Following Weber, an increasing complexity arises from the structural and institutional differentiation of the lifeworld, which follows the closed logic of the systemic rationalisation of our communications. There is a transfer of action co-ordination from 'language' over to 'steering media', such as money and power, which by-pass consensus orientated communication with a 'symbolic generalisation of rewards and punishments'. After this process the lifeworld 'is no longer needed for the co-ordination of action'. This results in humans ('lifeworld actors') losing a sense of responsibility with a chain of negative social consequences. Lifeworld communications lose their purpose becoming irrelevant for the co-ordination of central life processes. This has the effect of ripping the heart out of social discourse, allowing complex differentiation to occur but at the cost of social pathologies
In , rationalisation is the process whereby an increasing number of social actions and interactions become based on considerations of efficiency or calculation rather than on motivations derived from custom, tradition, or emotion. It is conceived of as a core part of and as manifested especially in behaviour in the capitalist market; rational administration of the state and bureaucracy; the extension of modern science; and the expansion of modern technology. Some (such as the ) have argued that the spread of rationalisation based on calculation and efficiency society.
began his studies of rationalisation in , in which he shows how the aims of certain , particularly , shifted towards rational means of economic gain as a way of dealing with their anxiety about whether they had been saved. The rational consequences of this doctrine, he argued, soon grew incompatible with its religious roots, and so the latter were eventually discarded. Weber continues his investigation into this matter in later works, notably in his studies on and on the classifications of . In these works he alludes to an inevitable move towards rationalization.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_%28sociology%29
In , rationalisation is the process of constructing a justification for a decision that was originally arrived at through a different mental process.
This process can be in a range from fully (e.g. to present an external defense against ridicule from others) to mostly (e.g. to create a block against internal feelings of guilt).
For an example, consider a person who bought one of the first home computers in 1980 primarily motivated by the excitement of playing with a computer. If he felt that his friends would not accept "having fun" as a sufficient reason for the purchase, he might have searched for other justifications and ended up telling them how much time it was going to save him in doing his taxes.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_%28psychology%29
McDonalds fast food chain started in U.S.A. in the 1950's. The hierarchy within each store usually employs a manager and a large team of staff. The business thrives on the word fast in terms of turnover this is in relation to burgers, fries, milkshakes etc. and also customers. Its success is due to its ability to offer consumers, workers, and managers four basic components these are; efficiency, calculability, predictability and control.
These four basic components can be thought of as a rational system. These components introduced originally in Weber's theory of rationality are amplified by McDonalds and are a clear extension of Weber's theory. Many aspects of McDonalds mirror the concept of rationalisation using these basic components this is illustrated in the following examples.
Efficiency is used to; streamline operations, have faster service, make burgers quicker. Calculability (calculating, counting, quantifying) is seen at McDonalds as to how many burgers can be sold in an hour - speed of productivity (usually high) and what are the end results (usually large). Predictability is the third dimension and as in Weber's rational society people prefer to know what to expect in most setting and at most times. In McDonalds this manifests in their outlets (seating arrangements, facilities etc.), there products (taste, size, price etc) everything is the same in every outlet across the world. Finally Control is seen as the replacement of human with non-human technology. Technology includes machines and tools but also materials, skills, knowledge, rules regulations, procedures and techniques. (The McDonaldization of Society 2000). Also as in Weber's ideology (Classical Social Theory 1997) McDonalds can be a dehumanising place in which to work, the efficiency element making staff into robotic machines that provide the fast food, the consumers dehumanised in the fact of having to queue for their food and to listen to the same greeting said in a monotonous manner by the ever-smiling.
Artificial intelligence, a new and exciting technology, is not a new concept in human imagination. The idea can be found at least as far back as the pre-Christian Greeks and in all ages thereafter. Homer was acquainted with the concept of AI, perhaps 800 years BC, and the ancient historian Polybios believed that Nabis, a dictator of Sparta (about 200 BC), used a robot to compel rich but recalcitrant citizens to pay their taxes. We tend to think that artificial intelligence is a new idea, hatched in the computer age. In fact it is an ancient notion.http://library.thinkquest.org/C005693/page2.html
According to Weber, formal rationality means that rules, regulations, and larger social structures shape the search by people for the optimum means to a given end. Individuals are not left to their own devices in searching for the best means of attaining a given objective. Weber identified this as a major development in the history of the world: Previously, people had been left to discover such mechanisms on their own or with vague and general guidance from larger value systems (religion, for example). After the development of formal rationality, they could use rules to help them decide what to do. More strongly, people existed in social structures that dictated what they should do. In effect, people no longer had to discover for themselves the optimum means to an end; rather, optimum means had already been discovered and were institutionalised in rules, regulations, and structures. People simply had to follow them. Important aspect of formal rationality, then, is that it allows individuals little choice of means to ends. [Because] the choice of means is guided or even determined, virtually everyone can (or must) make the same, optimal choice.
Weber praised the bureaucracy, his paradigm of formal rationality, for its many advantages over other mechanisms that help people discover and implement optimum means to ends. The most important advantages are the four basic dimensions of rationalisation (and McDonaldization).
First, Weber viewed the bureaucracy as the most efficient structure for handling large numbers of tasks requiring a great deal of paperwork. As an example, Weber might have used the Internal Revenue Service, for no other structure could handle millions of tax returns so well.
Second, bureaucracies emphasise calculability, or the quantification of as many things as possible. Reducing performance to a series of quantifiable tasks helps people gauge success. For example, an IRS agent is expected to process a certain number of tax returns each day. Handling less than the required number of cases is unsatisfactory performance; handling more is excellence.
The quantitative approach presents a problem: little or no concern for the actual quality of work. Employees are expected to finish a task with little attention paid to how well it is handled. For instance, IRS agents may manage large numbers of cases and, as a result, receive positive evaluations from their superiors. Yet they may actually handle the cases poorly, costing the government thousands, or even millions, of dollars in uncollected revenue. Or, the agents may handle cases so quickly that taxpayers may be angered by the way the agents treat them.
Third, because of their well-entrenched rules and regulations, bureaucracies also operate in a highly predictable manner. Incumbents of a given office know with great assurance how the incumbents of other offices will behave. They know what they will be provided with and when they will receive it. Outsiders who receive the services the bureaucracies dispense know with a high degree of confidence what they will receive and when they will receive it. Again, to use an example Weber might have used, the millions of recipients of checks from the Social Security Administration know precisely when they will receive their checks and exactly how much money they will receive.
Finally, bureaucracies emphasise control over people through the replacement of human with nonhuman technology. As you will recall, nonhuman technologies (machines and rules, for example) tend to control people, while human technologies (hammers and pens, for example) tend to be controlled by people. Indeed, the bureaucracy itself may be seen as one huge nonhuman technology. Its nearly automatic functioning may be seen as an effort to replace human judgement with the dictates of rules, regulations, and structures. The division of labour, which allocates to each office a limited number of well-defined tasks, controls employees. Incumbents must do those tasks, and no others, in the manner prescribed by the organisation. They may not, in most cases, devise idiosyncratic ways of doing those tasks. Furthermore, by making few, if any, judgements, people begin to resemble human robots or computers. Having reduced people to this status, it is then possible to think about actually replacing human beings with machines. This has already occurred to some extent: in many settings, computers have taken over bureaucratic tasks once performed by humans. One can imagine
...
