The German sociologist Max Weber (1864-1920), was the founder of "comprehensive" and explanatory sociology , which takes as its starting point, the social actions of individuals, in an attempt to elucidate the reasons. His study of Western society focuses on the rationalization of human activities in political, social and economic spheres. His book, Economy and Society (1922), seeks to define general concepts, such as social action, fighting, power and domination.
[...] In contrast, economic relations dominated by the traditional hamper market development and "pure charisma is specifically outside the economy." However, the schematic nature of these links should not obscure the flexibility of ideal types with which they revolve. The flexibility of the typology allows its adaptation to diverse history and its developments. The forms of domination come in different forms and combinations. The traditional dominance of special covers various forms: gerontocracy, patriarchal, patriomonialisme, feudalism and organization in this order. To perpetuate domination requires some traditionalization of legal procedures and the prestige of the governed . [...]
[...] In "The types of domination," the distinction between legal domination of the other two types of dominance, facilitates understanding of the bureaucratic administrative rule, characteristic of the modern Western state. It is the process of rationalization in the Western society, an idea taken up and developed by Norbert Elias (1897-1990), in “Dynamics of the West.” Furthermore, Weber described the story as a "constant struggle, most latent time between the holder of power and administrative direction for the appropriation or expropriation of one or the other." In his words, the outcome of this struggle is decisive "for the development of civilization." In this perspective, the analysis of Norbert Elias's historical process of state development owes much to Max Weber as well as Karl Marx. [...]
[...] The three types of domination identified by Max Weber can not be presented in a "pure" form in reality. As the author puts it, "we are here to believe that the historical reality is left trapped in the conceptual scheme.” B. Understanding the historical realities The typology of domination refers to a political and economic diversity. The typology of domination allows a better understanding of historical political organizations. The administrative bureaucracy is "the purest type of legal domination. It differs from two other types of domination by its rationality. [...]
[...] According to Bourdieu, "is a legitimate institution, or an action, or use that is dominant and unrecognized as such, that is to say, tacitly acknowledged?” This definition of legitimacy includes the idea of domination and ignorance of it, ignorance due to a tacit agreement. Bourdieu explains this complicity with domination by the "habitus". "The habitus is the process of internalization by the individual to an objective structure of domination. He brought forth the rule into the mental structures of the individual. [...]
using our reader.