samuelsson claims also shared a Puritan outlook.

Weber himself, perhaps seeking to circumvent such evidence, created a distinction between traditional capitalism and modern capitalism. The view that traditional capitalism could have existed first, but that Calvinism in some meaningful sense created modern capitalism, depends on too fine a distinction according to critics such as Samuelsson. Nevertheless, because of the impossibility of controlled experiments to firmly resolve the question, the issue will never be completely closed.

The second type of critique is that Weber misinterpreted Calvinism or Puritanism. British scholar R. H. Tawney in Religion and the Rise of Capitalism (1926) noted that Weber treated multi-faceted Reformed Christianity as though it were equivalent to late-era English Puritanism, the period from which Weber’s most telling quotes were drawn. Tawney observed that the “iron collectivism” of Calvin’s Geneva had evolved before Calvinism became harmonious with capitalism. “[Calvinism] had begun by being the very soul of authoritarian regimentation. It ended by being the vehicle of an almost Utilitarian individualism” (Tawney 1962, 226-7). Nevertheless, Tawney affirmed Weber’s point that Puritanism “braced [capitalism’s] energies and fortified its already vigorous temper.”

Roland Bainton in his own history of the Reformation disputed Weber’s psychological claims. Despite the psychological uncertainty Weber imputed to Puritans, their activism could be “not psychological and self-centered but theological and God-centered” (Bainton 1952, 252-53). That is, God ordered all of life and society, and Puritans felt obliged to act on His will. And if some Puritans scrutinized themselves for evidence of election, “the test was emphatically not economic activity as such but upright character…” He concludes that Calvinists had no particular affinity for capitalism but that they brought “vitality and drive into every area … whether they were subduing a continent, overthrowing a monarchy, or managing a business, or reforming the evils of the very order which they helped to create” (255).

Samuelsson, in a long section (27-48), argued that Puritan leaders did not truly endorse capitalistic behavior. Rather, they were ambivalent. Given that Puritan congregations were composed of businessmen and their families (who allied with Puritan churches because both wished for less royal control of society), the preachers could hardly condemn capitalism. Instead, they clarified “the moral conditions under which a prosperous, even wealthy, businessman may, despite success and wealth, become a good Christian” (38). But this, Samuelsson makes clear, was hardly a ringing endorsement of capitalism.

Criticisms that what Weber described as Puritanism was not true Puritanism, much less Calvinism, may be correct but beside the point. Puritan leaders indeed condemned exclusive devotion to one’s business because it excluded God and the common good. Thus, the Protestant ethic as described by Weber apparently would have been a deviation from pure doctrine. However, the pastors’ very attacks suggest that such a (mistaken) spirit did exist within their flocks. But such mistaken doctrine, if widespread enough, could still have contributed to the formation of the capitalist spirit.

Furthermore, any misinterpretation of Puritan orthodoxy was not entirely the fault of Puritan laypersons. Puritan theologians and preachers could place heavier emphasis on economic success and virtuous labor than critics such as Samuelsson would admit. The American preacher John Cotton (1582-1652) made clear that God “would have his best gifts improved to the best advantage.” The respected theologian William Ames (1576-1633) spoke of “taking and using rightly opportunity.” And, speaking of the idle, Cotton Mather said, “find employment for them, set them to work, and keep them at work…” A lesser standard would hardly apply to his hearers. Although these exhortations were usually balanced with admonitions to use wealth for the common good, and not to be motivated by greed, they are nevertheless clear endorsements of vigorous economic behavior. Puritan leaders may have placed boundaries around economic activism, but they still preached activism.

Frey (1998) has argued that orthodox Puritanism exhibited an inherent tension between approval of economic activity and emphasis upon the moral boundaries that define acceptable economic activity. A calling was never meant for the service of self alone but for the service of God and the common good. That is, Puritan thinkers always viewed economic activity against the backdrop of social and moral obligation. Perhaps what orthodox Puritanism contributed to capitalism was a sense of economic calling bounded by moral responsibility . In an age when Puritan theologians were widely read, Williams Ames defined the essence of the business contract as “upright dealing, by which one does sincerely intend to oblige himself…” If nothing else, business would be enhanced and made more efficient by an environment of honesty and trust.

Finally, whether Weber misinterpreted Puritanism is one issue. Whether he misinterpreted capitalism by exaggerating the importance of asceticism is another. Weber’s favorite exemplar of capitalism, Benjamin Franklin, did advocate unremitting personal thrift and discipline. No doubt, certain sectors of capitalism advanced by personal thrift, sometimes carried to the point of deprivation. Samuelsson (83-87) raises serious questions, however, that thrift could have contributed even in a minor way to the creation of the large fortunes of capitalists. Perhaps more important than personal fortunes is the finance of business. The retained earnings of successful enterprises, rather than personal savings, probably have provided a major source of funding for business ventures from the earliest days of capitalism. And successful capitalists, even in Puritan New England, have been willing to enjoy at least some of the fruits of their labors. Perhaps the spirit of capitalism was not the spirit of asceticism.

Evidence of Links between Values and Capitalism

Despite the critics, some have taken the Protestant ethic to be a contributing cause of capitalism, perhaps a necessary cause. Sociologist C. T. Jonassen (1947) understood the Protestant ethic this way. By examining a case of capitalism’s emergence in the nineteenth century, rather than in the Reformation or Puritan eras, he sought to resolve some of the uncertainties of studying earlier eras. Jonassen argued that capitalism emerged in nineteenth-century Norway only after an indigenous, Calvinist-like movement challenged the Lutheranism and Catholicism that had dominated the country. Capitalism had not “developed in Norway under centuries of Catholic and Lutheran influence,” although it appeared only “two generations after the introduction of a type of religion that produced the same behavior as Calvinism” (Jonassen, 684). Jonassen’s argument also discounted other often-cited causes of capitalism, such as the early discoveries of science, the Renaissance, or developments in post-Reformation Catholicism; these factors had existed for centuries by the nineteenth century and still had left Norway as a non-capitalist society. Only in the nineteenth century, after a Calvinist-like faith emerged, did capitalism develop.

Engerman’s (2000) review of economic historians shows that they have given little explicit attention to Weber in recent years. However, they show an interest in the impact of cultural values broadly understood on economic growth. A modified version of the Weber thesis has also found some support in empirical economic research. Granato, Inglehart and Leblang (1996, 610) incorporated cultural values in cross-country growth models on the grounds that Weber’s thesis fits the historical evidence in Europe and America. They did not focus on Protestant values, but accepted “Weber’s more general concept, that certain cultural factors influence economic growth…” Specifically they incorporated a measure of “achievement motivation” in their regressions and concluded that such motivation “is highly relevant to economic growth rates” (625). Conversely, they found that “post-materialist” (i.e., environmentalist) values are correlated with slower economic growth. Barro’s (1997, 27) modified Solow growth models also find that a “rule of law index” is associated with more rapid economic growth. This index is a proxy for such things as “effectiveness of law enforcement, sanctity of contracts and … the security of property rights.” Recalling Puritan theologian William Ames’ definition of a contract, one might conclude that a religion such as Puritanism could create precisely the cultural values that Barro finds associated with economic growth.

Max Weber’s thesis has attracted the attention of scholars and researchers for most of a century. Some (including Weber) deny that the Protestant ethic should be understood to be a cause of capitalism — that it merely points to a congruency between and culture’s religion and its economic system. Yet Weber, despite his own protests, wrote as though he believed that traditional capitalism would never have turned into modern capitalism except for the Protestant ethic– implying causality of sorts. Historical evidence from the Reformation era (sixteenth century) does not provide much support for a strong (causal) interpretation of the Protestant ethic. However, the emergence of a vigorous capitalism in Puritan England and its American colonies (and the case of Norway) at least keeps the case open. More recent quantitative evidence supports the hypothesis that cultural values count in economic development. The cultural values examined in recent studies are not religious values, as such. Rather, such presumably secular values as the need to achieve, intolerance for corruption, respect for property rights, are all correlated with economic growth. However, in its own time Puritanism produced a social and economic ethic known for precisely these sorts of values.

Bainton, Roland. The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century . Boston: Beacon Press, 1952.

Barro, Robert. Determinants of Economic Growth: A Cross-country Empirical Study . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997.

Engerman, Stanley. “Capitalism, Protestantism, and Economic Development.” EH.NET, 2000. https://eh.net/bookreviews/library/engerman.shtml

Fischoff, Ephraim. “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism: The History of a Controversy.” Social Research (1944). Reprinted in R. W. Green (ed.), Protestantism and Capitalism: The Weber Thesis and Its Critics . Boston: D.C. Heath, 1958.

Frey, Donald E. “Individualist Economic Values and Self-Interest: The Problem in the Protestant Ethic.” Journal of Business Ethics (Oct. 1998).

Granato, Jim, R. Inglehart and D. Leblang. “The Effect of Cultural Values on Economic Development: Theory, Hypotheses and Some Empirical Tests.” American Journal of Political Science (Aug. 1996).

Green, Robert W. (ed.), Protestantism and Capitalism: The Weber Thesis and Its Critics . Boston: D.C. Heath, 1959.

Jonassen, Christen. “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism in Norway.” American Sociological Review (Dec. 1947).

Samuelsson, Kurt. Religion and Economic Action. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993 [orig. 1957].

Tawney, R. H. Religion and the Rise of Capitalism . Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1962 [orig., 1926].

Weber, Max, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism . New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1958 [orig. 1930].

ECONOMIC HISTORY ASSOCIATION

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR  MICHAEL HAUPERT EMAIL: [email protected]

MEETINGS COORDINATOR JEREMY LAND JEREMY.LAND@ GU.SE

ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR TAYLOR LAND [email protected]

QUICK LINKS

• GRANTS/FELLOWSHIPS
• EHA PUBLICATIONS

• Previous Book Reviews
• Browse Library
• Course Syllabi
• Directory Listings
• Encyclopedia
• Mailing Lists
• Measuring Worth
• Related Sites
• EH.Net Sponsors

© ECONOMIC HISTORY ASSOCIATION 2023

SITE DESIGN/HOSTING, BIG FISH CREATIVE

يمكنك البدء بجني المال وتحقيق ربح مادي من أبحاثك العلمية، المزيد

• to shamra store
• to search engine

Wadi International University

Copy to clipboard

هل ترغب بارسال اشعارات عن اخر التحديثات في شمرا-اكاديميا نعم | كلا

• Скидки дня
• Справка и помощь
• Адрес доставки Идет загрузка... Ошибка: повторите попытку ОК
• Продажи
• Список отслеживания Развернуть список отслеживаемых товаров Идет загрузка... Войдите в систему , чтобы просмотреть свои сведения о пользователе
• Краткий обзор
• Недавно просмотренные
• Ставки/предложения
• Список отслеживания
• История покупок
• Купить опять
• Объявления о товарах
• Сохраненные запросы поиска
• Сохраненные продавцы
• Сообщения
• Развернуть корзину Идет загрузка... Произошла ошибка. Чтобы узнать подробнее, посмотрите корзину.

Oops! Looks like we're having trouble connecting to our server.

Refresh your browser window to try again.

Related Searches

• audition barbara walters
• mozart violin sonatas
• violin germany
• german violin bow
• pauline viardot
• vienna art plate 1905
• verdi opera
• conrad weiser
• vivian maier
• marie versini
• mozart piano concertos
• johann haviland bavaria germany
• vienna acoustics mozart grand
• marcia van woert
• louie varland