Unlike many who post to this list, I will be mercifully brief.
Weber sought in his models a level between historical description and
sociological theories of universals. Weber found Marx's materialism to be
an interesting potentially useful hypothesis but he did not (unlike some on
this list) accept it as REVEALED TRUTH.
Unlike Marx, Weber insisted that individual action (rather than class) was
the proper unit of sociological anaysis. Thus meaning and culture become
fundamentals and not mere superstructure as in Marxism. Weber walked a
line between radical subjectivism [what was hen the utilitarian tradition]
and historicism [which in his day was anti-scientific in its rejection of
typological concepts].
Weber recognized that cultural studies are subjective in that they
originate in the investigator's notions of what is culturally significant.
But once the question has been framed, Weber holds that it must be
investigated systematically by the formulation of testable models -- ideal
types.
Weber conceptualized collectives (groups) in terms of social behavior
rather than structures. Thus his __Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of
Capitalism__ explores the links between religion-culture and economy (that
is, the employment of wealth). Ultimately then, Weber does not reject
structuralism but rather shows how culture and behavior produces structure.
He cannot be said to competely reject materialism for he holds that group
formation is based on material interest as well as on affinity and
authority. That is why Talcott Parsons was able to produce a synthesis of
Weber and the structural-functionalism of Durkheim.
Finally, I getting damn sick and tired of Jim Blaut's self-righteous
condemnation of everyone who disagrees with him (or in this case, everyone
who finds Weber's work useful) as eurocentric, conservative and racist. He
can not discuss ideas or debate without sinking to personal attacks. I
would venture that there are a great many who employ Weber's insights who
are none of those things. Blaut is in fact afraid to debate any idea on
its merits. He cannot bring himself to participate give and take and has
refused to discuss his ideas with me at all. He is a sad case indeed.