The Authority of Public Opinion–why Weber declined to take part in the conversation
During the second half of the19th and early 20th centuries the role of public opinion became a focus of debate for political and social theorists. Although sociologists disagreed whether public opinion was a threat to order they agreed that it exercised an important influence on the working of moder...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Max Weber studies 2011-01, Vol.11 (1), p.119-139 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 139 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 119 |
| container_title | Max Weber studies |
| container_volume | 11 |
| creator | Furedi, Frank |
| description | During the second half of the19th and early 20th centuries the role of public opinion became a focus of debate for political and social theorists. Although sociologists disagreed whether public opinion was a threat to order they agreed that it exercised an important influence on the working of modern authority. Yet despite his interest in the substantive issues raised in this debate, Max Weber wrote very little about public opinion. His silence on this subject is surprising since public opinion was widely represented as essential for the legitimation of political rule. This essay argues that Weber's reluctance to take part in this conversation may have been influenced by the irresolvable questions raised by the ascendancy of public opinion for his theory of domination. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1353/max.2011.a808815 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1353_max_2011_a808815</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>24579979</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>24579979</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1087-f10d1d4d8a36f83cdbf13d5184b5d0d2749621d9b28113460b1030da18d48cca3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kE1OwzAQhS0EEqWwZ4PkC6TMxE7iLKuKP6lSkWjF0nJsR01o48hxge64AzfkJCQKYjWb9703-gi5RpghS9jtXn3OYkCcKQFCYHJCJjEkacQh46dkgjyDSEAmzslF19UAMeOMTchmvbV0fghb56twpK6kz4diV2m6aqumcs3P1_fH9khfbWE9NVbvqsYaGhwN6s3SVvlAq4aGvkS75t36ToWeuiRnpdp19urvTsnm_m69eIyWq4enxXwZaQSRRSWCQcONUCwtBdOmKJGZBAUvEgMmzniexmjyIhaIjKdQIDAwCoXhQmvFpgTGXu1d13lbytZXe-WPEkEOWmSvRQ5a5J-WHuEj0npXWx32h87K2h180z8qx5B8GdQN5hCxh_Osx25GrO6C8_8zMU-yPM9y9gspGnEf</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Authority of Public Opinion–why Weber declined to take part in the conversation</title><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Furedi, Frank</creator><creatorcontrib>Furedi, Frank</creatorcontrib><description>During the second half of the19th and early 20th centuries the role of public opinion became a focus of debate for political and social theorists. Although sociologists disagreed whether public opinion was a threat to order they agreed that it exercised an important influence on the working of modern authority. Yet despite his interest in the substantive issues raised in this debate, Max Weber wrote very little about public opinion. His silence on this subject is surprising since public opinion was widely represented as essential for the legitimation of political rule. This essay argues that Weber's reluctance to take part in this conversation may have been influenced by the irresolvable questions raised by the ascendancy of public opinion for his theory of domination.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1470-8078</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2056-4074</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2056-4074</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1353/max.2011.a808815</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Max Weber Studies</publisher><subject>Democracy ; Democratic authority ; Militant democracy ; Moral principles ; Politicians ; Public opinion ; Public sociology ; Religion ; Social theories ; Vocation</subject><ispartof>Max Weber studies, 2011-01, Vol.11 (1), p.119-139</ispartof><rights>Max Weber Studies 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24579979$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/24579979$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,4024,27923,27924,27925,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Furedi, Frank</creatorcontrib><title>The Authority of Public Opinion–why Weber declined to take part in the conversation</title><title>Max Weber studies</title><description>During the second half of the19th and early 20th centuries the role of public opinion became a focus of debate for political and social theorists. Although sociologists disagreed whether public opinion was a threat to order they agreed that it exercised an important influence on the working of modern authority. Yet despite his interest in the substantive issues raised in this debate, Max Weber wrote very little about public opinion. His silence on this subject is surprising since public opinion was widely represented as essential for the legitimation of political rule. This essay argues that Weber's reluctance to take part in this conversation may have been influenced by the irresolvable questions raised by the ascendancy of public opinion for his theory of domination.</description><subject>Democracy</subject><subject>Democratic authority</subject><subject>Militant democracy</subject><subject>Moral principles</subject><subject>Politicians</subject><subject>Public opinion</subject><subject>Public sociology</subject><subject>Religion</subject><subject>Social theories</subject><subject>Vocation</subject><issn>1470-8078</issn><issn>2056-4074</issn><issn>2056-4074</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kE1OwzAQhS0EEqWwZ4PkC6TMxE7iLKuKP6lSkWjF0nJsR01o48hxge64AzfkJCQKYjWb9703-gi5RpghS9jtXn3OYkCcKQFCYHJCJjEkacQh46dkgjyDSEAmzslF19UAMeOMTchmvbV0fghb56twpK6kz4diV2m6aqumcs3P1_fH9khfbWE9NVbvqsYaGhwN6s3SVvlAq4aGvkS75t36ToWeuiRnpdp19urvTsnm_m69eIyWq4enxXwZaQSRRSWCQcONUCwtBdOmKJGZBAUvEgMmzniexmjyIhaIjKdQIDAwCoXhQmvFpgTGXu1d13lbytZXe-WPEkEOWmSvRQ5a5J-WHuEj0npXWx32h87K2h180z8qx5B8GdQN5hCxh_Osx25GrO6C8_8zMU-yPM9y9gspGnEf</recordid><startdate>20110101</startdate><enddate>20110101</enddate><creator>Furedi, Frank</creator><general>Max Weber Studies</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110101</creationdate><title>The Authority of Public Opinion–why Weber declined to take part in the conversation</title><author>Furedi, Frank</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1087-f10d1d4d8a36f83cdbf13d5184b5d0d2749621d9b28113460b1030da18d48cca3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Democracy</topic><topic>Democratic authority</topic><topic>Militant democracy</topic><topic>Moral principles</topic><topic>Politicians</topic><topic>Public opinion</topic><topic>Public sociology</topic><topic>Religion</topic><topic>Social theories</topic><topic>Vocation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Furedi, Frank</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Max Weber studies</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Furedi, Frank</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Authority of Public Opinion–why Weber declined to take part in the conversation</atitle><jtitle>Max Weber studies</jtitle><date>2011-01-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>119</spage><epage>139</epage><pages>119-139</pages><issn>1470-8078</issn><issn>2056-4074</issn><eissn>2056-4074</eissn><abstract>During the second half of the19th and early 20th centuries the role of public opinion became a focus of debate for political and social theorists. Although sociologists disagreed whether public opinion was a threat to order they agreed that it exercised an important influence on the working of modern authority. Yet despite his interest in the substantive issues raised in this debate, Max Weber wrote very little about public opinion. His silence on this subject is surprising since public opinion was widely represented as essential for the legitimation of political rule. This essay argues that Weber's reluctance to take part in this conversation may have been influenced by the irresolvable questions raised by the ascendancy of public opinion for his theory of domination.</abstract><pub>Max Weber Studies</pub><doi>10.1353/max.2011.a808815</doi><tpages>21</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1470-8078 |
| ispartof | Max Weber studies, 2011-01, Vol.11 (1), p.119-139 |
| issn | 1470-8078 2056-4074 2056-4074 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1353_max_2011_a808815 |
| source | JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
| subjects | Democracy Democratic authority Militant democracy Moral principles Politicians Public opinion Public sociology Religion Social theories Vocation |
| title | The Authority of Public Opinion–why Weber declined to take part in the conversation |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T18%3A31%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Authority%20of%20Public%20Opinion%E2%80%93why%20Weber%20declined%20to%20take%20part%20in%20the%20conversation&rft.jtitle=Max%20Weber%20studies&rft.au=Furedi,%20Frank&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=119&rft.epage=139&rft.pages=119-139&rft.issn=1470-8078&rft.eissn=2056-4074&rft_id=info:doi/10.1353/max.2011.a808815&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E24579979%3C/jstor_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=24579979&rfr_iscdi=true |