Marx Vs Simmel

I value doing things that help me live a healthier lifestyle. I understand that it is important to take care of myself by eating healthy, exercising, and doing my best to alleviate stress. If I don’t take care of myself I will not be in any shape to help anyone else. When I was younger my values were materialistic. I was more concerned about what I

Karl Marx and Max Weber were influential sociologists that paved the way for modern sociological school of thought. Both, Karl Marx and Max Weber contributed a lot to the study and foundation of sociology. Without their contributions sociology would not be as prominent as it is today. From the contribution of how sociology should be studied, to how they applied their theories to everyday life has influenced many sociologists. Predominantly, both of these theorists’ discussed the effects of capitalism, how it has developed, shaped and changed society into what it is today. Specifically, Karl Marx’s contribution of the bourgeoisie vs. the proletariat class and Max Weber’s social stratification has helped individuals to understand how modern day society has transformed into what it is today. Particularly, this paper will lie out Weber’s theory of social stratification and Marx’s theory of the bourgeoisie vs. the proletariat class; additionally this essay will also compare and contrast the ideas of these two influential sociologists. Finally this essay will criticize both of these sociologists’ theories and display that Marx and Weber do not explain how modern day society and classes have been formed.

Georg Simmel along with scholars of his generation were instrumental in providing theories of reasoning to explain human behavior within specified social environments. Georg was a man who was extremely interested in the spiritual aspects of human beings while they experienced life from various positions to include progression of higher levels of spirituality emerging from lower levels. Georg was also fascinated with the natural inevitable experiences of humanity. (Wikipedia. n.d).

The biggest difference between the views of Marx and Davis and Moore resides in the issue of the distribution of resources. While Marx believes that there is an inequality in the distribution of resources between the bourgeoisie and proletariat classes, Davis and Moore theorize that inequality has to happen so that the most important positions are filled by the most qualified.

Things that are valuable to us can be things that are old or that have family value and some of the values can also come from our memories. Some of the values that we have, might not be bought with money. There are many treasures in the world but it is all in the person.Everyone has a different perspective of what something valuable can be to them. When people who have the chance to get anything they want, they don’t seem to value everything they have but when you compare it to a person who doesn’t have the chance to get everything they find even the smallest things valuable to them.

Marx and Freud are two thinkers of roughly the same time period, mostly the 19th century, into the 20th for Freud. Comparing and contrasting their theories provides for a deeper understanding of both of their philosophies. Marx’s theory of human nature stresses the idea that people are inherently social. He saw that most of an individual’s behavior is dependent on the actions of others, and noted that even the most mundane aspects of human existence are socially learned. Additionally, he believed that a person’s society determines their behavior, noting differences among cultures and the fact that there is no one, unified way of thinking that all cultures subscribe to. This ties in well with his materialist theory of history, which places tremendous

Whether a present is bought at a store or crafted by hand, there is still a great deal of valuable thought and meaning behind it. Unfortunately, nowadays most people believe that a price tag is what dictates an object's worth. However, value is determined by at least one person's perception of worth because relationships are valuable, history increases value, and the public's desires decrease value.

Value is an inherent part of all human beings and should not be decided nor measured by the vast accumulation of monetary wealth. That being said, I do believe we can have a better understanding of human behavior based on Marx’s theory, especially so in modern America, where the value of an individual is mainly based on the amount of money they possess.

Marx argued that the goal of intellectual work such as his was to change the world; an opinion obviously shared by Gilman since she was also on a mission to change the world, for women.

Through the documents written by Tocqueville and Marx on the 1848 Revolution, their individual political views are expressed through their interpretations of the Revolution. Although it appears that the difference in interpretation is only by reason of socialist v. liberal, some similarities in foundations can be deduced. Both Marx and Tocqueville recognize the collapse of hierarchy, but they have differences in how to fix this problem. Also, both don’t want full equality for all and want some government interference. Tocqueville states that “I know of no country in which revolutions are more dangerous than in a democracy … there is always a danger of their becoming permanent, and one may almost say, eternal” (Tocqueville on Revolution). He

Compare and contrast the various early European urban theorists as found in Chapter 1 of the course text. (300-400 words)

Due to state laws and policies, Marx and Rousseau both agree men are not living in a free society. In western democracies today, both philosophers’ ideas are clear and visible.

There was once a time when the societies of the world were nothing more than a ruling class and a class that was ruled. In these feudal societies classes were set. There was little chance for a member of the ruling bourgeoisie class to cross over to the oppressed proletariat class or from the proletariat class to the bourgeoisie class. Every individual within each class had the routine for each day set out for him or her. There was little change in the lives of individuals of these societies. There was monotony in their work and their work did little more for them than keeping them alive. In those societies,

When people look at the world, they see it is structured in a specific way. Each perspective varies depending on the person. For instance, when looking at classical theory in sociology, there exists three viewpoints on society. Karl Marx believed the world based on conflict while Weber made sense of it by viewing the meanings. As for Durkheim, he made sense of it through social cohesion. Unlike Marx, whose primary focus was conflict, Durkheim’s writing centered around how people were capable of coexisting harmoniously.

Both Karl Marx and Max Weber assert that capitalism is the dominion of abstractions and the irrational accumulation of abstract wealth for the sake of wealth. For Marx, the state of capitalism is entrenched in the social classes to which people have bben assigned. Capitalism, according to Marx, is a result of the bourgeoisie 's ascent to economic and political power. This fuels the manifestation of a system that exploits the labour power of the lower socioeconomic classes for the gain of the higher socioeconomic classes. Weber understands the state of capitalism to be the end product of the work ethic of the Protestant branches of Christianity and the secularization of Protestant puritanism, which helped fuel rationalism. Capitalism, according to Weber, is to be understood as the relations and methods of production and commodities, now rationalized. Ultimately, Marx ascribes the ascent of capitalism to the exploitation of people and power, while stressing that such a system can be overcome by a communist revolution, whereas Weber states that such a system is the result of cultural choices and is not as convinced that capitalism can be overcome.