Intention, responsibility, and sociological reductionism

As opposed to a democratic, eudaemonist conception of the state, Weber's “Politics as a Vocation” and Economy and Society defend a sociological, instrumental one. The latter does not countenance a contrast of rational authority – one that serves a common good – with repressive authority – one instrumental to particular purposes. In sociologically insisting that instruments overshadow aims, Weber promoted a non-Aristotelian, nondemocratic political science. But once again he did not compare his standpoint to any other. Instead, he contended that since political associations have pursued a diversity of particular tasks, they can have no end in common, even, say, to protect their members’ lives and capacity for moral personality:

Thus, Weber sought to analyze all state activity in terms of common means, primarily, the use of physical violence, and secondarily, the need for legitimacy and an administrative staff. His argument weaves together positivist and neo-Kantian features in a way that, as the first section of Chapter 9 emphasizes, has enduringly influenced behavioral sociologists and political scientists.