[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 266 KB, 1169x1600, Max_Weber,_1918[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17001075 No.17001075 [Reply] [Original]

>Max Weber
>Btfo's Marx and Nietzche
>heavily influences Adam Curtis

Why is he not in fashion in modern academia?

>> No.17001093

But he was influenced by both Marx and Nietzsche and he is one of the most influential social scientists in history. 90% of the famous sociologists of the last century were Weberians.

>> No.17001211

>>17001075
He is taught and cited a great deal still, I cited the cunt in my PhD. Where do you get your notion of what "modern academia" is?

>> No.17001230

QRD?

>> No.17001496

>>17001075
because he was a liberal and not a commie. you forgot to add
>BTFO'd P*lish "people", Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht
>We have this [German] revolution to thank for the fact that we cannot send a single division against the Poles. All we see is dirt, muck, dung, and horse-play – nothing else. Liebknecht belongs in the madhouse and Rosa Luxemburg in the zoological gardens.

>> No.17001523

>>17001075
the fuck do you mean "not in fashion in modern academia"? he's heavily used by modern academia. Are you one of those peterson fags thaat think modern academia is just a bunch of 'muh marxists munsters'?

>> No.17001545

>>17001523
why did the thread suddenly become a breadtube comments section

back to Ieddit tranny faggot

>> No.17001573
File: 383 KB, 592x552, 1602725501908.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17001573

>>17001545
>breadtube
Why do you autodidacts only know about shitty internet trends?

>> No.17001594

>>17001573
as long as you're ranting at phantoms do you want me to stand in for the doctor who refused to prescribe you hormones too? do you just amble around social media looking for opportunities to yell about things

i can be "qanon" too if that helps you. pretend i'm your uncle on facebook who still calls you by your real name

>> No.17001602

>>17001075
1. You shouldn't put the name of the person in greentext. It's not an action; you don't need a subject for your greentext. You can just put up the picture; his name is literally right there.
2. He is somewhat in fashion in modern sociology.
The only things he isn't in fashion in are things he's probably wrong on (such as the overly reductive "Protestant Ethic" stuff). He also refused to use empirical evidence to prove his claims, which goes against most of mainstream academia, leading to him being cited less than he otherwise might.

>> No.17001613
File: 210 KB, 492x497, 1604968798066.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17001613

>>17001594
keep on fighting 'muh modern academia', your internet fight will surely achieve something

>> No.17001629

>>17001613
do you want me to be alex jones too? what other things did you hear about on twitter? we both know you'll only be on 4chan for a little bit before you get tired of the CHUDS, so let's make the most of this moment. tell me all the 4chan stereotypes you came here to be annoyed by

do you want to call me elliot rodger? you do, don't you

>> No.17001667

>>17001602
>He also refused to use empirical evidence to prove his claims, which goes against most of mainstream academia
Is this one of those cases of the pot calling the kettle black?

>> No.17001685

>>17001667
No. Sociologists love to use empirical evidence. Every sociologist in the past 50 years uses an extreme amount of macro-evidence to prove what they say. (Just for context, I don't like that fact and I think it partially discredits much of sociology, but it's still a fact either way.)

>> No.17001704

>adam curtis
AHHHHH SPOOKY MUSIC PLAYED TO INAGES OF PEOPLE ON A SUBWAY AHHHHHH

>> No.17001749

>>17001685
Oh I know that they use so called empirical evidence
I was going for the whole thing where these pieces of "evidence" very rarely replicate
Unless you mean something different

>> No.17001834

>>17001749
No, I mean literally Weber rejected the usage of empirical evidence in general (even un-replicable evidence).

>> No.17003265

>>17001075
>Why is he not in fashion in modern academia?
Is this a joke? He is one of the most widely cited authors in the social sciences.

>> No.17003293

>>17003265
I was gonna say... his theories and work are still the basis of Sociology, he's literally the first person they talk about in a 101 class.

>> No.17003298

Modern Academia is not what you think it is. Desu.

>> No.17003332

>>17001496
>Liebknecht belongs in the madhouse and Rosa Luxemburg in the zoological gardens.
Holy based

>> No.17003717

>>17001075
Weber has been discussed in academia ad nauseam for several decades. Not sure where you got the idea he's ignored.