Social Stratification : Functional Theory, And Conflict Theory

The Functionalist theory emphasizes the contributions (functions) that all parts of society (e.g., social institutions) make within society. This theory has contributed to sociology by providing a view “which emphasizes the way in which the parts of a society are structured to maintain stability.” (Schafer 2013, pg13)

Social Inequality refers to any difference between groups or individuals in society which results in one having inferior life chances than the other. Functionalists believe these inequalities are the result of the meritocracy we live in. This is a system based on the idea that social stratification is necessary and desirable for the society. Functionalists argue that inequalities have a purpose; they are functional for society. Functionalism is a structural theory based on the notion that society is based on shared values. This consensus means that society will be in a state of equilibrium and there is harmony, as a result of which there will be social solidarity.

The sociological views of functionalist and conflict theorist on stratification and economic inequality have had profound impact on the current economic discussion. In the past, economist have argued that wealth inequality is essential for “economic strength and social stability. [5] That wealth inequality “is needed to reward hard work, talent and innovation”. [6] However, in recent years, many economist have come to the conclusion that extreme wealth inequality, can lead to economic stagnation and social instability. What degree of

Early theories such as Functionalist theory argue that inequality is functional for society since it makes sure that those who show the most potential talent are encouraged to develop this talent through higher education and training, with the promise of higher incomes when they qualify (deferred gratification). They state that in order for society to function properly, society must make sure that people fully use their talents. Inequalities stem from the fact that society values different roles in different ways, based on the shared norms and values of a society. Davis and Moore argue that inequality is inevitable in modern society because people need to be put into different positions based on merit. They argue that society is a meritocracy and that there is equal opportunity for all, those who are the most talented and have increased their talent via education and training will therefore occupy the most important positions.

For example, a person’s position in life determines his or her income. Approximately 50 percent of total income is earned by richest 20% people. In 2010 the wealthiest 20% of families owned 87.7% of America’s wealth. Another factor is debt and stocks. The poor have little to no marketable assets and have a sizeable amount of debt. The top 10% also own 88% of all stock. The bottom 40% own less than 1% of total stock holdings. These examples clearly explain the inequality within society and that the amount of power that you have all depends on your social status and income. Some advantages to social stratification is that if you are a part of a wealthy family or you worked your way up the social stratification ranks, then you are granted more opportunities, money, and are more likely to get the job. I do like this part in social stratification because I do believe that If you work hard enough to get a high paying job, then you should be rewarded for your persistence and determination to better a life for yourself. Therefore, I conclude that social stratification has its pros and cons by producing both discrimination and opportunity to society though I firmly believe each person should be compensated equally based on level of education and

This perspective outlines, "inequality is not only inevitable but also necessary for the smooth functioning of society." (Kendall, 2016) In contrast, conflict theory suggests, "The stratification of society is created and maintained by one group in order to protect and enhance its own economic interests." (Kendall, 2016), this is to suggest that the different classes in society are in conflict because the more powerful groups maintain and control the means of production. Conflict theorists do not believe that stratification is functional for society; rather, they believe it will lead to instability and social

Functionalist believe that stratification and inequality is needed to benefit the society so that the high status positions are filled by qualified people. Conflict theorist argue that it builds competition between the rich and the poor which affects society. (Andersen &Taylor, 2007)

Class, Status, and Party are viewed as influential factors that have a great effect in stratification, according to Weber, he viewed class to have a direct correlation to wealth and economic power. For instance, Class would be a group of people whose lifestyles would be similar economically. Status, however would be based on one's own social power and based on the lifestyle a particular group of people would have. Lastly Party would be based on groups who include individuals who are focused on certain causes, based on anything i.e. politics, religion, class, etc. Each of these factors are all based on groups of people and the way these groups can intersect within each section. Each of these factors are a category in the social stratification

Social stratification is essential to understanding how society functions. An important social stratification that has a major effect on society is social class and, “Marx saw class divisions as the most important source of social conflict” (Shortell). Social class stratification has to do with the idea that society tends to divide itself into separate classes based on their access to money and power. There are usually large cultural differences between the people of the different classes. The social

Class stratification is a form if social stratification, in which a society tends to divide classes whose members have different social, economic or educational statuses e.g. working class and middle class. A good example of class stratification is the United Kingdom which has a small percent of elite at the top i.e. the royal family and the prime minister and the mass on the bottom i.e. working class people, this is what’s called a hierarchy (which is a system which members of an organisation or society which is ranked to relative status or authority.)

Social inequality is best described as an unconsciously evolved device by which societies insure that the most important positions are conscientiously filled by the most qualified person (Davis and Moore 1945: page 244). In that case, social inequality is necessary for people looking for jobs. Obviously, those who have the skills to fill a higher position will take it over someone who lacks those necessary tools. Most Americans do not like the idea that social classes exist (Domhoff 1998:page 253). What isn 't so clear is why social inequality, or stratification, exists, and how you can move up in the classes.

The purpose of this paper will be to address what social stratification is, and why sociologists consider it crucial to our understanding of today’s society. In addition it will also be discussing the three dimensions of social stratification and how we think its changed since the 1970s and 80s to today, and which theory we think best explains this change. Along with how the inequality of valued resources impacts America as a whole, and how the recent financial meltdown has made stratification worse in America.

This paper will be discussing “Some Principles of Stratification” by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore, “Classes in Capitalism and Pre- Capitalism” by Karl Marx, and “Who Rules America?” by G. William Domhoff. Davis and Moore examine stratification, social class, and positional rank and their effects on individuals and society. Marx examines inequality in society, the relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed or the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, and methods of production and their effects on society. Domhoff examines the roles of corporate communities and the upper class and how they impact America.

Although Weber’s work if often praised for ‘creating a more flexible basis for empirical analysis of stratification’, Weber is also critiqued for the inconsistency within his work. Cox (1950) criticized Weber work social stratification writing, ‘It seems to us it is too generalized and inconsistent to be of any considerable value as a source of fundamental suggestions in understanding the phenomena’. It is difficult to clarify the boundaries between the different groups possibly resulting in an in coherent way of determining someone’s social status.

Social stratification refers to a system by which a society ranks categories of people in a hierarchy. In the United States, it is perfectly clear that some groups have greater status, power, and wealth than other groups. These differences are what led to social stratification (study.com, 2015). But what mechanisms and forces are used to enforce and impose these differences?