However, there is a slight difference in their theories. Weber, on the one hand, insists that identification of meaningful action should be related to values; on the other hand, Parsons decides to eliminate the principle of Wertbeziehung. Parsons’s definition of unit acts was not affected by the actor’s account of action, and therefore “meaning” was not the major issue with Parsons’s Action Theory. However, Parsons was influenced by bureaucracy and charisma in Weber’s theory. He stated that Weber’s conception of bureaucracy was very much ideal in the sense that it involved a leadership in a hierarchy with specificity in functions of the participants. Furthermore, Parsons reflected Weber’s conception of normative orders by forming them as “a set of prescriptions, permissions, and prohibitions” on social action. Thus, Parsons’s emendation retained Idealism and Positivism in Weber’s work, but improved from the problems of Wertbeziehung and historical
However, there is a slight difference in their theories. Weber, on the one hand, insists that identification of meaningful action should be related to values; on the other hand, Parsons decides to eliminate the principle of Wertbeziehung. Parsons’s definition of unit acts was not affected by the actor’s account of action, and therefore “meaning” was not the major issue with Parsons’s Action Theory. However, Parsons was influenced by bureaucracy and charisma in Weber’s theory. He stated that Weber’s conception of bureaucracy was very much ideal in the sense that it involved a leadership in a hierarchy with specificity in functions of the participants. Furthermore, Parsons reflected Weber’s conception of normative orders by forming them as “a set of prescriptions, permissions, and prohibitions” on social action. Thus, Parsons’s emendation retained Idealism and Positivism in Weber’s work, but improved from the problems of Wertbeziehung and historical