Theories of Stratification and Class - WEBER
1.
Theories of Marx & Weber form basis of most sociological
analyses of class and stratification
2.
WEBER – an ACTION theorist, the founder of Social Action Theory
There are two main types of sociological theories; the first is the
structural or macro (looking at the whole of society) theory (as
advocated by Durkheim) while the other is social action,
interpretive or micro (looking at the small parts of society)
perspectives/theory (Weber).
As the ‘micro’ name suggests, social action perspectives examine
smaller groups within society. Unlike structuralism, they are also
concerned with the subjective states of individuals. Very much unlike
a structuralist perspective, social action theorists see society as a
product of human activity.
Structuralism is a top-down, deterministic perspective that examines
the way in which society as a whole fits together. Functionalism and
Marxism are both structuralist perspectives: as such, they both
perceive human activity as the result of social structure. Social action
sociologists reject the views of structuralists.
However, Weber acknowledges the existence of classes, status groups
and parties, but challenges Durkheim’s view that society exists
independently of the individuals who make up society.
3. Built upon Marx’s analysis, but not simply bipolar (Marx), Weber
made it more complex – a multi-dimensional approach.
Society – characterised by conflicts over POWER and RESOURCES.
Class Stratif’n - a multi-class model, a matter of 3 major things:
a. INCOME & WEALTH & ‘CLASS’
i. Yes, include Marx’s Economic factors
1. regular income - determined from occupation
2. wealth – determined from possessions of value
Income & Wealth in turn are determined by what a person
brings from within themselves, ie
ii. Resources (have nothing necessarily to do with
property)
1. Qualifications/credentials
2. Skills, so more skilled people have a better
3. Individual’s ‘market position’ – what they offer
to an employer
Those in management/professional jobs
a. earn more, therefore +ve consequences
b. more favourable working conditions,
therefore +ve consequences
c. skills, qualifications = them ‘more
marketable’
Those at lower level – skilled craftsmen able to
secure higher wages than semi-skilled
b. STATUS/PRESTIGE
Means differences betw social groups in the honour/prestige
accorded by others
Status in traditional societies – 1st hand knowledge, nurtured over
years – this changed over time as socs became more complex
Later socs, status expressed through people’s
I.
STYLES OF LIFE – as seen by others
a. HOUSING
b. DRESS CODES
c. MANNER OF SPEECH (My Fair Lady http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhninL_G3Fg
people who share the above, begin to form,
unintentionally and perhaps intentionally, a community,
shared identity
2.
Status often varies INDEPENDENTLY OF CLASS DIVISION
(very different to Mx’s view who only saw capitalists and
workers)
a. exceptions to general rule (money confers high status)
‘genteel poverty’, ‘impoverished aristocracy’ etc, means
those with a title or honour are still accorded high status
(BY OTHERS) even alth they may have lost ‘all’ their
money
b. ‘new money’, looked down with scorn from those with
‘old money’
c. PARTY/POWER/COMMAND
can influence stratif’n separately from class and status
Power – Can the person influence important decisions in
society that affect other people?
a. = is a group/gp of individs who work together because
of common background, aims, interests, often works
towards a goal in the party’s interest (includes church
groups, ecology groups, sports clubs, groups in local areas,
etc)
b. Mx had said party organisations (and status differences) in
terms of class
c. Weber says, no, neither can be reduced to class divisions
d. Status and Party elements can be effected by class divisions,
but also both can influence the economic circumstances of
individuals and groups, thereby effecting class
e. Can appeal to concerns cutting across class differences,
3.
i. Religious gps – see differences betw Mx and Weber’s
explanations of Protestant v Catholic divides in N.
Ireland
ii. Political & social gps
Weber gives us more to think about (than Mx) as,
a. he offers a more complex interpretation than Marx of why
stratification exists greater number/variety of economic factors in
class stratif’n
b. Consequently, Weber provides a more flexible basis for
empirical analyses of stratification
Weberian perspectives allowed class/income & wealth, status/prestige and
party/power/command to be viewed as independent of one another. For
example, wealth could be used to gain power and prestige. Another example
would be that one might have high wealth/ income but low prestige/ status and
little power to influence important decision in society. Social class was
therefore the result of a combination of all three aspects.