EHESS

The Weber Thesis and South East Asia

Author(s): Syed Hussein Alatas
Source: Archives de sociologie des religions, 8e Année, No. 15 (Jan. - Jun., 1963), pp. 21-34
Published by: EHESS
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30120216 .
Accessed: 12/06/2014 12:33

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

EHESS is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Archives de sociologie des
religions.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE WEBER THESIS
AND SOUTH EAST ASIA

THIS paper aims at assessing the status of the Weber thesis by relating it to
Islam and economic action in South East Asia.
In the discussion on the Weber thesis eversince its publication in 1904-1905,
much effort has been wasted to eliminate some misunderstandings concer-
ning the thesis or parts of it. Besides this, there has been also a misunderstanding,
one way or mutual, between authors involved in the discussion. Sometimes it
is not easy to decide quickly who misunderstands whom. Talcott Parsons, for
instance, accusses H. M. Roberstson for misunderstanding Weber's conception
of the < spirit of capitalism ). Robertson, according to Parsons, identifies the
< spirit of capitalism )> with acquisitiveness while this has only a secondary
place in Weber's conception. The conception of the <calling )>suggested by Weber
belongs to a different order (1).
Although Parsons description of Weber's conception is correct, I am not
certain that his accusation against Robertson hits the mark. I admit that there
are certain passages in Robertson's book which reveal some misunderstandings,
as when he tries to show that the doctrine of the calling is opposed to the amassing
of wealth and covetousness (2). This is, however, superfluous because Weber
never claims that the doctrine of the calling exhorts people to acquisitiveness.
This acquisitiveness is considered by Weber as an indirect by-product though a
significant one.
Despite such superfluous remarks Robertson shows a proper understanding
of Weber. He notes, Weber has stressed the point that the doctrine of the
( calling ) caused the Puritans to be diligent in their application to business, to
the greater glory of God) (3). Similarly the unintended effect released by the
fusion of Calvinism and business contrary to the ideals of Calvin, is also noted
by Robertson (4). Robertson's elaboration of perspectives acknowledged by Weber
serves only to emphasize the order of significance in the data used both by him
and Weber. His ignoring the significance of the religious factor, pushed into

(1) See his introduction to Max Weber: The theory of social and economic organization,
(tr. A.M. Henderson and T. Parsons), Glencoe, Illinois, Free Press, 1947, p. 81.
(2) H.M. ROBERTSON, Aspects of the rise of economic individualism, Cambridge University
Press, 1933, p. 11.
(3) Ibid., p. 11.
(4) Ibid.,.p. 208.

21

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARCHIVES DE SOCIOLOGIE DES RELIGIONS

prominence by Weber as a decisive one in the cluster of causes, suggested to ex-

plain the capitalist spirit merely conforms to his opinion that an explanation
based on it is fantastic (5).
Whatever is the merit of his criticisms, it is doubtful whether we can accuse
Robertson of misunderstanding the thesis, although 1 do agree that he misun-
derstands some of Weber's ideas like the ideal-type and its application. It belongs
to the canon of true understanding to classify and place in the scheme of signifi-
cance, the misunderstanding of an author towards another. In the case of R obert-
son, some of his misunderstandings of Weber, like that concerning the ideal-type,
are not damaging to his arguments in refuting the thesis.
Considering the controversy and its complexity, it is advisable to present
here a brief introduction to the definition of the thesis before embarking upon
the main theme, so that the rest which follows may be judged from the correct
perspective.
To begin with let us locate the place of the Weber thesis in the writings of
Max Weber. (a) We have Weber's writings on philosophical and methodological
issues. (b) We have his works on sociology and economic history, covering such
topics as bureaucracy, classes, cities and their growths, typology of social pheno-
mena and men, etc. (c) We have his contributions on the study of religion, a
combination of history and sociology.
The Weber thesis is part of the last mentioned kind of contributions. Con-
sequently a distinction is here maintained between the Weber thesis as such,
of which a description will be given, his sociology of religion, and his other socio-
logical contributions. The concern of this paper is restricted only to the thesis.
As such the conclusions expressed here have no validity beyond the confine of
the thesis.
While it is true that it is impossible to understand Weber completely without
considering the wider background of his scientific thought-world, nevertheless
it is possible in principle to refute the thesis without awareness of Weber's
wider interest, provided however, the relevant part of his ,total contribution
connected directly with the thesis, is not forgotten. As I noted earlier, Robertson's
misunderstanding of the ideal-type, or even his complete ignorance of it, had it
been so, need not necessarily jeopardize his attempt to remove Weber from his
pedestal of certainty. It is not out of place to mention this since some of
Weber's defenders have made good use of his critic's ignorance of his other
writings. They reproach the critics who happen to be unfamiliar with the many
sided contributions of Max Weber.
The distinction between the thesis and Weber's sociology of religion, has
often been ignored or unperceived. In the introduction to their valuable selec-
tion and translation of Weber's works, Gerth and Mills refer to the thesis
which in their hands assumes a different form than that intended by Weber,
as evidenced by the following: ( In any case, Weber is concerned with
using generalized conceptions in order to understand society as subject to lawful
regularities. For such regularities are necessary in order to satisfy an interest in
causation. To understand a sequence of regular events causally, one must examine
comparable conditions. Thus in an attempt to validate his causal analysis of
religion and capitalism in the Occident, Weber examined many other civilizations.
Although capitalist beginnings could be observed in these other civilizations,
capitalism in the Western sense did not emerge. Weber wished to find those
factors in other civilizations which blocked the emergence of capitalism, even
(5) Ibid., p. 206.
22

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE WEBER THESIS AND SOUTH EAST ASIA

though there were many favourable conditions present for its emergence. By
such a comparative analysis of causal sequences, Weber tried to find not only
the necessary but the sufficient conditions of capitalism. Only in the Occident,
particularly where innerworldly asceticism produced a specific personality
type, were the sufficient conditions present. In his pluralism, he naturally did
not consider this type of personality the only factor involved in the origin of
capitalism; he merely wished to have it included among the conditions of
capitalism ) (6).
The reference to the thesis is clear, but Weber's intention here is not fully
expressed. It is not true that Weber (<merely wished to have it included among
the conditions of capitalism >. It is much more than this. Weber, in several places
suggests that capitalism had indeed several causes. One of these is religion, and
that too the Christian religion. Within the Christian religion, it is Protestantism,
and within Protestantism it is Calvinism that played the most significant role
in the genesis of capitalism. There are thus several effects of Christianity on
economic action, directly and indirectly related to the birth of modern capitalism.
One of them is what Weber believed to be Christianity's elimination of magic
which made rational action possible. This factor has operated for centuries before
the Reformation. It is peculiar to the Semitic tradition of the prophetic religions (7).
There is thus a set of unique Judaic-Christian religious factors operating for
centuries in European history making it possible for capitalism to rise. One of
these factors emerging later is the innerworldly asceticism. This innerworldly
asceticismnotedbyGerthandMills has been differentiated byWeber into two kinds,
the Lutheran and the Calvinist, both present during the Reformation.It is the Cal-
vinist blend that Weber found interesting not only as one of the conditions as sug-
gested by Gerth and Mills, but as a decisive and significant one. This is what
Weber says of the Protestant outlook without yet emphasizing the Calvinist : <.As
far as the influence of the Puritan outlook extended, under all circumstances, and
this is, of course, much more important than the mere encouragement of capital
accumulation, it favoured the development of a rational, bourgeois economic
life; it was the most important, and above all the only consistent influence in
the development of that life. It stood at the cradle of the modern economic
man ) (8).
Had Weber not made such a claim, there would in all probability be no
controversy around his thesis. The peculiarly Calvinist blend of innerworldly asce-
ticism later emphasized by Weber, qualifies the thesis as a thesis. Failure to make
the distinction between Weber's thesis and his general sociology of religion will
contribute to increase the existing confusion and misunderstanding which always
accompany a discussion between several people. This distinction is at times ignored
in works intended to have no connection with the controversy. I may mention here
a valuable and instructive work as an instance. In his Tokugawa Religion, Bellah
mistakenly identifies Weber's sociology of religion with the thesis. This is what
he says: ( The sociologist influenced by Max Weber's great work on the relation
of religion to the development of modern Western society, especially the modern
economy, naturally wonders whether religious factors might also be involved
in the Japanese case. The problem stated baldly is, was there a functional analogue
to the Protestant ethic in Japanese religion ? This problem then will serve as a

(6) H.IH. GERTH and C.W. MILLS, From Max Weber : Essays in sociology (translated and
edited), London, Routledge and K. Paul, 1957, p. 60-1.
(7) Robert N. BELLAH, Tokugawa Religion, Glencoe, Illinois, Free Press, 1957, p. 2-3.
(8) Max WEBER, The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (tr. by T. Parsons),
New York, Scribner, 1958, p. 174.

23

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARCHIVES DE SOCIOLOGIE DES RELIGIONS

special focus of interest throughout the study. We shall attempt to understand

as clearly as possible what Japanese religion actually meant to ordinary people,
and we shall pay particular attention to any elements which might be connected
with the rise of a modern industrial society ) (9).
The functional analogue to the Protestant ethic is suggested to be present
in Japanese modern history by Bellah (10). But what Bellah had in mind falls
more under Weber's general sociology of religion rather than the thesis speci-
fically. The traits Bellah found in Japanese society can at most be compared to
Protestantism but not its Calvinistic variant in the sense Weber conceived it
and which played a significant role in his analysis. Bellah hardly mentioned
Calvinism and the calling, even as referents to matters incidental to his theme.
Thus it cannot claim, Bellah's analysis, to search and to discover the analogy
with Weber's findings. The correlation between economic ethic and religion, ably
discussed by Bellah with reference to modern Japan, in itself is fundamentally
different from analysis in the Weber thesis. The thesis is more than establishing
correlations, interdependence, and mutual causation.
However, the remarks made about Gerth and Mills and Bellah, do not
affect the valuable contributions expressed in their efforts to present Max
Weber's ideas.
The befogging of issues is further generated by attempts to interpret
Weber, not satisfied with an accurate presentation. At the concluding part
of his on the whole well-written history of the controversy, Fischoff recommends
the following exegesis of Max Weber: < In the light of all this Weber's thesis
must be construed not according to the usual interpretation, as an effort to
trace the causative influence of the Protestant ethic upon the emergence of
capitalism, but as an exposition of the rich congruency of such diverse aspects
of a culture as religion and economics. The essay should be considered as a stimu-
lating project of hermeneutics, a demonstration of interesting correlations between
diverse cultural factors. Although at the time of the republication of the essay
Weber insisted that he had not changed his views on this matter at all, the
whole intent of his later work does show an implicit shift of view, or at any rate
of emphasis. No longer laying the basic stress on the causal factors in the economic
ethic of radical Protestantism as related to the capitalist spirit, his later researches
culminating in the systematic sociology of religion, accepted rather the con-
gruency of these diverse aspects of our culture, and their subsumption under the
comprehensive process of rationalization. It is important to emphasize that
some of the distortions involved in Weber's ideal-type method are neutralized
in his later sociological studies of the non-Christian religions, to which all too
little attention has been paid. In these mighty studies, which are cultural sociolo-
gies of the Weltreligionen, Weber traces the influence of material, geographic
and economic circumstances on the religious and ethical ideas of different cultures.
Yet though he treated religious norms, institutions and practices with cold detach-
ment, he never denied the historical reality and power of the religious complex.
His general view remained that human affairs are infinitely complicated with
numerous elements interacting; and it was his unshakable conviction that to
attribute causal primacy is to be guilty of oversimplification ) (11).
The above may be easily mistaken for an accurate portrayal of Weber's

(9) R.N. BELLAH, op. cit., p. 2-3.

(10) Ibid., p. 196.
(11) E. FISCHOFF,u The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism : the history of a
sontroversy n,in R.W. GREEN, ed., Protestantis8m and Capitalism, Boston, Heath & Co., 1959,
p. 113-4.

24

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE WEBER THESIS AND SOUTH EAST ASIA

thesis. It is true that we should not consider Weber as assigning a causal primacy
to the religious factor, if it is taken in the singular sense. But how many of his
critics misunderstood him here ? Not the majority. In 1932, Bouman gave a
summary of the points, reduced by him into five, of criticism levelled against
Weber (12). They are the following: (a) Weber underestimated the influence of
Catholicism in the encouragement of asceticism and rationality. (b) His concept
of modern capitalism is too narrow, being too much occupied by the place of
rational action in it. (c) He attached too little attention to non-religious factors,
such as the expansive individualism of the Renaissance, the anti-traditionalistic
trends of emigrants and heretics, and the influence of the commercial revolution
in the 16th. century. (d) His interpretation of sources was not always genuine
and true. On further control of works cited by Weber, it appeared that Weber's
documentation of rational economic action from those works have not been
consistent with the conservative nature of those works as a whole. (e) He read
too much continuity in the history of Calvinism.
Weber's claim that the spirit of capitalism preceded capitalism itself, according
to Bouman, is untenable.
Both Weber and his serious critics made use of the same categories of
data, by which I mean the economic, political, geographical, religious,
demographic, etc. The differencel ies in the order of significance and temporal
sequence of some of the data and phenomena cited. To allude that the critics
misunderstood Weber's pluralism is certainly out of place. The pendulum of
misunderstanding, in this instance, swings to Weber's apologists or the umpires
of controversy like Fischoff. They misunderstand both Weber and his serious
critics like Robertson and Hyma.
Just as we ought to give Weber allowance for hasty formulations of some
phrases and judge them with reference to his work as a whole, so should we
understand the meaning of Robertson's criticism of Weber. It is true that we
find uncalled for assertions in Robertson's book such as the allusion as though
Weber suggested that the spirit of capitalism was created by the Protestant
ethic (18).
To return to Fischoff, the relationship between the Protestant ethic and the
spirit of capitalism is not merely one of congruence but of causation. Fischoff's
suggestion is misleading. Of this causative relationship Samuelsson clearly grasps
its essence when he describes the thesis in the following: << Weber asserted stre-
nuously that such causal links did indeed exist. Protestantism created the pre-
conditions for a << spirit of capitalism >. The dictum hardly applied to Luthe-
ranism, which retained the traditional canonical attitude to trade. But it applied
without reservation to Calvinism and the various Protestant sects > (14).
The causative relationship is further explained by Weber in his study of
Oriental religions mistakenly referred to by Fischoff in support of his <<con-
gruence interpretation. On the relation of Confucianism with our theme, Weber
>The
writes : << indispensible ethical qualities of the modern capitalist entrepre-
neur were: radical concentration on God-ordained purposes; the relentless and
practical rationalism of the asceticist ethic; a methodical conception of matter-
offactness in business management; a horror of illegal, political, colonial, booty,

(12) P.J. BOUMAN, <Eenige beschouwingen over de historische betrekkingen tusschen

godsdienst en kapitalisme De Economist (Haarlem), 1932, p. 181-98.
(13) H.M. ROBERTSON, ,, Op. cit., p. XV-XVI.
(14) Kurt SAMUELSSON, Religion and economic action, (tr. E.G. French), London, Heine-
mann, 1961, p. 2.

25

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARCHIVES DE SOCIOLOGIE DES RELIGIONS

and monopoly types of capitalism which depended on the favour of princes and
men as against the sober, strict legality, and the harnessed rational energy of
routine enterprise; the rational calculation of the technically best way, of practi-
cal solidity and expediency instead of the traditionalist enjoyment of trans-
mitted skill or the beauty of product characteristic of the old artisan craftsman.
This must be added to the pious worker's special will for work. The relentlessly
and religiously systematized utilitarianism peculiar to rational asceticism, to
live < in athe world and yet not be < of)> it, has helped to produce superior rational
aptitudes and therewith the spirit of the vocational man which, in the last
analysis, was denied to Confucianism. That is to say, the Confucian way of life
was rational but was determined, unlike Puritanism, from without rather than
from within. The contrast can teach us that mere sobriety and thriftiness combined
with acquisitiveness and regard for wealth were far from representing and far
from releasing the < capitalist spirit >, in the sense that this is found in the voca-
tional man of the modern economy > (15).
If the above is not causative I do not know what is. Another instance is to
be found in connection with India where, Weber believed, modern capitalism
could not emerge from within.
The Hindu social-order blocked its emergence despite the presence of other
favourable conditions (16). This judgement is extended also to Islam and other
religions in the Orient. The innerworldly-asceticism as generated by Protestantism
Weber found decisive for the economics of the Occident (17).
It would not be desirable to devote more space to prove the causative nature
of the Weber thesis in the mind of its author. Weber's causal pluralism should
not be confounded with a pluralism of a fixed and static pattern. Causal pluralism
does not exclude a grading of significance in the set of causes appealed to explain
a phenomenon. He definitely considers Protestantism and Calvinism as a deci-
sive cause. To explain it away and then to call it will convert the
voluminous sociology of religion written by Weber into <Ccongruencea
a tedious heap, for surely
it need not take so much effort and intricate exposition just to establish a con-
gruence.
Among the sociologists who accurately perceive the causative theme of the
thesis may be noted Talcott Parsons (18), Sorokin (19), and Bendix (20).
My portrayal of the thesis, though it is very concise and incomprehensive,
does not disfigure it in any way. I assume that those interested in this topic are
conversant with Weber's arguments and his other writings which have bearing
on the thesis. Other factors conditioning the rise of the capitalist spirit and
modern capitalism, including those generated by Protestantism, not mentioned
here, should be assumed as already taken into account and not forgotten. This
is particularly necessary to state in view of the fact that one is liable to be accused
of misunderstanding or misrepresenting Weber. I have singled out the role of
Calvinism as the specific theme since this is the significant differentia which
makes the thesis what it is. It is viewed as the decisive cause releasing the spirit

(15) Max WEBER, The Religion of China (tr. and ed. H.H. Gerth), Glencoe, Illinois, Free
Press, 1951, p. 247.
(16) Max WEBER, The Religion of India (tr. and ed. H.H. Gerth and D. Martindale),
Glencoe, Illinois, Free Press, 1958, p. 337.
(17) Ibid., p. 337.
(18) Talcott PARSONS, The structure of social action, Glencoe, Illinois, Free Press, 1949,
p. 512.
(19) Pitirim SOROKICN,
Contemporary sociological theory, New York, Harper and Brothers,
1928, p. 678.
(20) R. BENDIX, Max Weber, an intellectual portrait, New York, Double Day, 1960, p. 104.

26

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE WEBER THESIS AND SOUTH EAST ASIA

of capitalism, among the many weighed and included by Weber. Hence a greater
attention alloted to this factor should not be taken as a one sided exposition
of the Weber thesis which requires at least a book to present it entirely.

Definition of the thesis: According to Weber modern capitalism emerged as

the cumulative result of social, political, economic and religious forces with
their roots deep into European history. Beginning from the time of the Reforma-
tion up to approximately the 18th. century, the influence of religion had been
very decisive. Protestantism, particularly Calvinism, originated a certain ethic
which fused with capitalism, giving birth to what Weber called the spirit of
modern capitalism. It was this spirit that released the tremendous energy cha-
racterizing modern capitalism.
Weber is not concerned with the consciously cherished ideal of Calvinism.
He is interested in certain psychological attitudes and elements of the teaching
which subsequently developed phenomena at times contrary to the religious
aims of Calvinism.
The bearer of this spirit was the rising middle class from whose history Weber
derives his arguments. The best example of the fusion between Protestantism
and capitalism he finds in Benjamin Franklin.
By capitalist spirit Weber did not mean mere acquisitiveness. < The impulse
to acquisition ,>,he says, a pursuit of gain, of money, of the greatest possible amount
of money, has in itself nothing to do with capitalism. This impulse exists and
has existed among waiters, physicians, coachmen, artists, prostitutes, dishonest
officials, soldiers, nobles, crusaders, gamblers, and beggars. One may say that it
has been common to all sorts and conditions of men at all times and in all coun-
tries of the earth, wherever the objective possibility of it is or has been given.
It should be taught in the kindergarten of cultural history that this naive idea of
capitalism must be given up once and for all. Unlimited greed for gain is not in
the least identical with capitalism, and is still less its spirit. Capitalism may even
be identical with the restraint, or at least a rational tempering, of this irrational
impulse. But capitalism is identical with the pursuit of profit, and forever renewed
profit, by means of continuous, rational, capitalistic enterprise n(21).
The spirit of modern capitalism, as distinguished from capitalist institutions
and enterprise, had not always occurred together with them. Within the same
order of relationships we may have different spirits, the modern and the tra-
ditional (22). The fusion between the Calvinist ethic and the spirit of capitalism
can best be seen in the type of men who became its bearer. They avoided osten-
tation and waste, cultivated reserve and honesty, with a tinge of asceticism (23).
Their attitude and philosophy Weber describes as ainnerworldly asceticism >.
According to Weber, the direct relationship between Calvinism and the
spirit of modern capitalism, was preceded by a similar relationship in the past,
in the sense that religion everywhere partly determined the development of
capitalism either by hindering or assisting it (24). As regards Calvinism, the major
factor noted by Weber is the doctrine of the calling, wherein the acquisition of
wealth is considered as a possible sign of salvation, indicating an individual's

(21) Max WEBER, The protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, op. cit., p. 17.
(22) Ibid., p. 66.
(23) Ibid., p. 71.
(24) Ibid., p. 284, note 118.

27

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARCHIVES DE SOCIOLOGIE DES RELIGIONS

membership of the chosen few decreed by God. Thus a spur was provided for the
vigorous and earnest effort to acquire worldly success. This, and some other
factors flowing from Calvinism, infused business life with a new spirit. Once it
was there it developed a life of its own and left its Calvinistic moorings (25).
The thriftiness issuing from the sense of the calling led to the accumulation
of capital, and this in turn activated further undertakings.
The idea that success reveals a blessing from God was not unknown before
Protestantism or even Christianity. Judaism had it too (26). But Calvinism
gave it a central place by linking it with the idea that success may very well be
the sign of salvation. Hence the anxiety to know whether one is doomed or saved
released a vigorous activity in the economic field.
Weber's explanation is much richer than presented here and should be
consulted directly.
The spirit of modern capitalism, acting as a soul to capitalism, was thus
decisively influenced by Calvinism which stressed individual responsibility for
salvation and suggested worldly success as its possible indication, throwing each
individual to himself, generating a methodical and disciplined way of life. These
traits later became common property and infused the non-economic aspects of
life also.
To strengthen his arguments, Weber appeals to Asian history and suggests
that modern capitalism did not develop independently in Asia primarily because
of the restraining influence of religion. The area he studied is China and India
with numerous details. In India it was the caste-system which prevented the
spirit of capitalism to rise (27), in China Confucianism and Taoism because of
their global outlook on life which dispensed with the rational and disciplined
effort to temper acquisitiveness and build up systematically the rational, long-
range, profit-making attitude regarded as a calling in itself (28).
Weber attributes the emergence of modern capitalism in contemporary Asia
to Western influence (29).
Criticism of the thesis: Weber's thesis has been severely criticized as well
as defended since its publication. An important argument which concerns us here
is the alternative proposal that the spirit of capitalism was already present
before Calvinist ethic took the form depicted by Weber. It was rather an adjust-
ment to the changing circumstances than a mover of the capitalist spirit prior
to it in origin. To my mind this suggested alternative is well documented and
succeeded in refuting the thesis except in the version as derived from the theory
of congruence which deprives it of the original meaning given by Weber. Again
for the appraisal of the criticism direct reference to the authors is necessary. This
paper does not aim to enter the controversy around the European scene directly.
It aims at establishing the proposition that the spirit of modern capitalism can
rise in Asia from within itself. This can be shown at least among certain Muslim
traders and small industrialists. This being the case, the conditions for a similar
phenomenon in Europe need not have a religious qualification for its uniqueness.
Once the uniqueness is rejected, the balance falls on the side of the sociological

(25) Ibid., p. 2-3.

(26) Ibid., p. 271.
(27) Max WEBER, The Religion of India, op, cit. pp. 111-112.
(28) Max WEBER, The Religion of China, op. cil. pp. 235-245.
(29) Ibid., p. 61.

28

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE WEBER THESIS AND SOUTH EAST ASIA

theory implied in the writings of such critics as Robertson and Hyma, and others.
The capitalist spirit is then viewed as the product of capitalism itself without
any need for a religious initiation. Parallels between traits of the capitalist spirit
and innerworldly-asceticism are just factors of no decisive influence in the genesis
of economic ethic, but at most in its adaptive integration. Non-religious social
and cultural factors can exert greater influence in the rise of an economic ethic.
It is thus justified for us to insist that they are more important in the rise of
modern capitalism than the Protestant spirit. The difference with Weber lies not
in the awareness of these factors but in their order of significance. An instance
from Islamic life in Malaya and Indonesia is sufficient to strengthen the above
contention.

Interest in Weber among scholars of South East Asia.

Interest in the works of Weber goes back at least to the early twenties. In
a report for the Dutch Government in Java written by D.M.G. Koch, reference
was made to religion and economic ethic in connection with the activity of Sare-
kat Islam, the first major political party with a mass following in Indonesia.
He saw a parallel between the rise of the small capitalist class in Java and its
counterpart in Western Europe during the first half of the 16th. century (30).
He also noted that the change in the economic ethic of the Javanese Muslim
capitalists in small industries, was comparable to the emergence of the modern
outlook as represented in the teachings of Luther and Calvin. As an instance he
cited a passage from the speech of Abdul Muis, one of the Sarekat Islam leaders,
during its congress in 1917, urging strenuous effort to economic and scientific
progress (31). Although no mention of Weber was made in the above report,
Koch did apply some of Weber's findings to the Javanese situation. Later he
acknowledged this in his autobiography published in 1956 (32).
Earlier, in 1911, in the second issue of aDe Indische Kroniek ~, he attempted
to explain the much greater success of Islamic proselytization, as compared to
that of Christianity in Indonesia, by means of their respective structural economic
backgrounds, Christianity, the industrial West, Islam the agrarian East (33).
Without inquiring into the merit of his views which were partly formed
with the assistance of Weber's writings, we shall note the position of the thesis in
his approach. His writings clearly imply the rejection of the thesis. The Protestant
ethic in Western Europe and the Muslim ethic in Java, as conceived by Koch,
were the results of social and economic development. They were adaptations
to the capitalist spirit. This view is in line with his socialistic philosophy, which
emphasizes the significance of the economic factor as a driving force in historical
development, although not in the Marxian sense (34).
A few years later, B.J.O. Schrieke, in another report, dealing with Communism
in the West of Sumatra, made a passing reference to Weber and Sombart. Accor-
ding to Schrieke there was the emergence of the capitalist mentality in the Mi-
nangkabau area when a section of the community prefered cultivating lucrative
commercial crops rather than rice. This change, he suggested, was accompanied

(30) D.M.G. KocH, Mededelingen omtrent enkele onderwerpen van algemeen belang, Welte-
vreden, Landsdrukkerij, 1920, p. 6.
(31) Ibid., p. 8.
(32) D.M.G. KOCH, Verantwoording, The Hague, Van Hoeve, 1956, p. 109.
(33) Ibid., p. 62.
(34) Ibid., p. 113-4.

29

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARCHIVES DE SOCIOLOGIE DES RELIGIONS

by a change in spirit. He said, Here we have to do with a revolution in spirit,

similar to that of the early capitalist spirit in Europe, as indicated by Max
Weber and Sombart. The aeconomic mentality a has made its entry upon the
scene)> (35).
Schrieke, as we see, cited Weber only for the purpose of comparison without
giving him a major place in his study. He has given more attention, and derived
more help in his particular study, from the Belgian writer Hendrik de Man.
Regarding the thesis, Schrieke clearly expressed his agreement with
Weber.
After Schrieke, the earliest attempt perhaps to apply the sociological contri-
butions of Max Weber to the South East Asian scene, this time giving it a pro-
minent place in the whole approach, came from another Dutch scholar J.C. van
Leur. In a dissertation on early Asian trade submitted in 1934, van Leur attempted
to analyze early Asian trade and society based on Weber's methodology in the
field of sociology and economic history. The first application of Weber's metho-
dology in the field of Indonesian history, in the proper sense of the word, was
thus attempted by van Leur (36).
Concerning the thesis, van Leur apparently accepted it, as we shall see from
the text, written in 1940. He wrote, < The rationalization in attitude towards
life by means of the legalism of ( inner asceticism C which Max Weber has pointed
out in Calvinism as one of the roots of the spirit of modern capitalism is not to be
found either in the enterprise in Holland or in the actions of the authorities and
directors of the trade overseas~> (37).
As it appears above, van Leur intended to deny the effect of innerworldly
asceticism only in Holland. It is at most a correction of the thesis restricted to
Holland.
His primary concern in Indonesian history was not the social and historical
role of religion. The thesis here did not occupy his attention as much as Weber's
other writings on general economic history.
The above writers dealt with Weber not from the point of view of the sociology
of religion as such, but more from general historical interest, with emphasis on
the political and economic factors as variables. It is however, W.F. Wertheim
who first connected Weber's sociology of religion with the study of Islam in
Indonesia, in a work first prepared in 1950, later revised and published in 1956.
His study can be considered as the first attempt to introduce the sociology of
religion proper into the Malay-Indonesian, if not the South East Asian field (38).
The attempt is further increased in scope by his contribution to the Oxford
Conference on the sociology of religion, March 1961 (39).
Regarding his stand on the Weber thesis, I can only suspect that he approves
it, probably with some modifications. Comparing the Asian and European reli-
gious reform movements, he suggested that the path of development may differ
due to the greater functional significance in Asia of the class as compared to
the religious struggle. The class interest in Asia shall condition the pattern of
(35) B. SCHRIEKE, Indonesian Sociological Studies, part 1, The Hague, Van Hoeve, 1955,
p. 99.
(36) J.C. van LEUR, Indonesian Trade and Society, The Hague, Van Hoeve, 1955. See p. 20
for his adherence to Weber's methodology, in 1934. Again expressed in 1937 when dealing with
Indonesian historiography, p. 154.
(37) Ibid., p. 227.
(38) W.F. WERTHEIM, Indonesian Society in Transition, 2nd rev. ed., The Hague, Van
Hoeve, 1959. The work noted is published as ch. 8, " Religious reform ", pp. 195-235.
(39) W.F. WERTHEIM, Religious Reform Movements in South and Southeast Asia ,,
A.S.R., 12, 1961.

30

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE WEBER THESIS AND SOUTH EAST ASIA

religious movement and unity more than the other way round. It is in connection
with this that his view on the Weber thesis can be inferred. He suggests, < This
may be one of the main reasons why the impact of the religious reform movements
upon Asian society is far less intensive than the influence of Protestantism upon
Western European societies in earlier centuries. Though the present movements
in several respects are comparable to the Reformation, their ideas are mainly
restricted to a rather insignificant layer of the urban population. Economic and
political developments did not allow a consolidation and a deepening of their
spiritual influence upon society. Soon after the birth of those ideas, the initiative
was taken over by social groups to which the concept of social progress is not
necessarily related to religious convictions, or even appears to be incompatible
with religion. Only by readapting their religious tenets and social philosophies
to the psychical and material requirements of the broad rural and urban masses
of the rising Fourth Estate, could those religions try to retain part of their hold
upon the Asian common people n (40).
From the above it is clear that Wertheim reversed the Weber thesis as far
as the Asian situation goes. But as he suggested that this differs from the Refor-
mation, it implies that the thesis does portray, according to him, the rise of capi-
talism and the conditioning role of religion in Western Europe. However, my
reading of Wertheim's view on the Weber thesis may very well be wrong and this
can easily be settled by a word from him.

The coming of Islam to South East Asia.

Islam in South East Asia was introduced there by traders. The earliest
reference known from Chinese annals, dated 674 A.D. pointed to an Arab chief,
conjectured by later notices as being head of an Arab settlement on the West
Coast of Sumatra (41). From the 7th. century onwards Islam was introduced
into South East Asia primarily by Muslim traders. By the 13th. century we
witness the first Malay Muslim kingdom in Northern Sumatra, the Sultanate of
Pasai. The next state to join the faith was Malacca in 1414 A.D. It is possible
that Trengganu, another area in Malaya might have adopted the Islamic faith
earlier, if we can infer it from an inscription discovered at the turn of the century.
From the 15th. century onwards we can notice a new phase of Islamization
involving members of the aristocracy and finally culminating in the conversion
of some coastal dependencies on the Northeastern part of Java which started
during the latter half of the 16th. century. The whole process after the 15th.
century indicated a revolution from within which finally succeeded in changing
the character of Malay and Indonesian societies.
The point of interest to note is the mutual alliance between Islam and trade
in the process of expansion. This is not an accidental conjunction of economic
and religious trends. It issued forth from the very nature of the Islamic faith. Of
all the great religions of to-day, it is only Islam which grew up in the atmosphere
of trade. The founder himself was a trader. The teaching dispenses with priesthood
and urges each believer to be a priest and missionary by himself. The vocation
of trade is regarded as something honourable, for Mohammed himself was a
trader.
This association between Islamic expansion and trade is still operating in
contemporary Africa (42).
(40) Ibid., p. 61.
(41) W.D. GROENEVELDT, Notes on the Malay Archipelago and Malacca, compiled from
Chinese Sources, Batavia, 1876, p. 14.
(42) E.G. PARRINDER, a Islam and West African Indigenous Religion ,, Numen, vol. VI,
2, dec. 1959, 130-41.
31

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARCHIVES DE SOCIOLOGIE DES RELIGIONS

The economic ethic of Islam.

The traits cited by Weber characterizing the Protestant ethic such as direct
responsibility to God, honesty in dealing, hard work, frugality, a methodical
ordering of tiine in daily life, rational calculation, etc., are all strongly pronounced
in the Islamic ethic. There is also the concept of the calling. A man who is successful
in life is said to have received the favour of God. The Malays and Indonesians
say it <(berkat dari Tuhan >.An intensification of effort is also stressed by Islam,
expressed in the word << ikhtiar >. There are however two major points of difference
between the Islamic and Calvinist ethics as portrayed by Weber. The Islamic ethic
does not consider wealth as the possible sign of salvation. Since Islam rejected
the idea of predetermination of the kind upheld by Calvinism, the problem does
not arise to know who belongs to the elect and who to the damned. Another point
is the ban against usury and interest. Only recently there were talks among some
Muslims to interpret interest as outside the ban put by religion, which suggests
to us that the forces of modern capitalism are here at work.
Despite the fact that the Calvinist concept of the calling was not present,
a group of small capitalists answering Weber's description has come into being
during the colonial period. They did not come under the influence of Western
capitalist ethic conceived as an independent variable transmitted to the Orient.
They arose as a reaction against existing situations created by colonial domina-
tion. Many of them came from an area unexposed to Western influence, such as
Hadramaut in Southern Arabia. Before the second world war in Malaya and
Indonesia, we could come across several Arab traders and small industrialists
manifesting the traits of the capitalist spirit. They were also known for their
religious enthusiasm and with many of them also the innerworldly asceticism.
After the second world war the Muslim world witnessed the strenuous effort at
industrialization and business expansion by indigenous elements. In India and
China, to note Weber's examples, great changes are taking place such that Weber's
claim that these two societies hindered the growth of modern capitalism or
economic rationalization should be seen in another light.
As the situation conditions the emergence of the capitalist spirit in contem-
porary Asia, there is no strong reason to believe otherwise in the case of the
Reformation period. The Calvinist doctrine of the calling at that time would be
influential only among its believers. As there were also others who did not belong
to the Calvinist or other Protestant churches then, and who also developed the
capitalist spirit, there is no reason to exaggerate the significance of the calling.
Although Weber admitted that the situation conditions the rise of ideas and
attitudes, he reserved this for the post-Reformation period when capitalism reached
its full growth.
In contemporary Asia, in addition to the encouragement given by Islam
to economic action, we can clearly notice among the Muslims both the impeding
and accelerating influences of non-religious factors. The economic ethic emerged
from the interaction of Islam, or the conception of Islam, with these factors. The
result is not a uniform pattern. Thus for instance among a certain section of the
rural population in Malaya, notably in the Eastcoast, there is the phenomenon
of otherworldly-asceticism making it possible for them to regard economic stag-
nance as the state of affairs ordained by God. This area is relatively jundeveloped
compared to the Westcoast, and in the past it was rather isolated from the main
streams of cultural and commercial influences. The otherworldly-asceticism
serves as an ideology resulting from economic stagnance rather than the initial
impediment to the rise of the capitalist spirit. A change in the direction of
innerworldly-asceticism is bound to occur the moment the religious leaders and
32

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE WEBER THESIS AND SOUTH EAST ASIA

teachers of the area are drawn into the network of urban capitalist relationship
which acutely affects their livelihood and dignity.
In Malaya to-day, as indicated above, the Muslim population shows a
marked difference in enconomic spirit. The total population of Malaya is esti-
mated at 6.276.915, according to the preliminary report of the 1957 census. Of
this about 3.480.899 are Malay Muslims, 2.366.656 Chinese, and the rest Indian,
Pakistanis and others, some of which are Muslims. The Malays are essentially
a rural people, comprising the bulk of the agricultural community, cultivating
paddy, small holdings of rubber, coco-nuts or fruits. About 75 % of the country's
estimated 51.000 fishermen are Malays. The rest are mostly engaged in government
service.
The Chinese are mainly urban dwellers engaged in business, industrial labour,
clerical service, mining, building, entertainment centres, hotelkeeping, etc.
Among the Chinese business men, shopkeepers and industrialists, the modern
capitalist spirit is very well pronounced. Frugality and diligence are highly priced.
The making of money and success in life are ends in themselves accompanied by
a disciplined effort. There is a rational ordering of life.
Among the Muslims in Malaya we see a pattern emerging which is not of
one shade. The modern capitalist spirit is not found among the Malay Muslims
but well pronounced among the Indian Muslims engaged in business. The inte-
resting thing for us to note is the fact that both the Malay and Indian Muslims
belong to the same religion, the same school of thought (mazhab Shafei), and both
saturate their religious life with a common interest in mysticism. The Indian
Muslims from Malabar are very fond of mystical exercises. Their leading saint
is Sheikh Abdul Qadir al-Djailani of Bagdad.
If the capitalist spirit is so closely tied up with the religious attitude we can
expect a uniform pattern of expression among Muslims of common schools and
mystical interest. Apparently what is decisive here is not religious but other
factors. The factors which released the capitalist spirit among Arab Muslims,
Indian Muslims, Minangkabau, Acheh and Bugis Muslims, and also the Chinese
must clearly be of non-religious origin because (a) either they reacted in a different
manner despite the same religious and mystical background, or(b) they developed
a common capitalist spirit despite differences of religion like the Indian Muslims
and the Chinese in Malaya. To my mind the decisive factors are their emigrant
spirit and their position outside government service. This explanation can be
extensively documented and extended as to include deeper historical antecedents.
As to the Indonesian Muslims, the emergence of the capitalist spirit among cer-
tain groups can also be traced to cultural and historical roots. The influence of
religion on their economic life definitely exists but not in the sense of Weber's
thesis. It is much more on types of economic activity which go parallel in some
instances with cultural and religious groupings.

Conclusion.

From a comparative research on the relationship between Islam and capita-

lism in contemporary South East Asia, the Weber thesis cannot find much support.
On the contrary, the alternatives suggested by Robertson, Hyma and Samuelsson,
to mention only three, can rely on numerous data strengthening their positions.
The emergence of the capitalist spirit in South East Asia is a process which
is still going on and subject to direct observation. There is no reason why conclu-
33

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARCHIVES DE SOCIOLOGIE DES RELIGIONS

sions from such a study cannot be used to decide the central issue in the contro-
versy around the Weber thesis.
Despite the weakness of the thesis, Weber's treatment of the subject has
been very useful and should be welcome by scholars of South East Asian societies
as well as others. Weber has succeeded to set a more profound level of analysis
and has enriched us with conceptual tools of great importance. He has also
awakened interest in a subject hitherto neglected by serious social scientists, the
significance of religion in human society and its relation to economic life.

Syed Hussein ALATAS.

Dewan Bahasa, Kuala Lumpur, Malaya.

OTHER REFERENCES

A. HYMA, Christianity, Capitalism and Communism, Ann Arbor, Hyma, 1937.

N. BIRNBAUM, ( Conflicting interpretations of the rise of capitalism : Marx and Weber n,British
Journal of Sociology, 4, 2, june 1953.
L.L. BENNION, Max Weber's Methodology, Paris, 1933. Part 2 contains Weber's sociology of
religion.
R.W. GREEN, Protestantism and Capitalism: the Weber thesis and its critics, Heath, U.S., 1959.
This selection contains contributions from Weber, Fullerton, Troeltsch, Sombart,
Tawney, Hudson, Se, Robertson, Fanfani, Hyma and Fischoff.
Henri SEE, Onstaan en ontwikkeling van het moderne kapitalisme, Wereld Bibliotheek, Amsterdam-
Antwerpen, 1952.
L. TURKSMA, ( Protestantse ethiek en rationeel kapitalisme
no 3, mei-juni 1961. Discusses Samuelsson's
n,
Mens en Maatschappij, vol. 36,
Religion and economic action with reference
to Offenbacher's dissertation on Baden concerning Protestantism and Catholicism and
economic action. This dissertation is made use of by Weber as one of his key arguments.
R. F. BEERLING, Protestantisme en kapitalisme, Max Weber in de critiek, Publicatie Sociologisch
Instituut, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, nO 3, 1946.
B. SCHRIEKE, u Native society in transformation period o, in The effect of Western influence on
native civilizations in the Malay Archipelago, ed. B. Schrieke, Kolff, Batavia, 1929.
Syed Hussein ALATAS, ( The reconstruction of Malaysian history r, Revue du sud-est asiatique,
numero 3, 1961, Institut de Sociologie, Universit4 Libre de Bruxelles. Contains a critical
discussion on van Leur and Schrieke on Indonesian historiography, where van Leur's
misunderstanding of Weber's methodology is noted but not further treated as this
requires a special treatment which is in preparation. The article has been submitted
as a paper to the First International Conference of South East Asian Historians, Sin-
gapore, january 1961.
Facts Sheets, Information Services, Federation of Malaya, ]E:uala Lumpur, 1957, 1957-1958,
no 4, 12, 13, 12-19.
Talcott PARSONS, ( Max Weber's sociological analysis of capitalism and modern institutions p,
in An Introduction to the history of sociology, ed. H.E. Barnes, Chicago University
Press, 1948.

34

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:33:37 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions