MAX WEBER'S THEORY OF LAW EDUCATION AND POLITICAL VIEWS OF RELIGION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2023vol1.7153Keywords:
Canon law, conventional norms, ideal norm, law education, law school, legal norm, legal phenomenon, school of sociology, sociology of law, sociology of religionAbstract
In order to better evaluate Weber's most popular views on the economic ethics of religion, by comparison and due to the interaction of the opposites and sets of views expressed in them, in this work, the discipline of human rights will also be analysed, which will closely identify Weber's asceticism about the spirit of normative Protestantism and the ethics of capitalism and law school and education. The purpose of the research is to establish and identify the ideas expressed by Weber regarding the value scope of social classes, layers and typology of religion, by analysing them – conventionally, but specifically – through the doctrine of lex nature and education impact in school of sociology. Additionally, the purpose of the present work is to answer what is the general structure of Weber's philosophical thoughts and views on school of law, to find and identify in it the asceticism of the sociology of religion, interspersed with the theory of conflict and domination. But the relevance of the research is rooted in the fact that the methods of Weber's scientific approach are used to analyse the state's institutional and orderly system-theoretical dependence from the bureaucratized forms of public authority and this impact in knowledge.
Downloads
References
Barclay, R. (2002). An Apology for the True Christian Divinity. Retrieved from: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/56487
Bielefeldt, H. (1998). Philosophie der Menschenrechte. Grundlagen einesweltweiten Freiheitsethos. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesell-schaft.
Britannica. (2022). Ulpian Roman jurist. Retrieved from: https://www.britannica.com/science/jurisprudence
Cicero, M. T. (2009). M. Tullii Ciceronis Orationes V9 (1830) Marcus Tullius Cicero. Kessinger Publishing, LLC
Eisenstadt, S. N. Ed. (2000). The reconstruction of religious arenas in the framework of “multiple modernities”. Millenium: Journal of International Studies
Ensign, Ch. D. (1955). Radical German Pietism (1675.–1760.) Boston University. Retrieved from: https://hdl.handle.net/2144/8771
Fergus, K. (2009). Thomas Aquinas. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Finnis, J. (1998). Aquinas. Moral, Political and Legal Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Freud, S. (1929). Civilization and its discontents., S.E., 21:64-145.
Habermas, J. (1996). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Hefe, O. (2009). Taisnīgums, filozofisks ievads. Poligrāfs.
Hoffe, O. (2006). Gerechtigkeit, Eine philosophische Einfuhrung. Munchen: Verlag C.H.Beck oHG, Munchen.
Hoffmann, H. (1902). Kirchenverfassungsrecht der niederl. Leipzig: Reformierten.
Kalbergs, S. (2010). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Oxford University Press.
Kant, I. (1996). Practical Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Kants, I. (2010). Tīrā prāta kritika. R.: Zinātne.
Koenig, M. (2010) .Cilvēktiesības. Rīga : Tiesu namu aģentūra.
Lesky, E. (1976). A System of Complete Medical Police; Selections from Johann Peter Frank. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Macey, D. (1994). The Lives of Michel Foucault. Vintage books. A division of random house, INC, New York.
Maritain, J. (1951). Man and the State. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Merkel, W., & Croissant, A. (2000). Defective Democracies: Concept and Causes. Central European Political Science Review, 1, 34.
Morgerism books. (2021). The works of Thomas Adams. Monergism Books, PO Box 491, West Linn, Oregon, 97068. Retrieved from: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/adams/The%20Works%20of%20Thomas%20Adams%20-%20Thomas%20Adams.pdf
Mueller, J. T. (2003). Christian Dogmatics. Published by Concordia Publishing.
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA
Saeima. (1998). On the National Anthem of Latvia. Latvijas vēstnesis, 58/59. Retrieved from: https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/47134
Satversmes Sapulce. (1922). Latvijas Republikas Satversme. Valdības Vēstnesis, Nr. 141. Pieejams: https://likumi.lv/ta/id/57980-latvijas-republikas-satversme
Schluchter, W. (2017). Max Weber’s Sociology of Religion. In T. Ertman (Ed.) Max Weber's Economic Ethic of the World Religions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P.66. DOI: 10.1017/9781316460092.002
Siebeck, M. (1994). Wissenschaft als Beruf 1917/1919. Politik als Beruf 1919. Deutsch. ISBN-13: 9783161458132
Socrates. (2022). Electronic Scientific Journal of Law. Legal Doctrine of Max Weber’s Sociology of Religion. Riga: RSU. Retrieved from: https://dspace.rsu.lv/jspui/handle/123456789/9944
Spener, P. J. (2019). Theologische Bedenken. II, S. 81 f.
Šuvajevs, I. (1999). Filozofija. Saruna par filozofiju. Zvaigzne ABC, Rīga.
Švābe, A., Būmanis, A., & Dišlers, K. (1927). Latviešu Konversācijas vārdnīca. 1.–21. Rīga: A. Gulbja apgāds.
Toteff, C. A. (2016). Max Weber’s Sociology of Religion. Tubingen. Germany. E-ISBN PDF 978-3-16-154430-9.
UK Parliament. (1689). Bill of Rights of the United Kingdom.
Vēbers, M. (2004). Reliģijas socioloģija. AGB ISBN 9984 – 624 – 24 – 2
Weber, M. (1949). The Methodology of the Social Sciences. Edward A. Shils and Henrey A. Finich. Illinois: The free press of glencoe. p.41.
Whitebook, J. (2017). Freud An Intellectual Biography. Cambridge University Press, UK.
Williams, T. D., & Bengtsson, J. O. (2020). Personalism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/ personalism/
st United States Congress. (1789). Bill of Rights of the United States of America. Retrieved from: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript#toc-transcription-of-the-1789-joint-resolution-of-congress-proposing-12-amendments-to-the-u-s-constitution-2
