Markets and rationalities are two categories of Social Science much debated in the academy. Max Weber is regarded as a pioneer in the study of the category rationalities, from which a large part of the dominant interpretations in Social Science originated, especially those in Sociology. The authors describing the market emphasize different aspects, and the reports about its historic emergence are also divergent. There is not, therefore, in Social Science, a unique interpretation of the functions and the historicity of the market, as well as there is no unanimity with regard to the dominant rationality ways. This theoretical essay brings the perspective of two authors on markets and rationalities, with no intent of absolutizing their thought or restricting their contributions to the themes. Ramos (1981) conceives reason as a force inherent to the individual, which he names substantive reason, pointing out that, with Thomas Hobbes, reason configures a utilitarian calculation of consequences. Additionally, Ramos (1981) sees the markets as a threat to freedom and individuals' autonomy. According to Castoriadis (1992b, 1996, 1999b), reason is present in an anonymous social collective, man and society are inseparable from the socio-historical context. In turn, the market, good or bad, works, although manipulating consumers and exerting violence against workers. In common, the authors advocate for freedom and individuals' autonomy. We conclude the essay corroborating the view of Alves (2007), as the clarifications presented throughout the text indicate that divergences are not in the theories and methods, but in the nature of the object under study.
Market; Sociology; Rationalities; Development; Autonomy