Editing Max Weber (section)

===Theodicy===
{{see also|Theodicy}}

Weber used the concept of theodicy in his interpretation of theology and religion throughout his corpus.{{sfnm|1a1=Adair-Toteff|1y=2013|1pp=87–90|2a1=Swedberg|2a2=Agevall|2y=2016|2pp=348–349|3a1=Turner|3y=1996|3p=149}} This involved both his scholarly and personal interests in the subject. It was central to his conception of humanity, which he interpreted as having been connected with finding meaning.{{sfn|Adair-Toteff|2013|pp=87–88}} Theodicy was a popular subject of study amongst German scholars who sought to determine how a world created by an [[omnibenevolent]] and [[omnipotent]] being can contain suffering. As part of this tradition, Weber was careful in his study of the subject.{{sfnm|1a1=Adair-Toteff|1y=2013|1pp=88–90|2a1=Turner|2y=1996|2pp=149–158}} Rather than interpreting it through a theological or ethical lens, he interpreted it through a social one.{{sfnm|1a1=Adair-Toteff|1y=2013|1pp=88–89|2a1=Turner|2y=1996|2p=149|3a1=Swedberg|3a2=Agevall|3y=2016|3p=347}} Furthermore, he incorporated [[Friedrich Nietzsche]]'s concept of {{Lang|fr|[[Ressentiment]]}} into his discussion of the topic. However, Weber disagreed with Nietzsche's emotional discussion of the topic and his interpretation of it as having been a Jewish-derived expression of [[Master–slave morality|slave morality]].{{sfnm|1a1=Adair-Toteff|1y=2013|1pp=99–102|2a1=Turner|2y=1996|2p=158}}

Weber divided theodicy into three main types:{{sfnm|1a1=Adair-Toteff|1y=2013|1pp=94–97|2a1=Turner|2y=1996|2pp=147–148|3a1=Swedberg|3a2=Agevall|3y=2016|3pp=347–348}}

# Persian dualism – God is not all powerful and misfortune comes from outside his power
# Indian doctrine of karma – God is not all powerful and misfortune comes from inside oneself
# Doctrine of predestination – Only a chosen few will be saved from damnation

Weber defined the importance of societal class within religion by examining the difference between the theodicies of fortune and misfortune and to what class structures they apply.{{sfnm|1a1=Swedberg|1a2=Agevall|1y=2016|1pp=347–348|2a1=Turner|2y=1996|2pp=163–164|3a1=Plye|3a2=Davidson|3y=1998|3pp=498–499}} The theodicy of fortune related to the desire of those who were successful to prove that they deserved it. They were also prone to not being satisfied with what they already had and wished to avoid the notion that they were illegitimate or sinful.{{sfnm|1a1=Turner|1y=1996|1pp=164–165|2a1=Swedberg|2a2=Agevall|2y=2016|2pp=347–348}} Those without the work ethic believed in the theodicy of misfortune, believing wealth and happiness were granted in the afterlife. Another example of how this belief of religious theodicy influenced class was that those of lower economic status tended towards deep religiousness and faith as a way to comfort themselves and provide hope for a more prosperous future, while those of higher economic status preferred the sacraments or actions that proved their right to possess greater wealth.{{sfnm|1a1=Plye|1a2=Davidson|1y=1998|1pp=498–499|2a1=Swedberg|2a2=Agevall|2y=2016|2pp=347–348|3a1=Turner|3y=1996|3pp=163–165}}