Ch. 4

Social Stratification Theory: Early Statements

This chapter examines some of the earliest sociological thought on social stratification. We will explore the work of Karl Marx, Max Weber, and Emile Durkheim. These are truly the classical theorists in sociology and will have a lot to say about stratification.

Paradigms- The general images of reality which also shape more specific theories.

The two main macro-level paradigms in sociology that have also influenced the development of social stratification are called functional and conflict theories.

Functional theorists maintain that society is held together by a general consensus over the major values of society. People tend to obey the rules because they were socialized with these rules and they would have no reason to reject them. Functionalists focus on societies has holistic systems like biological organisms. In the functionalists view, societies are social systems with specific needs that must be met if society is to function properly.

Conflict theorists believe that society is held together in the face of conflict because 1.) One group may be more powerful and force others to follow the rules that serve their interests; or 2.) Because there are so many conflicting interest groups, individuals or groups must learn to cooperate in order to achieve some type of stability.

Karl Marx

Although many associate Marx with the Soviet Union and the cold war, Marxian theory was not what was seen in the Soviet Union. With the fall of the Soviet Union, it is now possible to study Marx without the Soviet interpretation of him. This allows us to see Marx=s ideas in a more value-neutral light.

Marx was not only a philosopher, but also an activist. He felt the role of social science was to understand and change society. This philosophy runs counter to what many social scientists believe today.

History of Marx:

Historical Materialism: Marx believed that in order to understand human societies, we must begin with the material conditions of human subsistence, or the economics of producing the necessities of life. We must also understand the historical progression of these material conditions. This is called historical materialism by Marx.

Substructure: Marx referred to the material and economic base (material conditions) as the substructure.

Superstructure: Other parts of our lives are shaped by the substructure, such as culture, politics, etc, and this is the superstructure. The superstructure is shaped by the substructure.

Means of Production: the type of technology used to produce goods (such as hunting and gathering, agrarian, industrial) This is part of the substructure.

Causes of Social Change: Because Marx believed that society was characterized by conflict rather than social equilibrium and order, he believed that human societies were in a state of evolution that would eventually lead to the final stage of society: communism. Marx believed that changes in the substructure (hunter/gatherer, agrarian, industrial) would create changes in the superstructure.

Bourgeoisie: It was with private ownership of the means of production that class and class conflict began. In capitalist societies, the bourgeoisie were the owners of the means of production.

Proletariat: the working class that provided labor for the bourgeoisie.

Labor Theory of Value: Marx used this theory to explain the exploitation inherent in capitalist societies. Marx believed that the value of any item is the amount of labor necessary for its production. The bourgeoisie pay the workers only a fraction of the value that the workers actually produce. The remainder is Asurplus value@ which is taken by the capitalist for his or her profit. ASurplus value is the difference between the value created by the worker and the cost of maintaining him.@

Max Weber

Weber provided us with two expansions of Marx=s work. First, Weber added a multidimensional view of social stratification, rather than the binary view of Marx. Second, his work on the development of bureaucracy enabled us to understand the nature of power and dominance within advanced industrial societies.

Weber believed in a value-free sociology. He believed that the social scientist=s task was to understand human society without trying to change it.

Weber=s multidimensional view of social stratification: Weber did not believe that conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat was the only or most important form of conflict. For Weber, the social scientist must consider a person=s more general relationship to the marketplace. Second, he came to stress a multidimensional aspect of social stratification: the dimensions of class, status, and party (power).

Class: a number of people who have in common a specific causal component of their life chances, which is represented by economic interests in the possession of goods and opportunities for income. This explains the new middle class in industrial societies.

Status: Also thought of as prestige. It is the ability of someone to live up to a set of ideals or principles held important by the society or some social group within it. We think in terms of the rich, movie stars, famous athletes, etc.. Status groups draw lines around themselves, restricting social interaction with those not of the same status.

Party or Power: These are the people who have power and can influence the rest of society. They have the ability to dominate or influence others for whatever goal.

Weber saw all three of these aspects as important to the ranking of individuals within society. There is also a large degree of overlap among the three. Weber also believed that conflict could never be completely eliminated. As one form is eliminated, another would take its place to cause more conflict and inequality. He was much more pessimistic than Marx.

Bureaucracy: Weber already believed by the turn of the century that bureaucracy would continue to grow and flourish. Even though people claim to want to be free of it, they continue to want a strong military, better economic planning, lower crime, etc. All these things lead to more bureaucracy. Weber called this the AIron Cage.@ He felt that people were building this iron cage for themselves and he saw no solution to the situation. Bureaucracy can be thought of as:

1. governed laws or administrative regulations

2. hierarchy of authority

3. Managed by written documents

4. thorough and expert training

5. Management of the office follows general rules that are stable and can be learned

Weber wrote about three principal ideal types of legitimate authority.

Rational-legal Authority: AResting on a belief in the legality of patterns of normative rules and the right of those elevated to authority under such rules to issue commands.@ Weber saw this as the most efficient means for modern societies.

Traditional Authority: AResting on an established belief in the sanctity of immemorial traditions and the legitimacy of the status of those exercising authority under them.@ This was primarily displayed in agrarian societies, and began to fall with the industrial revolution.

Charismatic Authority: AResting on devotion to the specific and exceptional sanctity, heroism, or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him.@ This is only temporary and usually comes with a revolt against the status quo (Jesus, Lenin, Martin Luther, Khomeini).

Durkheim

Durkheim was a functionalist and called for bolstering the status quo around a moral integration of society. Durkheim believed that the problems of his era were moral, not material.

Remember, Durkheim viewed society using the organic analogy. That is society is similar to a biological organism.

Durkheim believed that humans were by nature greedy and self-serving. Therefore, in order to save people from social chaos and individual destruction, a strong moral order was necessary.

Mechanical Solidarity: This characterized pre-industrial societies. Believed society was held together by a Acollective conscious@ or one mind. Characterized by external inequality, or ascribed status.

As societies continued to grow and change individuals began to have different beliefs and values.

Organic Solidarity: This is characterized by industrial societies. Believed that occupational organizations or guilds could provide the same guidance as was done in pre-industrial societies. This would restrain people=s self-interests and they would see what was good for the larger society. Characterized by internal inequality, or achieved status.

In order for society to function properly, there has to be inequality. In industrial societies, people must understand this and put aside their own beliefs for those of the common good.