Constitutional Political Economy, 11, 119–145, 2000. c  2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in The Netherlands. Latent Theoretical Convergence upon a Pluralist Conception of Economic Action: Adam Smith and Max Weber MILAN Z. ZAFIROVSKI zafirmz@athens.edu Department of Sociology/Anthropology, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, U.S.A. Abstract. This paper engages in exploring certain latent theoretical convergences between the works of Adam Smith and Max Weber. The fact that these two have been major protagonists in the establishment and development of political economy and sociology respectively gives a rationale to such an endeavor. Another rationale is provided by the paucity of attempts at exploring the theoretical relations between Smith and Weber in the current economic and sociological literature. Helping fill in this gap in the literature is the paper’s intended contribution. That Weber’s writings contain pertinent convergences with Smith’s work is the general premise of this article. In particular, the treatment of economic action epitomizes these congruencies between Smith’s political economy and Weber’s economic sociology. JEL classification: B31, A12, A14. 1. Introduction A myriad of theoretical and methodological studies exist that are concerned with the work of Adam Smith and Max Weber. As regards Smith, these involve analyses and interpretations of the following issues (Buchanan, 1991b): A first set incorporates Smith’s value and distribution theories, the emergence of political economy, including the theory of the firm, the laissez-faire doctrine and the axiom of the market’s invisible hand. Included in a second set are the origins of rational choice theory or the economic approach to human behavior in Smith’s work, viz. Wealth of Nations, particularly of the concept of classical/modern economic man in agency theory premised upon seeking self-interest, including profit. Another set of issues pertains to the pertinence of moral factors in Smith’s conception of economic action and actors. Re-examined is Smith’s design of decent (moral) society, his account of the generation of moral rules, including their imposition by a dominant social group, as well as his critique of the free market economy by viewing capitalism as a moral order. So is the interplay of moral sentiments and self-interest, or of passions and reason in human action, the distinction of utility and morality, and the bearing of Smith’s moral philosophy on economic theory. Relatedly, scholars decipher in Smith a multilayered discourse of individual desires, social history, and cultural values linking markets and moral conscience (and even redefine necessities, e.g. health care, along his lines.) Scholars also stress Smith’s conception of progress and his view on the relationship of the division of labor and markets as well as on the role of laws, institutions and policies in economic development. Further, Smith is credited with the emancipation of economics from political and religious considerations, underscoring his concerns about superstition and religious zeal. Finally, what is seen as Smith’s economic orthodoxy is sometimes distinguished from