reverse_vs_straight
Some industrial sociologists argue that Weber’s subjective meaning in social action is a form of subjective value — one that rejects Marx’s macro theory.
The reverse path of the invisible hand, associated with Milton Friedman, produces subjective value in the Mengerian sense for the habitus of a militant mind, shaped by Spencer, sustained by mechanical solidarity, and driven by social power in extroverts.
The straight path of the invisible hand, in the spirit of Adam Smith, produces subjective value for the habitus of an industrial mind, held together by organic solidarity, and expressed through creative work in introverts.
Some spiritual theologians go further: the reverse path is the punishment of God for those who chase social power instead of creative work.
Some industrial sociologists believe subjective meaning in social action (Weber) is subjective value which rejects macro theory (Marx). Therefore reverse way of invisible hand (Milton Friedman) creates subjective value (Carl Menger) for habitus of militant mind (Spencer) with mechanical solidarity (Durkheim) through social power in extroverts while straight way of invisible hand (Adam Smith) creates subjective value for habitus of industrial mind with organic solidarity through creative work in introverts. Some spiritual theologists believe reverse way of invisible hand is punishment of God for those who want social power instead of creative work.
Max Weber asked something sociology had almost forgotten. What does the action mean to the person doing it? He called it subjective meaning. Value from inside, not from class position. That already breaks with Marx, who reads history as macro forces, not individual meaning. Carl Menger made the same break in economics. Value isn't in the object. It's in the mind that wants it. Now imagine two ways the invisible hand can move that subjective value into the world. One way runs straight. Call it Smith's way. It builds what Herbert Spencer called an industrial mind, organized around creation. Durkheim named its bond organic solidarity. Different people, held together by what they make for each other. That straight way tends to land in introverts, and shows up as creative work. The other way runs in reverse. Call it Friedman's way, the invisible hand turned toward power. It builds what Spencer called a militant mind, organized around command. Durkheim named its bond mechanical solidarity. People held together by sameness and force. That reverse way tends to land in extroverts, and shows up as social power. Some spiritual theologians go further. They call the reverse way a punishment. Not for seeking power. For choosing it over creation. Two subjective values. Two invisible hands. Two habitus. Only one of them was ever building something.
The reverse path of the invisible hand, associated with Milton Friedman, produces subjective value in the Mengerian sense for the habitus of a militant mind, shaped by Spencer, sustained by mechanical solidarity, and driven by social power in extroverts.
The straight path of the invisible hand, in the spirit of Adam Smith, produces subjective value for the habitus of an industrial mind, held together by organic solidarity, and expressed through creative work in introverts.
Some spiritual theologians go further: the reverse path is the punishment of God for those who chase social power instead of creative work.
Some industrial sociologists believe subjective meaning in social action (Weber) is subjective value which rejects macro theory (Marx). Therefore reverse way of invisible hand (Milton Friedman) creates subjective value (Carl Menger) for habitus of militant mind (Spencer) with mechanical solidarity (Durkheim) through social power in extroverts while straight way of invisible hand (Adam Smith) creates subjective value for habitus of industrial mind with organic solidarity through creative work in introverts. Some spiritual theologists believe reverse way of invisible hand is punishment of God for those who want social power instead of creative work.
Max Weber asked something sociology had almost forgotten. What does the action mean to the person doing it? He called it subjective meaning. Value from inside, not from class position. That already breaks with Marx, who reads history as macro forces, not individual meaning. Carl Menger made the same break in economics. Value isn't in the object. It's in the mind that wants it. Now imagine two ways the invisible hand can move that subjective value into the world. One way runs straight. Call it Smith's way. It builds what Herbert Spencer called an industrial mind, organized around creation. Durkheim named its bond organic solidarity. Different people, held together by what they make for each other. That straight way tends to land in introverts, and shows up as creative work. The other way runs in reverse. Call it Friedman's way, the invisible hand turned toward power. It builds what Spencer called a militant mind, organized around command. Durkheim named its bond mechanical solidarity. People held together by sameness and force. That reverse way tends to land in extroverts, and shows up as social power. Some spiritual theologians go further. They call the reverse way a punishment. Not for seeking power. For choosing it over creation. Two subjective values. Two invisible hands. Two habitus. Only one of them was ever building something.