The Protestant Ethic, the Spirit of Capitalism, and Perceptions of Poverty
This page provides a brief summary of the key points of Max Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Next, it discusses the Protestant Ethic and how it often is used illogically to blame persons living in poverty for their living in poverty.
The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of Capitalism
The Protestant Reformation (see especially: Martin Luther, John Calvin).
- Every person is born into sin and faces the possibility of being enslaved by sin.
- Jesus, the only son of God, sacrifices himself to allow for the atonement of sin and the possibility of being granted everlasting life in heaven.
- Everlasting life depends upon God's mercy, which is based upon one's faith and good works.
The Dilemma of Life and the Hope for Salvation
- No person knows for certain whether they are among the saved.
- People therefore look for indications they are among the saved, among those blessed by God.
The Solution: The Protestant Ethic.
- Inner-worldly asceticism: One approach to being in God's good graces is to behave oneself: to work hard, stay sober, obey the law, save/invest money, and delay gratification of desires not immediately required.
- The Protestant Ethic thereby provides a template for living the good life, one that God will bless.
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
- By engaging in inner-worldly asceticism, one increases their likelihood of profiting in business.
- Therefore, being successful and acquiring profit serves as an indication that one is in God's good graces. ("Thank God, I was successful at...")
- Acquiring profit, once seen as a sin, now becomes an indication of being in God's good graces. ("He must be blessed by God because he has been very successful.")
- Initially, showing off one's profit was viewed as sinful, thereby encouraging investment in capitalist ventures.
- Later, "conspicuous consumption" becomes a more accepted way to show that one was among the saved.
The Protestant Ethnic and Perceptions of Persons Living in Poverty
Logic and False Conclusions
Consider this logical fallacy, termed "confusion of the inverse":
- If A, then B.
- Not B.
- Therefore: Not A.
An example:
- Most automobile accidents occur within 25 miles of home (If within 25 miles of home, more likely to be in an accident)
- You are driving an automobile more than 25 miles from home (Not within 25 miles of home)
- Therefore, you must be safe from automobile accidents (Not likely to be in an accident).
One can easily see the logical fallacy here: One is not safe from automobile accidents simply because they are driving outside a 25 mile radius from home.
False Conclusions and Perceptions of Poverty
Apply the fallacy of "confusion of the inverse" to the relationship between the Protestant Ethic and living in poverty.
- If one adheres to the Protestant Ethic, one is more likely to escape living in poverty.
- John is living in poverty.
- Therefore, John must not be adhering to the Protestant Ethic.
The logical fallacy is that John might be adhering closely to the Protestant Ethic, but still live in poverty for many reasons: he has a low-wage job, he has high expenses (i.e., large family, high health-care bills), or some combination of low wages and high expenses.
Blaming Persons Living in Poverty
Because most Americans believe in the principles of the Protestant Ethic, they find it easy to believe that persons living in poverty must be to blame for not following the rules of the Protestant Ethic. We tend to look for personal reasons that someone lives in poverty, in part to protect our belief that it will never happen to us.
