The Weberian approach is tied to epistemological, theoretical, and methodological writings of German sociologist and economist Max Weber, and his followers. 

      Epistemological and Theoretical foundations of Weber's approach

Weber's sociological approach combines the epistemological and theoretical foundations of two directions that were very widespread in the German social sciences at the end of the nineteenth century - formal sociology, on the one hand, and historicism and hermeneutics, on the other. Formal sociology, developed by Simmel, Tönnies, and Wiese, was based on the premise that individual characteristics of individuals should be abstracted, and, instead, generalized and a priori categories, that is, pure social forms, should be developed and systematized. Historicism and hermeneutics, whose most important representatives are Dilthey and Heinrich Rickert, start from the assumption that there is an essential difference between the social and natural sciences, both in subject matter and in the methods that can be applied to the study of the subject. The social sciences study values ​​and meanings, and they should be used to understand and interpret subjective human behavior, while the natural sciences aspire to establish general deterministic relations. Thus, the social sciences study what is unique and unrepeatable in a culture at a certain historical moment.

Weber takes the view from formalism that it is necessary to develop and systematize generalized social forms, which he did by developing an "ideal-type approach" and creating many classifications. On the other hand, Weber partially takes over the premise of historicism, about the essential difference between the social and natural sciences. Weber also believes that it is necessary to understand individual psychological motives, goals, and values, and to interpret and document culturally and historically unique phenomena.          

Weber believes that the goal of social science is to build a network of abstract concepts and to investigate objectively existing causal relationships in individual events. We can determine general social rules by studying causal relationships in individual events. The starting point for studying individual events is human "social action". Social action is any behavior that has meaning for a person who performs a social action and includes failing to perform an activity, as well as suffering from an external situation. Another condition for a behavior to be viewed as social action is that the actor must take into account the behavior of others and coordinate his social actions with it.

Human social action is the only thing we can really understand because it has its objective, external side, which we can directly observe, but also because it has an internal, subjective side, which we can understand and interpret. That is why social action is the basic unit of sociological analysis. Human social action is voluntary, however, it can be a product of conscious and intentional desire, just as it can be a product of unconscious motives. Unconscious motives are influenced by culture and tradition, as external factors, but also personal emotional states, as internal factors. Weber believes that fully conscious and intentional social action is just a borderline case and that people are much more likely to act instinctively or routinely. In that sense, every social action can be directed by several different factors: values, goals, emotions, and rationality. These factors are expressed in different proportions in any particular social action of an individual, but they are also shaped in different ways by the broader cultural and historical context of social action.

                                 Method of „Understanding“

The scientific study of social action requires the application of the cognitive method of „understanding“ (verstehen). Understanding is made possible by the fact that there is an identity between the subject (researcher) and the object (individual that is studied) of cognition, and therefore understanding has a higher degree of clarity and certainty compared to other forms and methods of cognition. The identity of the subject and the object of knowledge, in essence, means that scientists, as well as people whose work is the object of the study, have similar psychology. This is what enables scientists to understand the subjective meaning that social action has for the person who performs the social action.

Understanding has both an intellectual and an emotional component. This means that we can understand the rational aspect of one's social actions, while at the same time understanding the emotional motives of that social action. Understanding social action, as a sociological method, allows us to create causal explanations of individual events. On the other hand, creating causal explanations of complex processes requires the application of a comparative-historical method, while a thought experiment, also, serves as a research aid. A special type of sociological concept, in Weber's approach, is "ideal types". Ideal types represent abstract sociological concepts that allow us to classify the subjective side of human social action (both conscious and unconscious; both rational and emotional) according to their type into different categories. Ideal types can serve hypothetical-analytical understanding, or serve descriptive and historical explanations.

                                Types of Human Action

Weber applies the ideal type method to classify the types of human social action. The basic types of social action are: 1) goal rational, 2) value rational, 3) affective, and 4) traditional. Goal rational social action is aimed at choosing the most efficient means to achieve the set goals, but other possible goals are taken into account, as well as the resources that should be used to achieve the goal. Value rational social action is aimed at achieving a goal, which is important in itself, regardless of the chances of success and resources spent because it is believed in the absolute value of that goal. Affective social action is directed by passions and emotions, so the meaning of social action is in itself, and not in achieving a specific goal. Traditional social action is completely shaped by the consistent following of established social rules, regardless of the final effect of that social action.

                        Moral Order and Power Relations

Weber also studied the normative order of society and the types of government that exist in different societies. The basic types of normative order are law and moral conventions (ethics). The law achieves the maintenance of the moral order by creating a special group of people who must enforce laws and sanction those who violate them. Moral conventions, on the other hand, are enforced diffusely because the whole society acts in such a way as to sanction those who violate moral rules. Individuals may view the moral order as legitimate or illegitimate. There are also relations of power and authority in society. Weber defines political power as "the probability that one actor within social relationship will be in position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability rest" (Weber, 1922a). Weber defines Authority as: “probability that certain commands (or all commands) from a given source will be obeyed by a given group of persons”  (Weber, 1922a). While power relations can be a product of circumstances, authority relations are never a product of chance because authority represents institutionalized relations of superiority and subordination, so they are always part of the established moral order.

There are only three legitimate forms of authority: legal-rational, traditional, and charismatic. The difference between these three types of authority is in how authority is justified, but also according to how the administrative apparatus of society is organized. Legal-rational authority is historically a product of Western culture. It is characterized by the application of impersonal laws through official state bodies. The administrative apparatus is hierarchically and bureaucratically organized. All persons are subject to the same laws, including those performing the most important functions. In addition, there is a separation of official duty from the private life of those in administrative positions, as well as the separation of public property from personal property. Apart from the level of the modern state, the rational authority also appears in several different types of organizations and institutions.

Traditional power rests on the sanctity of long-established norms and institutions, while, at the same time, there is a constant distrust in any type of change. The right to exercise power is not strictly separated from the person in power, and there is no clear distinction between private and public property. There are two main forms of traditional power: patrimonial, in which all subjects are completely dependent on the ruler and all those who occupy lower positions remain on them only while enjoying his favor; and feudal, in which the highest classes have their protected status and they form the administrative apparatus. The feudal nobility swears allegiance to the ruler but is freed from his arbitrariness.

The third form of authority is charismatic authority and this type is transitional because it occurs in periods of crisis and sudden social changes. Charismatic authority does not respect any restrictions and is always radical. The main examples of charismatic leaders are a prophet, a hero, and a demagogue. All who are below the charismatic leader owe their position only to their loyalty to the leader, while people submit to the leader only as long as he possesses charisma. This form of authority is more a relationship of power than authority. Charismatic power is very quickly transformed into a traditional, legal-rational, class form, or charisma itself is transformed.

                         Religion and the Rise of Capitalism

Two areas that Weber studied in great detail were religion and capitalism. His studies of religion are gathered in the three-volume book Sociology of Religion (1920-1921). Although Weber's studies of Judaism, the religions of India (Hinduism and Buddhism), and China (Taoism and Confucianism) are very significant, by far his greatest influence on sociology was his study of Protestantism in The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism (1920), the first volume of Sociology of Religion. In The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism, Weber combines his two important fields of interest - religion, and capitalism.

He believes that each religion has its own economic ethics and that ethics implies practical incentives to perform a certain type of social action, based on a religious view of the world and life. Capitalism is also specifically marked by the inherent capitalist spirit, the main feature of which is the opposition to traditional economic social action. The capitalist spirit contains a positive view of work and the acquisition of material wealth. Emphasis is placed on effort, thrift, discipline, and innovation, while laziness, gaining wealth without work, and hedonistic spending are viewed negatively. In pre-capitalist economies, people worked only as much as they needed to achieve a standard of living that was satisfactory to them. The capitalist spirit led to the complete rationalization of economic life.

The greatest influence on the development of the capitalist spirit and the rejection of the traditional form of doing business had the emergence of Protestant religions and their teachings in the early 16th century. Of all the Protestant currents, the most important for the development of the capitalist spirit was ascetic Protestantism, and above all Calvinism. Protestantism emphasized the idea of ​​"vocation", that is, that work is the most sacred duty of man because it enables salvation through the fulfillment of duty to God and therefore represents the highest expression of ethical self-affirmation. Protestantism, by treating labor as a means of salvation, directly refutes the traditional view of labor as God's punishment for original sin. Protestantism believes that success in a business is a confirmation of God's election, but that economic success must be achieved through hard work, thrift, and honesty. With this approach to economics and work, Protestantism has made a key contribution to the emergence and spread of the capitalist spirit.

                                           Bureaucracy

Weber is also known for his study of bureaucracy, which he viewed as the most rational mechanism for governing the state and other organizations and institutions. Bureaucracy enables efficient and systematic management of a large number of people and material resources. Although the rudiments of bureaucracy appeared with the first civilizations, it was not until the nineteenth century that bureaucratic management spread to all aspects of social life. This development and expansion of bureaucracy were made possible by the creation of a centralized state, an increase in traffic and communication systems, an increase in the monetary economy, an increase in tax revenues, and the development of the industry.

The development of bureaucracy is most closely related to the development of a legal-rational type of authority. Within a bureaucratic organization, individuals are connected hierarchically, each position has specific powers and duties, and there are clear relationships of superiority and subordination. There are general formalized rules that all members must strictly follow. The duties and salary of each person are precisely defined, the prospects for progress within the organization are known, and job qualifications are acquired through schooling or special exams. Bureaucracy is guided by instrumental rationality, and its advantages are: predictability, speed, resource savings, and uniformity.

                          Stratification and Class Differences

Weber had a huge influence on the sociological study of inequality, and according to him, inequalities were expressed differently in different societies, but there are always inequalities in every society, that is, every society had heterogeneity in terms of the hierarchy of social positions. Weber believes that in every society there are three relatively independent dimensions of inequality, that is, stratification: 1) material wealth, 2) status (social reputation), and 3) political power. Social status refers to the unequal distribution of prestige and honor between different social strata, which he calls all "status groups" (stand in German). Status group differences tend to crystallize and persist over a long period. With the creation of clear and defined differences between status groups, there comes a great reduction in informal and close relations between members of different status groups, and this is most pronounced in limiting marriages strictly between members of the same status group. When the formalization of the status groups begins to be accompanied by a formal-legal distinction of status group privileges, and when such a process is accompanied by a religious justification, then the status groups are transformed into different castes.

In modern capitalism, the most significant economic inequalities are manifested through class differences. Weber does not see classes as communities, although they can form the basis for joint action. What makes different individuals members of a certain class is their unique position in the market. Those who have significant ownership of economic goods (real estate, land, livestock, mines, money, luxury goods, etc.) belong to either the rentier class or the entrepreneur class. People who do not have significant property, but only work for others, will be divided into different classes according to the type of profession they perform and the security of employment. In capitalism, the economic success of each individual, and therefore his class position and specific life chances, depends only on success in the market. In Weber's approach to classes, strata that are excluded from market competition (such as slaves) have only status group position, but not class position because each class position depends on market position, and slaves have no relationship with the market.

      Other proponents of Weberian and neo-Weberian approach

British sociologist Nicholas Abercrombie in the book Class, Structure and Knowledge (1980), argues that in modern capitalist societies, the ruling class does not need to impose its ideology on society as a whole, but achieves its goals primarily through coercion and economic power. Members of the working class often actively reject the ideology of the ruling class. Abercrombie and John Urry studied the middle class in Britain in the book Capital, Labor and the Middle Class (1983) and their analysis concluded that there was a polarization of the middle class. Managers and experts are approaching the upper class, while most ordinary "white-collar workers" are approaching the working class. They believe that in the analysis of classes, it is necessary to combine Marxist and Weberian class analysis because both have their advantages. Classes consist, at the same time, of individuals, but also of their class locations. These two authors believe that the middle class of experts and managers is more influential in the United States than in European countries. Abercrombie studied many aspects of British society in detail.

British sociologists John Goldthorpe, David Lockwood, Frank Bechhofer, and Jennifer Platt conducted a large-scale study from 1963 to 1964 to test the hypothesis of a "bourgeoisization" of the working class. that is, whether wealthy manual workers are becoming more and more like the middle class. The research was conducted in the city of Luton, and workers from three large companies were interviewed. The results of this research were published in the book The Affluent Worker in the Class Structure (1968-1969), which was published in three volumes. Although most of the surveyed workers had high salaries, even higher than some members of the white collar, the original thesis was not proven. Differences like market situation, the possibility of career advancement, attitude towards work, social attitudes, and political affiliation continued to separate "rich" workers from members of the middle class who had similar salaries. This study also concludes that administrative staff workers are in a position between the working class and the middle class.

Goldthorp developed a sevenfold class scheme for the needs of the Oxford Class Mobility Study, the empirical part of which was conducted in England and Wales in 1972. The results and conclusions of the study were published in the book Social Mobility and Class Structure in Modern Britain (1980). In this book, Goldthorp presents the following class scheme going from the top to the bottom: 1) the most successful professionals, directors, and managers, as well as big capitalists; 2) professionals, middle managers, and managers; 3) routine non-manual employees; 4) smaller owners, farmers and the self-employed; 5) lower technical staff, supervisors of manual workers; 6) skilled manual workers; 7) unskilled and semi-skilled manual workers in industry and agriculture.

Several criteria were used in the construction of this scheme: source and level of income, economic security, market situation, as well as the level of autonomy in work. Although Goldthorp took over the market situation from Max Weber as the most important aspect of class position, he did not, unlike Weber, distinguish between owners and non-owners when making his scheme. Goldthorp calls the first two highest classes a service or service class, while members of the third and fifth classes are called an intermediate class. When studying mobility between these classes, a high rate of class mobility was found, higher upward than downward mobility, as well as an increase in the chances of those who come from the working class to leave it.

Polish-Australian sociologist Jan Pakulski in the book Postmodernization (1992),  explores the process of postmodernization. During modernization, culture went through processes of differentiation, rationalization, and commodification. In postmodernization, the processes of hypercomodification, hyperrationalization, and hyperdifferentiation take place. Thus, a "postculture" is created in which cultural styles and personal tastes are fragmented and mixed, and the distinction between high and popular culture is increasingly erased. In the sphere of politics, traditional political structures and relations were dying out, which were based on class politics and in which the state, representatives of employers, and trade unions played the most important role. Postmodern politics is characterized by increasingly significant extinctions of class identification and class voting, as well as the increasing importance of lifestyles and environmental issues in politics. The power of the state and traditional elites is weakening, while the importance and power of new social movements are growing.

Pakulski is best known for his neo-Weberian approach to the problem of classes, which he presented in his book The Death of Class (1996), which was also co-authored with Malcolm Waters. The authors believe that modern societies are transformed too much, in relation to the earlier ones, that they can no longer be considered class societies. The key processes that have led to such changes are: globalization, changes in the economy, new technologies, and political changes. Globalization has led to a new international division of labor, which has led to the disappearance of many traditional workers' occupations. The decline in manual labor, especially in the mining and steel industries, the growth of the service sector, and the emergence of flexible and fragmented labor markets are leading to a decline in the importance of the working class. Globalization has also reduced the ability of states to make political and economic decisions independently. In addition, unlike earlier periods, the increase in geographical mobility has now led to a decline in the importance of family and family background as the main source of class reproduction.

In such circumstances, the political, social, and economic importance of the class declines. In modern societies, "status conventionalism" prevails instead of class. With this phrase, the authors want to denote the newly created situation, that is, the situation in which inequalities in modern society are the product of the existence of different status groups, which differ from each other, primarily in prestige and different spending styles. Classes are no longer the main basis of the social identity of individuals, and therefore no longer the basis of their political and social behavior. Today's society is primarily a consumer society dominated by "status consumption". Dominant differences between status groups are in the domain of spending, and what distinguishes the "subclass", and what separates it most from other groups, is the inability to participate in status spending. The differences in status spending, and the prestige it brings, is the source of the main form of social stratification in the new age - status stratification.

South African-British sociologist John Rex used the Weberian theory of action to explain the importance of social conflicts for modern society in his book Key Problems in Sociological Theory (1961). He believed that social conflicts are not always bad, and sometimes they can also be very important because they help to eliminate structural inequalities. Unlike Marxists, he believed that in modern society there are several structural inequalities, other than class inequalities, which can be equally negative. Racial inequalities are one of the most significant inequalities, and Rex has devoted several studies to this topic.

Rex believes that what is characteristic of racism is that it is always a value system that explains the differences between ethnic groups in a deterministic way and presents those differences as positive or negative. One of his most significant studies on racism is the book Race, Community and Conflict (1967), which he co-authored with Robert Moore. In this book, the authors explore how the process of rising real estate prices has influenced the creation of "housing classes". Housing classes denote a situation in which racial and ethnic minorities live in isolated urban areas where there are inadequate housing conditions. Such housing isolation only increases racial discrimination and the poor economic situation of ethnic and racial minorities.

British sociologist Peter Saunders believes that the main social differences in Britain are no longer related to class, but to differences in type and level of consumption. He is a great critic of the British tradition of mobility research, such as studies done by Glass and Goldthorp. In the book, Unequal but Fair ?: A Study of Class Barriers in Britain (1996), Saunders, using data from the National Child Development Study, concludes that there is a real meritocracy in Britain because talented children succeed in life regardless of socioeconomic background. In that sense, it can be said that there is inequality in Britain, but that economic differences are fair because they are based on talent and success. People who receive higher economic rewards are the ones who make the greatest contribution to the development of society. Unequal economic rewards also contribute to motivating those who are most talented to give their best.

In his book Social Class and Stratification (1990), Saunders introduces a distinction between three types of equality. Formal or legal equality exists in societies where everyone is subject to the same laws and rules. This type of equality is almost entirely applied in Western capitalist societies. Legal equality does not mean that everyone has an identical socio-economic position. The second type of equality is equality of opportunity which refers to societies in which everyone has an equal chance of becoming unequal. Success depends on personal merit and possessing qualities that are valued in society. Such a society is a meritocracy.

The third type of equality is equality of outcomes, which goes beyond the idea of ​​equality of opportunity, and requires that everyone have completely identical outcomes, regardless of personal effort and contributions. Equality of outcome, in Saunders' opinion, undermines the first two equations. He believes that programs of "affirmative action" or "positive discrimination" result in discrimination against those who are not covered by these programs. Saunders also supports economic inequality because it contributes to economic growth. The end effect is an increase in the quality of goods and services, a fall in their prices, and an increase in the ability of ordinary people to afford many more goods and services. In addition, there is an increase in well-paid middle-class jobs in Britain and the United States, and thus a decrease in the share of unsuccessful people.

In the same book (1990), Saunders also studies the capitalist class in Britain. He believes that several thousand individuals control most of the key financial and administrative decisions, but he sees this group as an influential economic elite, not as the ruling capitalist class. This group of people lacks control over the administration, the media, and the education system, so they cannot be called the ruling class. He believes that the capitalist class has experienced a decline in influence and ownership because a large part of the ownership of shares (company stocks) and land is in the hands of various associations and cooperatives, as well as pension funds, which means that there has been an expansion of ownership.

Other notable authors who follow the Weberian approach include: Reinhard Bendix, Robert Erickson, Ray Pahl, and Frank Parkin. 

Books:

Abercrombie, Nicholas. Class, Structure and Knowledge: Problems of Sociology of Knowing (1980);

     -     Capital, Labour and the Middle Classes (1983);

Goldthorpe, John. The Affluent Worker in The Class Structure, 3 vols (1968-1969);

     -     Social Mobility and Class Structure in Modern Britain (1980); 

Pakulski, Jan.The Death of Class (1996); 

Rex, John. Key Problems in Sociological Theory (1961);

     -     Race, Community and Conflict (1967);

Saunders, Peter. Social Class and Stratification (1990);

     -     Unequal But Fair?: A Study of Class Barriers in Britain (1996);

Weber, Max. Basic Concepts in Sociology (1962, in German 1922c);

     -     The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism: and Other Writings (2002, in German 1920);

     -     Collected Methodological Writings (Weber in Translation) (2014);

     -     From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (2018);

     -     Economy and Society: A New Translation (2019, in German 1922a);