Internal
Links

Top
  Review Notes on   ST 5:  Modern Theories of Stratification
External
Links
Link
 Weber   
Link
            Weber on Stratification   
Link
 Early American Stratification Theory:  the Lynds & Warner   
Link
 Intro to Davis & Moore on Strat   
Link
            Davis & Moore on Strat -- Advamced  
             Critiques of Davis & Moore  
Link
 Parsons & Structural Functionalism   
Link
            Parsons on Stratification  
Link
            Occupational Prestige   
Link
 Neo Marxism   
Link
            C. Wright Mills' Power Elite Theory  
Link
            Dahrendorf  
Link
                       Class Location  
Link
            EO Wright  
Link
            Domhoff's Power Elite Theory  
Link
                       Domhoff on the Three Key Interest Group Coalitions  
Link
            An Analysis of the Three Key Interest Group Coalitions  
Link
            A Comparison of Pluralist Theory & Power Elite Theory by Farley  
Link
 Stratification based on Gender   
Link
            Stratification & Sociobiology  

 
External
Links
blank
Top
  An Overview of   Max Weber  1864  - 1920
External
Links
  -  Project:   Your Status, Class, & Power
Link
  -  Biography & Major Works
Link
  Summary:  There are EIGHT major ideas of Weberian sociology
1.  The major influence in modern society is the development of rationality
2.  Charisma, tradition, rationality are all forms of authority
3.  Weber viewed the development of the modern era as increasing dominated by the iron cage of rationality
4.  Class, power & status are all dimensions of stratification
5.  Weber, contrary to Marx, believes that the cultural system affects being as much as economic system
6.  History demonstrates the development of rationality
7.  Weber's "debate w/ ghost of Marx" was a sympathetic debate
8.  Weber believed that the development of social science methodology was needed		  
  There are EIGHT major ideas of Weberian sociology
 
  1.  The major influence in modern society is the development of rationality
 
 
 For Weber, rationality is a method or practice of choice based on who / what works best in achieving a given objective  
  2.  Charisma, tradition, rationality are all forms of authority
 
  2.1.  Charismatic authority is present when one is treated as endowed w/ supernatural, or at least exceptional powers or qualities not accessible to ordinary people  
  2.2.  Traditional authority is the claim by leaders & the belief by followers in the virtue of sanctity of age old rules & powers   
  2.3.  Legal/rational authority is a model of choice based on who / what works best in achieving a given objective  
  2.3.1  See Weber on Organizations  
  Weber believed that, conceived as a pure type, the modern bureaucratic organization has several distinctive characteristics  
  2.3.2.  Bureaucracy is the ultimate rational social organization  
  2.3.3.  Weber noted that Marx largely ignored administrative domination & organizational life
 blank
  See Also:  A comparison of Charismatic, Traditional, & Rationality Authority  
  3.  Weber viewed the development of the modern era as increasingly dominated by the "iron cage of rationality"  
  Weber called the rationalization of society, i.e. the development of the iron cage of rationality, the disenchantment of the world  
  Weber demonstrated that the disenchantment of the world had been carried out more thoroughly in the West than elsewhere  
  Weber thought the development of rationality in society was inevitable, but was extremely uncertain about the value of said development  
  For Weber, domination had been implemented, historically, through govt, i.e. political orgs  
  Weber feared that domination would become absolute through bureaucracy  
  Weber conceived of many of the dysfunctions of bureaucracy   
  Weber analyzes the role of professionals in bureaucracy & concludes that they have the best chance of breaking out of the "iron cage of rationality"  
  4.  Weber held that there were THREE dimensions of stratification, including class, power, & status
 
  See Also:  Stratification  
  4.1.  Class, a.k.a. the economic dimension, is based on wealth & income
 
  Weber updates Marx on class by adding the middle & professional classes  
  4.2.  Power, a.k.a. the political dimension, is based on political power
 
  4.3.  Status, a.k.a. the social dimension, is based on prestige, honor, etc.
 
  Weber is the first social theorist to make status important in social analysis  
  The addition of power & status to social analysis makes Weber similar to the neo Marxists  
  5.  Weber, contrary to Marx, believes that the cultural system affects being as much as the economic system
 
  Weber believed that all societal institutions were shaped by climate & geography as well as by the econ system  
  In the PESC, Weber finds that the economic & religious systems have mutual impacts on each other  
  The transition from ancient Judaism to Christianity enhanced the evolution of capitalism & rationality  
  China did not develop capitalism for many reasons  
  India did not develop capitalism for many reasons  
  6.  History demonstrates the development of rationality  
  Weber adds cultural effects to economic effects to understand history  
  Early Empire Era aka Asiatic System                         3 K - 200 BC  
  Empire Era: Ancient Slave Society: 
The Transition to Feudalism                             200 BC - 500 AD		  
  Middle Ages: Transition to Capitalism                                500 - 1300  
  Early industrial Age:  Western Capitalism                     1300 - 1700  
  7.  Weber's "debate w/ ghost of Marx" was a sympathetic debate  
  Marx examines the development & impact of the economy  
  Weber examines the development & impact of rationality  
  8.  Weber believed that the development of social science methodology was needed  
  One of Weber's major discoveries was that science cannot be value free  

 
Internal
Links

Top
  Outline on  Weber on Social Stratification:   Class, Status, Power, Influence
External
Links
  Stratification is the social process where scarce social & physical resources such as wealth, income, power, status, etc. are non randomly distributed among members, groups, classes etc. of society  
  Stratification is the study of how resources are distributed among society  
  Summary:  Different ranking systems, based on the distribution of different scarce resources, have been referred to by sociologists as Stratification  
  Various analytical constructs posit FOUR differing bases for stratification  
  Weber recognized that most societies have three major dimensions of stratification
 
  Organizational theorists maintain that organizational influence has unique stratification properties  
      Type of Strat    Dimension of Strat          Definition  
 
a.  Class Economic Placement in the strat system is determined by income & wealth
 
 
b.  Status Prestige Placement in the strat system is determined by cultural determinations of prestige, honor, charisma, etc.
 
 
c.  Power Political Placement in the strat system is determined by political determinations of control or authority over others
 
 
d.  Influence Organizational Placement in the strat system is determined by organizational determinations of control or authority over others
 
  For Weber,  there is a strong interaction of class, status, power & influence  
  Weberian Theory holds that our system of stratification restrains both the masses & the elites  
  For Weber,  status, power, & income all are part of stratification  
  Weber found that status, power, income, stratification, the individual maximization of wealth, poverty, inequality, etc. are all a function of the interaction of status, power, & class which are determined by the interaction, of not only the economic system, but also the religious, cultural & social systems  
  In the Protestant Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism, (PESC) Weber studied cultural values as they related to religion in a wide variety of past societies  
  See Also:  Weber's PESC  
  Weber found that through most of human history, people did not value maximizing personal wealth & comfort  
  Values in most preindustrial societies centered on spiritual life, interpersonal relations, community, & tradition  
  Weber links the spread of a norm of maximization w/ the individualistic values of Protestantism & argues that by promoting individualism, Protestantism created a cultural atmosphere in which capitalism flourished  
  In the PESC, Weber found that the norm of maximization is not universal, it has existed only in some societies through history  
  In the PESC, Weber found that the culture & values of a society may make it more or less conducive to capitalism  
  Weber's position in the PESC is consistent w/ those who believe capitalism needs the norm of maximization, of personal greed, in order to fully develop  
  While some have countered Weber in the PESC by arguing that the norm of maximization is a product of modernization & industrialization, not capitalism, Weber saw Protestantism, capitalism & industrialism as all contributing to the set of values that includes maximization  
  Lenski believed that the low technology of primitive societies resulted in stratification based only on status  
  Lenski & Weber believe that the development of society resulted stratification based on income, power, & status  
  Lenski & Weber believe that status has always been an aspect of stratification, but it cannot be the basis of economic & power stratification  
  Status, as a sole indicator, is important primarily in highly integrated society with a high level of consensus such as monasteries or Japan  

 
Internal
Links

Top
Outline on   Early American Stratification Theory
External
Links
  Stratification was ignored in the U.S. until the Great Depression  
  Marxism / conflict theory was ignored in the U.S. until the late 1950s  
  Middletown (1929) & Middletown in Transition (1937) by Robert & Helen Lynd established a tradition of strat studies in the US  
  The Lynds exposed overpowering images of equality of opportunity in America as a myth  
  The Lynds focused on power & economic inequalities; ideas that were later ignored  
  Yankee City by Warner was a classic study in stratification w/ a qualitative analysis w/ a focus on status  
  Warner's focus was similar to that of the Lynds but added an examination of the extent of inequality & social mobility  
  Warner focused on status as did most social scientists until conflict theory entered the debate in the 1950s  
  Warner differed from the Lynds in THREE  important ways  
  a.  The Lynds focused on the stratification of  power & economic inequalities while Warner focused more on the stratification of  status  
  Warner, utilizing Weber's second dimension of stratification, defined stratification in terms of status:  "By class is meant two or more orders of people who are believed to be, and are accordingly ranked by the members of the community, in superior and inferior positions."  
  Warner's utilization of status in place of economic class ignored the inequalities of power & economics  
  b.  The Warner school failed to critically examine the actual extent of equality of opportunity  
  There was a stress on the reality of social mobility w/o an examination of the extent of social mobility
 
 
 c.  The Warner school emphasized that stratification was functional & necessary for complex societies
 
 
 The conflict, the structured & hereditary nature of inequalities, the harsh conditions for workers, & the extensive poverty were ignored
 
 
 Warner's study, Yankee City, utilized the 'reputational method'  
  Warner developed 6 classes basing rank on status judgments by members in the community  
 
 Early American sociology had a non critical view of stratification w/ FOUR qualities
 
 
 a.  Stratification was generally ignored
 
  b.  It took our most severe economic crisis, the Great Depression, to bring social scientists to examine class inequalities  
  c.  The interest generated by the Great Depression was short lived  
  d.  Frequently the less radical topic of status inequality was examined  
  There are other early American examinations of stratification that were more critical, including  
  -  Thorstein Veblen on the leisure class & conspicuous consumption  
  -  Floyd Hunter, 1953, who conducted a study of community power  
  -  CW Mills, 1956, who compiled a description of the power elite on the national level  
  -  Parsons, whose view on stratification was non critical, but influential  

 
Internal
Links

Top
Outline on an  Intro to Davis & Moore on Stratification
External
Links
  STRATIFICATION IS THE STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL POSITIONS   
  Stratification is the structured process by which social groups are assigned a social position, resulting in a hierarchy & a pattern whereby scarce "resources" are distributed unequally to these social positions
 
  FOR DAVIS & MOORE, SOCIETY HAS ALWAYS HAD STRAT & MUST HAVE STRAT TO FUNCTION   
  Davis & Moore hold that stratification is universal  
  STRAT MOTIVATES PEOPLE BY REWARDING THEM FOR DOING DIFFICULT JOBS   
 
 Davis & Moore hold that poverty, stratification, & inequality exist because they meet society's needs for productivity by motivating people
 
  For Davis & Moore, the jobs that are the most critical to society, e.g. corporate mgrs., doctors., lawyers, etc., require longer & more difficult training than other jobs  
  The jobs that are the most critical to society also carry greater responsibility, are stressful, have long hours, & should have high pay  
  In order to induce highly capable people to take these critical jobs, society must offer them greater rewards in exchange for the difficulty in getting the job & the stress incurred on the job  
  W/o the motivation of higher pay, people would be unlikely to sacrifice current income in order to get the years of arduous training that critical jobs require  
  W/o higher pay, everyone would choose jobs that require no training, have little stress, & run only 8 to 5  

 
 Internal
Links

Top
Outline on  Davis & Moore on Stratification -- Advanced
 External
Links
  -  Project:  What Influences Career Rewards?
Link
  -  Stratification is the structure of social positions
Link
  Davis & Moore focus on the nature of positions' or jobs' effect on stratification  
 
 Davis & Moore believe that all societies exhibit stratification
 
  A critique, presented below shows that the amount of stratification varies widely among societies and that hunter gatherer societies had very limited stratification  
  Stratification is functional (necessary) & inevitable  
  Society functions to, society must fill, all positions in society  
  Positions vary by costs & benefits, therefore people's desire for different positions vary  
  Davis & Moore ask:  'How does society fill undesirable positions while ensuring that desirable positions are NOT overfilled?'  
  - 'How does society instill the desire to fill positions?'  
  - 'How does society instill the desire to achieve in a position?'  
  - Davis & Moore note that some positions are “more pleasant” than others & some positions are more important than others  
  Davis & Moore's SIX Principles of the Functionality or necessity of stratification include  
  1.  Some positions / roles are more important than others  
  2.  Some positions require special skills or are unpleasant  
  3.  People sacrifice to gain skills  
  4.  Society functions to induce people to sacrifice w/ three general types of privilege & rewards  
  a.  Sustenance & comfort  
  b.  Humor & diversion  
  Some jobs are inherently more pleasant, though many people come to enjoy their job even though it is belittled by society  
  c.  Self respect & ego expansion  
  5.  There must be differential access to rewards creates status/prestige & power to induce people to take difficult jobs  
  6.  Inequality is functional and inevitable in any society  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Critiques of Davis & Moore
External
Links
 
 -  Project:  What influences career rewards?
Link
  CONTRARY TO DAVIS & MOORE, MANY LOW PAYING JOBS ARE CRITICAL FOR THE FUNCTIONING OF SOCIETY   
 
 Melvin Tumin, 1953, 1970, holds that 
 
 
 - the jobs that Davis & Moore believed were so critical may not be as important as common low level jobs
 
 
 Historical demographers have demonstrated that garbage collectors & sewage maintenance workers are more critical for public health that are doctors
 
 
 Critics of Davis & Moore note that workers are just as necessary as managers
 
  It is difficult to rate jobs on pleasantness & importance of jobs & Davis & Moore make many assumptions in this regard  
  According to Davis & Moore, occupations that are unpleasant should be important  
  But most people would agree that the occupation of a doctor or lawyer is pleasant & important  
  But most people would agree that the occupation of a janitor or garbage collector is unpleasant & unimportant  
  THE LARGEST DETERMINANT OF STRAT IS INHERITANCE, WHICH DOES NOT MOTIVATE PEOPLE   
 
 Critics of Davis & Moore note that it is difficult to see how inherited wealth could motivate people
 
 
 Wealth is more unequally distributed than income & a large share of wealth is inherited rather than earned
 
  In 1989, about half of the wealthiest 400 US people inherited, or invested inherited wealth to become wealthy 
 
  EDUCATION IS THE GREAT EQUALIZER, I.E. IT ELIMINATES HI STRAT, BUT THE ED OF A CLASS IS DETERMINED NOT BY MOTIVATION BUT BY PARENTAL WEALTH   
  Parental income impacts a person's ability to obtain an education 
 
  If Davis & Moore were correct, poverty, stratification, & inequality would be the main factors determining one's ability to get an education, & not parental wealth
 
  Even middle class wealth is important for the parent's ability to give an education to their children
 
  - the training required to get critical, better paying jobs is far from unpleasant, in that many people enjoy education
 
  Contrary to what Davis & Moore hold, the process of training & education gives one prestige
 
  - the critical, better paying jobs have considerable non material rewards such as autonomy, a sense of accomplishment, prestige, etc.
 
  THE FACT THAT ED & STRAT ARE NOT PERFECTLY CORRELATED DEMONSTRATES THAT OTHER FACTORS, SUCH AS INHERITANCE, IMPACT STRAT LEVELS   
  Contrary to what Davis & Moore hold, many jobs require high levels of training but pay relatively little
 
  Critics of Davis & Moore note that social workers, professors, teachers require more training but pay less than many jobs available w/ a high school education
 
 
 EXTERNAL RESTRAINTS SHAPE STRAT LEVELS MORE THAN MOTIVATION
 
 
 External restraints on workers & the workforce are not considered by Davis & Moore
 
 
 Critics of Davis & Moore on stratification note that workers in low positions are blocked from gaining high positions because
 
 
 a.  gaining skills takes money, power, or influence
 
  Davis & Moore neglect restraints on acquiring skills
 
 
 b.  access to the best education via prepatory schools ivy league colleges & many professions is influenced by family ties
 
  Davis & Moore admitted only a weak "family" influence in gaining an education, a job, or a career
 
 
 c.  not everyone is capable of performing some tasks which means that society must deal w/ or accommodate all people, those w/ extraordinary skills as well as those w/ normal skills, those w/ below average skills, & those who perhaps do not have even enough skills to take care of themselves
 
  Davis & Moore ignored the stratification of abilities in the population   
  ORGANIZATIONAL / INTERNAL RESTRAINTS SHAPE STRAT LEVELS MORE THAN MOTIVATION  
 
 Internal restraints on job markets, such as those restraints created by people in high positions such as lawyers & Drs., have vested interest in status quo
 
 
 The importance of various jobs is NOT totally determined by the mkt
 
  People in power determine the worth of jobs  
  The AMA restricts the numbers of Drs.  
 
 Unions find it difficult or impossible to restrict the number of low status wkrs  
  INTL STUDIES SHOW THAT INEQUALITY / STRAT IS HIGHER THAN NEEDED TO MOTIVATE PEOPLE TO SACRIFICE   
  The level of inequality is higher than needed to induce sacrifice   
  The US has the highest inequality of industrialized countries  
  Japan has the lowest inequality of the major industrialized nations  
  The level of inequality btwn the US & Japan is very different & yet both are "successful countries"  
  Davis & Moore assume that the present system must continue   

 
External
Links

Top
An Outline on Talcott Parsonson Structural Functionalism
External
Links
  THE FUNCTIONAL IMPERATIVES MEET SOCIETAL NEEDS FOR ADAPTATION, GOAL SETTING, INTEGRATION, & MAINTENANCE   
 
 Parsons viewed society as a stable, though complex, system of interdependent parts each serving a function  
  A function is a complex of activities trying to meet needs of a system  
  A function is a consequence of a social arrangement that is in some way useful for the system  
 
 FUNCTIONAL IMPERATIVES ARE THE PROBLEMS OR NEEDS THAT A SYSTEM MUST SOLVE OR MEET
 
  According to Parsons:
1.  society has indispensable needs:  functional imperatives
2.  society functions to meet these functional imperatives
These are requirements by the nature of things		  
  Parsonian Functionalism parallels Darwin's Evolutionary Theory   
  -  Society functions under the evolutionary imperative of the survival of the fittest  
  -  Society takes its particular form because that form works well for the people & institutions of society  
Link
 A Chart of Parsons' Functional Imperatives: AGIM  
  1.  ADAPTATION:  SOCIETY ADAPTS TO THE SOCIAL & PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT  
  In order to achieve the functional imperative of adaptation, a system must obtain resources or facilities from the system's external env, & distribute them throughout the system  
 
 Adaptation is adjustment to the environment
 
  The economy / business, the military, & education are the primary social structures of adaptation in society today  
  2.  GOAL ATTAINMENT:  SOCIETY SETS GOALS FOR SOCIAL SYSTEMS & SUB SYSTEMS OF SOCIETY & PEOPLE  
  Because goals are often set by the govt, though this is changing, when goals are set for society & people, in practice this is setting goals for the govt & the polity ( the people )  
  3.  INTEGRATION:  SOCIETY ENCOUNTERS NEW SYSTEMS, PROCESSES, GROUPS, ETC., & MUST INTEGRATE THEM INTO THE WHOLE   
  Society Integrate in new systems, procedures, people, etc.    harmonizes people, social groups, & structures  
  Integration involves elements which establish control  
  The social structures whose manifest function is integration include peers, charity, & the media  
  4.  MAINTENANCE:  THROUGH THE FUNCTION OF MAINTENANCE, SOCIETY PASSES ON ITS CULTURE & SOC STRUCTURE WHEN IT PASSES ON TRADITIONS, CUSTOMS, ALL SOCIAL PRACTICES, ETC.   
 
 Society Maintains or sustains old systems, procedures, people, history/social patterns, etc.
 
  Society preserves coherence & solidarity in society  
  Maintains & coordinates subsystems & prevents major disruption  
  The social structures whose manifest function is maintenance include the family, religion, & recreation / leisure  
 
 Note: In Parsons' Structural Functionalism, the functional imperatives of maintenance & integration may conflict
 

 
Top
  
Chart of Parson's Functional Imperatives:  AGIM
1. Adaptation Adapt to the environment (social & physical)
2. Goal setting Set Goals for social & sub-systems of society & people
3. Integration Integrate in new systems, procedures, people, etc.
4. Maintaining Maintain old systems, procedures, people, etc.

 
Top    
Table of Parsons' Functional Imperatives & Social Structures
.
Social
Institutions
Manifest
Function
1.
Peers
Integration
2.
Family
Maintenance
3.
Religion
Maintenance
4.
Work (The Economy)
Adaptive
5.
Govt (Politics)
Goal Attainment
6.
Military
Adaptive
7.
Charity
Integration
8.
Education
Adaptive
9.
Media
Integration
10.
Recreation / Leisure
Maintenance

 
Internal
Links

Top
Outline on  Parsons on Stratification
External
Links
  For Parsons, status/ honor/ prestige is the most important dimension of stratification  
  One's place in the stratification system is determined by status, which may be understood as the moral evaluation by others  
  Wealth/power is a secondary dimension of stratification that arises as a reward for status  
  Status earns other rewards such as wealth & power  
  Status is formed by common value system (consensus on values)  
  Value consensus is shaped by the social institutions as driven by the functional imperatives  
  People are ranked by living up to the values of society  
  Stratification will exist in every society because every society has a hierarchy of values  
  Parsons makes the argument that status/ honor/ prestige cause wealth/ power as do Davis & Moore  
  Can one also make the argument that wealth/power cause status/honor/prestige?  
  The most respected roles in a society coincide with the functional imperatives:  AGIM  
  The different tasks of these institutions lead them to stress different values  
  For functionalists, stratification is shaped by the power of institutions which is shaped by the emphasis of the society  
  How is this similar to Marxism?  
  Societies differ on which functional imperative they emphasize   
  The U.S. is driven by the economic social structure as manifested by the adaptation functional imperative  
  Iran, & Afghanistan, who are ruled by the Taliban after the US helped them defeat the Soviets, are driven by the religious social structure which manifests the maintenance functional imperative  
  China emphasizes its political social structure driven by the goal setting functional imperative  
  Critique of Parsons stratification theory  
  1.  Parsons incorrectly assumes that people in top positions act for social, not individual interests  
       Power is used to promote interest of individual and groups  
  2.  Mills holds that Parsons view of power as a benign force is flawed  
       For Mills, power is used to get what one individual/ group wants & prevents others from getting what they want  
  Mills’ nightmare is Parsons’ dream because Mills fears the abuse of power while Parsons recognizes the inevitable role of power in society  
  Both Mills & Parsons would agree that consensus on values may be shaped by powerful interests, the difference in their viewpoint is whether the value consensus is shaped by manipulation & structural forces or whether it is freely arrived at  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Occupational Prestige
External
Links
  -  Supplement:  Harris Interactive on Prestige, 1998
Link
  -  Supplement:  Harris Interactive on Prestige, 2002
Link
  -  Supplement:  WSJ  Presigious Occupations, 2006
Link
  Occupational Prestige (OP) is the status, honor, or level in a hierarchy given to individuals in an occupation
 
  Like class, OP is largely a subjective quality, but social scientists have quantified it through surveys
 
  OP & class interact in that the level a person attains in one partially determines the level a person attains in the other
 
  Thus, in general, the higher a person's class, the higher their occupational prestige, & vice versa
 
  A person's occupation has many social ramifications beyond its immediate instrumental & economic consequences   
  Social scientists consider occupations as a proxy for one's position in the social class structure  
  People of similar occupations, beside having similar incomes & work experiences often pursue similar patterns of leisure & consumption, share distinctive lifestyles, & are perceived in similar fashion by other members of society (Trice, 1993)  
Link
 There are many different scales used to measure prestige & status, each of which varies in application to a particular social group, validity, reliability, etc.   
  Occupational classifications by the Census, i.e., the Census Classification Systems (CCS), the UN's International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) system, the Dept. of Labor's Dictionary of Occupation Titles (DOT), etc. all utilize the rough ordering provided by skill & prestige  
  The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) carried out early research on occupational prestige (North & Hatt, 1947; Hodge, Siegel, & Rossi, 1964)  
  NORC survey respondents ranked occupations by the standing that members would have in the community, ranking occupations along a 100 pt. scale resulted in a high for Supreme Ct. Justices w/ a score of 89 to shoe shiners w/ a low of 27  
  Treiman, 1997, notes that similar scales have been developed in many countries, & the findings in one country tend to approximate those in other countries  
  While OP is subjective, it has remained constant over time, demonstrating the regularity & strength of social qualities, structures, culture, etc.
 
Link
 See Table:  Occupational Prestige Ratings:  US Compared to 60 - Country Average
 
  See Also:  Harris Interactive on Prestige, 1998
Link
  See Also:  Harris Interactive on Prestige, 2002
Link
  OP ratings stay constant except that new occupations arise & take their place in the hierarchy, & as occupations disappear
 
  OP ratings are constant even among many industrialized nations
 
  Even some less industrialized countries such as China, have similar Occupational Prestige Ratings as the US
 
  OP ratings show that, globally, people agree that higher prestige jobs should be paid more
 
  However, it is not clear whether higher prestige in an occupation causes higher pay, or whether higher pay causes people to rate jobs as having higher prestige
 
  Parsons & the functionalists believe that higher prestige in an occupation causes higher pay
 
  Marx & the conflict theorists believe that higher pay causes people to rate jobs as having higher prestige
 
  The determinants of OP include the:
 
    - level of pay
 
    - educational requirements
 
    - amount of physical labor required by the job
 
  Occupational prestige, education, & income tend to be closely related, but there are exceptions  
  An exception to the correlation of occupational prestige, education, & income can be seen in members of the clergy who are typically highly educated, have relatively low pay, & have high prestige  
  Indicators of socio economic status (SES) often predict the general status of an occupation based on income & education  
  Duncan, 1961 & Stevens & Cho, 1985 have developed scales to measure SES  
 
 The highest ranked jobs include professional occupations which are widely associated high incomes & high levels of income
 
 
 Today the "classic," & oldest professions include:  doctors, professors, lawyers, & accountants  
 
 New professions include airline pilots, architects, dentists, etc.  
 
 Many occupations have risen in prestige & pay to be called semi professions, including firefighter, police, veterinarians, etc.  

 
Top
  
Table:  Occupational Prestige Ratings:  US Compared to 60 - Country Average
Far0506
OCCUPATION
60 COUNTRY AVERAGE
US
University Professor or Dean
86
82.4
Physician
78
 81.5
University Professor
78
78.3 
 Physicist
76
73.8
 Member, Board of Directors
75
71.8
 Lawyer
73
75.7
 Architect
72
70.5
 Dentist
70
73.5
 Chemist
69
68.8
 Sociologist
67
65.0
 Airline pilot
66
70.1
 High school teacher
64
63.1
 Clergy member
60
70.5
 Personnel director
58
57.8 
 Artist
57
57.0
 Classical musician
56
55.0
 Social Worker
56
52.4
 Journalist
55
51.6
 Professional nurse
54
61.5
 Secretary
53
45.8
 Actor or actress
52
55.0
 Union official 
50
41.2
 Real estate agent
49
44.0
 Professional athlete 
48
51.4
 Farmer
47
43.7
 Motor vehicle mechanic
44
35.8
 Policeman / woman
40
47.8
 Railroad conductor
39
40.9
 Telephone operator
38
40.4
 Jazz musician
38
37.2
 Carpenter
37
42.5
 Dancing teacher
36
32.3
 Firefighter
35
33.2
 Sales clerk
34
27.1
 Truck driver
33
31.3
 File clerk
31
30.3
 Assembly line worker
30
27.1
 Construction worker
28
26.2
 Gas station attendant
25
21.6
 Waiter
23
20.3
 Janitor
21
16.1
 Farm worker
20
21.4
 Garbage collector
13
12.6
 Shoe shiner
12
   9.3 
Note:  In a limited number of instances, there were slight differences in job titles btwn the world average and the US average.  The closest job title was used.

Source:  Occupational Prestige in Comparative Perspective by Donald J. Treiman, 1977, Academic Press. 

 
Top
  
Table on Names & Types of Prestige, Status, etc. Scales

Miller DC (1983). Handbook of research design and social measurement. 4th ed. Newbury Park, Calif. : Sage Publications.
UTA location & call number: Central Library H 62 .M44 1983 

Search the full Tests and Measures in the Social Sciences: Tests Available in Compilation Volumes.
Help   Go to: List of all Keywords, Collections examined 
To obtain any of these resources, you can:
1. Check the library closest to you to determine if it has the source volume;
2. Contact YOUR library Interlibrary Loan department or other services available at your institution. 

O.D. Duncan’s socioeconomic index (1961)
Reiss AJ; Duncan OD; Hatt PK; North CC
Pg280-282, 290-300 

Siegel’s (NORC) prestige scores (1971)
Siegel PM
Pg282-286, 290-300 

Treiman’s standard international pestige scale (1977)
Treiman DJ
Pg286-287, 290-300 

 Nam Powers socioeconomic status scores (1975)
Nam CB; LaRocque J; Powers MG; Holmberg
Pg287-290, 290-300 

August B Hollingshead two factor index of social position (1965)
Hollingshead AB
Pg300-308 

Revised occupational rating scale from Warner, Meeker, and Eell’s Index of status characteristics (1949)
Warner WL; Meeker M; Eells K
Pg309-313 

Alba M Edwards social economic grouping of occupations (1934)
Edwards AM
Pg313-315 

Hemphill’s index of group dimensions (group dimensions descriptions questionnaire) (1956)
Hemphill JK
Pg316-324 

From:  http://libraries.uta.edu/helen/test&meas/Table%20of%20contents/Miller1983_contents.htm


 
 
Internal
Links

Top
  Outline on  Neo Marxism
External
Links
  Neo Marxists vary on what they accept & reject from Marx  blank
Link
 Summary:  neo Marxism addresses SIX of the problems, unforeseen circumstance, etc. in classical Marx: 
1.  No revolutions:  There has been an absence of socialist revolutions
2.  No class consciousness:  There is a lack of working class consciousness
3.  No crises: Capitalist nations have not experienced crises
4.  No upper class:  The upper class no longer exists as it did in past 
5.  No working class:  The working class no longer exists as it did in past 
6.  No Soviet Block:  The Soviet Block stagnated in the 70s & 80s & failed in the 90s 		  
  Neo Marxism addresses SIX of the problems, unforeseen circumstance, etc. in classical Marx:   
  1.  THERE HAS BEEN AN ABSENCE OF SOCIALIST REVOLUTIONS   
  Some theorists posit that society has already had a socialist revolution in the form of the socialized, state capitalism which embodies FOUR components of institutionalized govt intervention & regulation of labor relations, corporate regulation, maintenance of the economy, & a social safety net   
  Some theorists posit that a revolution could still be coming   
  Marx said revolution would happen in mature capitalist countries, not in underdeveloped peripheral countries like Russia, China, Cuba, etc.   
  2.  THERE IS A LACK OF WORKING CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS  
  Marx didn't foresee the strength of popular culture, the media, etc. in legitimizing the capitalist system   
  The process & ability to legitimize the social relations in a social system is called ideological hegemony or just hegemony   
  3.  CAPITALIST NATIONS HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED CRISES  
  The govt. has been able to regulate the excesses of capitalism   
  From the 1890 to the 1910's there was a strong trust busting effort under Teddy Roosevelt & others   
  The Great Depression created monetary policy, fiscal political, unemployment, welfare, SSI and more under FDR   
  In 1935, the NLRA institutionalized labor management relations, avoiding major Labor Conflict & thus avoiding the chances of a Labor lead revolution   
  However, some theorists believe a world crisis of monopolization may yet occur in  next 50 to 100 yrs.: 
       Microsoft is the world software maker 
       Auto, oil & many major industries are globalizing:  Amoco & BP 		  
  4.  THE UPPER CLASS NO LONGER EXISTS AS IT DID IN THE PAST 
 
  In the past, the Upper Class possessed land which was visible wealth   
  Wealth today is mostly not in land, it is in stock, bonds, etc. & is therefore not visible   
  Today there is token ownership of "paper wealth" by the Middle Class   
  Because of ideological mystification, most people confuse the upper middle class w/ the upper class   
 
 5.  THE WORKING CLASS NO LONGER EXISTS AS IT DID IN THE PAST 
 
  The improved labor management relations which resulted from the NLRB & institutionalization of the labor movement, & the human relations movement created the sharing of the surplus value of the capitalist system   
  Big unions made gains for workers, but have never opted for worker control   
  Because of a higher standard of living, workers support capitalism in spite of alienating work conditions   
  The strength of the legitimation process of modern society convinces people that the current system is the only logical alternative, and it is the best that it can be   
 
 The expansion of the white collar class, which includes technology workers, salespeople, clerical workers, service workers, bureaucrats, etc., was unforeseen by Marx 
 
  In one sense, a new sub-class of the working class, didn't change basics of Marxism because any new class is part of the working class, but on the other hand, each of the subclasses of the working class has it's own dynamics   
  The middle class is politically conservative, promoting the division of the working class   
  The white collar class workers have a higher status   
  The white collar class workers frequently identify w/ owners   
 
 The white collar class workers generally have more social mobility 
 
 
 6.  THE SOVIET BLOCK STAGNATED IN THE 70s & 80s & FAILED IN THE 90s   
  The Soviet Union created authoritarian communism where the state, not capitalists, exploited the working class   
  Marx believed that communism could only successfully develop in mature capitalist nations, and thus the travesty of communism in Russia, China, etc. would not have been a surprise to him   
  After the 1917 revolution, until the 1950s, Soviet communism was more productive than capitalism, but the authoritarianism & oppression eventually so alienated the people that they lost their competitive edge   
  The fall of communism in the late 1980s & early 1990s had both big & little effects on theory / practice   
  E.O. Wright's empirical analysis is one theory that has tried to account for the fall of the Soviet Union; Wright developed a theory w/ four classes:  capitalists, managers, petty bourgeoisie, workers   
  Education has not bought much for the working class, but it does help the middle class, Petty Bourgeoisie, & managers   
  Wright's analysis fails to note that the education system for the working class & the poor is at the least, flawed, & at the worst, non-existent   
  It is still an open question as to whether education for the working class & the poor would would create social mobility or not   
  There are SEVEN common principles held by neo Marxists ( power - conflict theories )   
  I.  CONFLICT IN SOCIETY TODAY IS NOT JUST BTWN THE BOURGEOISIE & THE PROLETARIAT; IT IS BTWN INNUMERABLE INDIVIDUALS, GRPS, ORGS, ETC.   
  Conflict, such as found in stratified societies, is grounded in differing individual & group interests   
  II.  INTERESTS ARE NOT JUST BASED ON CLASS /ECON; THEY ARE ALSO BASED ON MANY FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN QUALS   
  Particular group interests are widely varied & based on individual & group positions w/in imperatively coordinated associations ( ICAs ), as developed by Weber & Dahrendorf, which are organizations centered around major tasks/ structures in society   
  See Also:  Dahrendorf   
  See Also:  Weber   
  III.  INTERESTS ARE THE BASIS OF CONFLICT   
  The group interests as manifest in ICAs are the basis of class conflict   
  Interests are rooted in many different human quals, including econ, sexuality, race, religion, occupation, etc.   
  IV.  IMPERATIVELY COORDINATED ASSOCS ( ICAs ) ARE THE LOCATION OF CONFLICT TODAY   
  Groups primarily come together w/in ICAs & thus ICAs are the location of conflict w/in modern society   
  Fundamental social conflict is occurring in the family, btwn races, in the wkplace, places of worship, etc.  
  V.  THE DIALECTIC CHARACTERIZES MANY FUNDAMENTAL SOCIAL RELATIONS / CONFLICTS AS CONDITIONS DEVELOP, ARE RESOLVED, SEWING THE SEEDS FOR THE NEXT STRUGGLE   
  Many neo Marxists accept Marx's idea of the dialectic   
      See Also:  The dialectic   
  VI.  THERE IS MUTUAL CAUSAL INTERACTION BTWN THE ECON BASE & THE CULTURAL SUPERSTRUCTURE   
  Many neo Marxists reject economic determinism & instead examine the mutual causal interaction btwn the economic base & the cultural superstructure   
  There is no econ primacy in soc relations   
  VII.  UPPER CLASS POWER IS BASED AS MUCH ON THE CONTROL OF IDEOLOGY AS CONTROL OF THE ECON   
  The control of ideology may be a more fundamental form of power than control of the economy   
  The control of ideology often allows the dominate grp to control the econ   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Power Elite Theory
by C. Wright Mills
External
Links
  Power elite theory has been formulated by C. Wright Mills & William Domhoff
 
 
 Power elite theory is similar to pluralist theory, except that while pluralists hold that "the balance of interests" is intact, the power elite theorists hold that the balance of interests have failed
 
  The power elite:
 
  - are a small, very wealthy group
 
  - foster a society where office holders have only the appearance of power; i.e., they are puppets
 
  - exercise real power & decision making behind the scenes
 
  - influence political leaders by foundations & public policy institutes which they fund  
  - struggle among themselves in what are often similar to "palace intrigues"
 
  - in terms of class, are made up of the active, influential, powerful, members of the upper class & the corp. mgrs.  
  Power is gained:
 
  - almost exclusively via corporate wealth
 
  - via interlocking directorates, which are overlapping positions of power on corporate boards
 
  - though the concentration of wealth via state capitalism
 
  - via overlapping positions of power in govt, including the executive branch, the civil service, and the military  
  - by controlling the rules and regulations of state capitalism
 
  - by keeping other classes pluralistic, i.e. fragmented
 
  The power elite are largely the result of "cultural lag" and are fundamentally anti democratic and anti equalitarian
 
  The group dynamics of the power elite demonstrates domination by a small leadership group
 
 
 The control exercised by a small elite is not so much the characteristic of organization, but rather the result of a great concentration of wealth, which leads to a concentration of power
 
  Control of corporations by the ruling elite rests on the ownership of large blocks of stock  
  P-E theory notes that the richest 1% of the US population owns over 50% of the stock (Gilbert & Kahl, 1982)  
  P-E theory notes that the richest 1% also owns over 28% of total wealth (Census, 1993e)  
  The ruling elite is a virtually closed social group w/ tremendous power  
  For Domhoff & P-E theory, the ruling elite attend exclusive preparatory schools, colleges, clubs & resorts, & intermarry largely w/ other members of the ruling class (Domhoff, 1983)  
  For Braun & P-E theory, While there are exceptional self made tycoons whose lives parallel the famous rags to riches novels by Horatio Alger, in reality, the heads of the largest corporations are almost exclusively born into their class position (Braun, 1991, 1997)  

 
Internal
Links

Top
  An Overview of  Ralf Dahrendorf  1929  - 
External
Links
  -  Project:  ICAs, & Class Analysis 
Link
Link
 -  Biography & Major Works   
  THE COMBINATION OF FUNCTIONALISM & CONFLICT THEORY EXAMINES SOCIETAL NORMAL OPERATIONS, & SOCIAL CHANGE   
  Dahrendorf integrated Marxism & structural functionalism  
  Dahrendorf operates at the same, macro, level as structural functionalists & looks at many of the same issues of stability, functions, etc.  
  Dahrendorf theorized that on the one hand some parts of society fit together well & function smoothly while on the other hand, other parts of society experience considerable conflict  
  Ritzer believes that Dahrendorf's theory suffers from a lack of Marxism  
Link
 Dahrendorf's Chart on the Continuum from Structural - Functionalism to Conflict Theory shows that many of the most important differences btwn structural functionalism & conflict theory actually represent poles on the end of a continuum, rather than different realities  
 
 Society exists btwn these two poles & may even have two simultaneous faces:  consensus & conflict  
  Consensus is an illusion
Society is held together by authority
Legitimacy/authority is precarious		  
  DAHRENDORF FOLLOWS MARX ON THE POWER OF GRP INTERESTS BUT DIVERGES ON ECON INTERESTS, HOLDING THAT MULTI CLASS SOCIETAL GRPS DEVELOP OTHER COMMON INTERESTS  
  Dahrendorf interprets Marx through structural functionalism  
  The criticisms of structural functionalism that are addressed by Dahrendorf's theory are that it ignores change & upheaval & is too conservative  
  Dahrendorf accepts Marx's ideas on
- the two class theory where Dahrendorf calls the two classes the superordinate & the subordinate classes
- organized ( or manifest ) group interests such as the labor movement
- & unorganized ( or latent ) group interests such as conservative workers
 
 
 Dahrendorf differs from Marx is his beliefs that:
 
  1.  The revolution will NOT end class conflict.  There will always be conflict  
  2.  Class conflict in advanced industrial society is NOT based primarily or only on economic interests  
  3.  The upper class no longer owns & controls the means of production  
  4.  Dahrendorf accepts the managerial control thesis that control is divorced from ownership w/ non owning managers controlling the economy  
  5.  The growth of the middle class in industrial societies has altered the nature of the economic divisions as described by Marx  
  6.  Conflict theory ignores order & stability; it's too radical  
  7.  For most Marxism & conflict theory, conflict emerges, unexplained, from structural functional like systems   
  INTERESTS ARE NOT BASED ONLY ON CLASS, BUT ON LIFESTYLE AS WELL   
 
 Dahrendorf is similar to Marx on his belief that interests are not psychological, but structurally generated by defined positions
 
 
 Taking Marx's understanding of interests, Dahrendorf combines it w/ the structural functionalist's understanding of manifest & latent functions
 
 
 Manifest interests are conscious / intended interests and
Latent interests are unconscious / unintended interests
 
 
 Dahrendorf's examination of manifest & latent interests is similar to, but an expansion of, Marx's concept of class consciousness
 
 
 Interest groups are groups in support of latent/manifest interests
Conflict groups are interest groups that are engaged in conflict
 
  Social change occurs when conflict groups form  
  Dahrendorf is similar to Weber in his beliefs on authority  
  -  Authority resides in positions not individual thus one may have authority in one sphere but not another  
  -  Legitimate authority has sanctions to back it up  
 
 Dahrendorf accepts Weber's position that power struggles in modern society occur inside bureaucracies, & not as direct conflict btwn classes 
 
  IMPERATIVELY COORDINATED ASSOC (ICAs) ARE BASED ON PEOPLE'S COMMON INTEREST IN AN ISSUE OF IMPORTANCE TO THEM   
  Class conflict will occur in imperatively coordinated associations ( ICAs )  
 
 ICAs include any association of people that is controlled by a hierarchy, thus an ICA is composed of dichotomous interest groups
 
 
 ICAs are like bureaucratic organizations centered around the major tasks/ structures in society i.e. economic or businesses, religion, politics, family, etc.
 
  Conflict will be spread among various power groups w/in organizations & among interest groups in society  
  ICAs come in all sizes & examples of ICAs in the social structures include: 
1.  Peers               fraternities, sororities, a network of friend, NGOs, social mvmts, etc.
2.  Family              tribal, extended, nuclear/traditional, single parent, grandparent, etc.
3.  Religion            church, mosque, synagogue, temple, a high church official or a simple member
4.  Work               executive or consumer or worker or watch dog group
5.  Govt                political elite or just a citizen
6.  Military            family support grps, citizen honor guards, welcome committees
7.  Charity             support grps, public interest grps, watch dog grps
8.  Ed                    university president or student
9.   Media             watch dog grps, citizen watch grps
10.  Leisure / Rec   informal rec grps, rec assoc		  
 
 ICAs are so pervasive in society, that individual & group interests are structured by the individual or group relationships to these associations such as personal connections, org to org connections; org to network connections, network to network connections
 
  W/in all ICAs there are authority roles of domination & subordination  
  On ICAs, Dahrendorf said, "One of the central theses of this study consists in the assumption that this differential distribution of authority invariably becomes the determining factor of systematic social conflicts of a type that is germane to class conflicts in the traditional (Marxist) sense of this term."  
  Unlike Marx, Dahrendorf recognized all kinds of individual or group interests
 
  Dahrendorf recognized all kinds of individual or group interests related to
- material rewards
- freedom
- status recognition
- leisure
- all kinds of services from each other
- any kind of interest that develops inside an ICA		  
  ICAs ARE BASED ON COMMON LIFESTYLE INTERESTS, BUT CLASS / ECON INTERESTS STILL PLAY A ROLE   
  The key is that the means to attaining interests are related to authority positions in ICAs
 
  The haves get what they want while the have nots do not get what they want & so they tend to challenge the status quo  
  A critique of Dahrendorf is that while he is examining org behavior, organizational analysis, org conflict, org development, etc. is not examined  
 
 Individuals take positions in many ICAs at the same time
 
  Each position in an ICA represents a different set of interests in relation to the authority or lack of authority held  
  An ICA's interests are latent until they become recognized & acted upon at which time they may become manifest to the actors  
  Each of the social structures may be seen as being made up of ICAs each of which acts upon it's latent & manifest interests
1.  Peers 
2.  Family 
3.  Religion 
4.  Work 
5.  Govt 
6.  Military 
7.  Charity 
8.  Ed 
9.   Media 
10.  Leisure / Rec
 
 
 Critiques of Dahrendorf
 
 
 a.  ICA conflict is much different than class conflict & therefore Dahrendorf loses the primacy of the economic base of conflict
 
  In Dahrendorf's defense, he believes that the dominate ICAs in most societies are the economy & religion  
 
 b.  It is not clear where the middle class fits in the two class system of superordinate & subordinate classes
 
  Dahrendorf says the location of the middle class depends on the particular interests of that ICA member, but this makes his analysis very complicated, but the world is complicated!  
 
 c.  ICAs obviously must be seen in a hierarchy of importance / influence in society but Dahrendorf gives no logic for comparing them
 
 
 However, other analysts & Dahrendorf have noted that most nations today are dominated by economic, religious, & political ICAs, indicating that these are the most influential ICAs today  

 
Top
  

Ralf Dahrendorf  1929  - 

He was born in Hamburg, the son of Lina Dahrendorf and the late Gustav Dahrendorf a social democrat member of the German Parliament. He studied philosophy, classical philology and sociology in Hamburg University between 1947 and 1952, became a doctor of philosophy and classics (Dr. phil.) in 1952. He continued his academic research at London School of Economics as a Leverhulme Research Scholar 1953-54, gaining a PhD in 1956. He was a professor of sociology in Hamburg (1957-60), Tübingen (1960-64) and Konstanz (1966-69).

From 1969 to 1970 he was a member of the German parliament for the Freie Demokratische Partei (Free Democratic Party), the German liberals, and a Parliamentary Secretary of State in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In 1970 he became a Commissioner in the European Commission in Brussels. From 1974 to 1984 he was director of the London School of Economics, when he returned to Germany to become Professor of Social Science, Konstanz University (1984-86).

He settled in the United Kingdom in 1986, becoming a Governor of the London School of Economics, and also (from 1987 to 1997) Warden of St Anthony's College at Oxford University.

Having adopted British citizenship in 1988, in 1993 Dahrendorf was granted a life peerage and was created Baron Dahrendorf of Clare Market in the City of Westminster by Queen Elizabeth II. He sits in the House of Lords as a crossbencher.

Top
  
Major Works of Dahrendorf

Class & Class Conflict in Industrial Society.  1959.  Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 

Europe's Economy in Crisis.  1982. 

Society and Democracy in Germany.  1993. 

Reflections on the Revolutions in Europe.  2004.


 
Top
  
Chart: Dahrendorf's Continuum from Structural - Functionalism to Conflict Theory
This chart shows that many of the most important differences btwn S - F & Conflict Theory actually represent poles on the end of a continuum, rather than different realities
Structural Functionalism Conflict Theory
1.  Equilibrium 1.  Continual change
2.  All elements contribute  to stability 2.  All elements contribute to conflict/change
3.  Common morality 3.  False consciousness / imposed morality
4.  Order 4.  Coercion / dominance

 
Internal
Links

Top
  Outline on   Class Location
External
Links
 
 Analysis of class location examines how & why people, analysts, politicians & the people themselves view themselves & others as belonging to a particular class
 
 
 For Kerbo, there are  SIX variables that describe a particular class location including realism, nominalism, subjectivism, objectivism, continuity of ranking, & discontinuous ranking
 
  1.  REALIST:  CLASS LOCATION BASED ON WHO ONE ASSOCIATES WITH  
 
 The realist analysis of class location is based primarily on who one associates with
 
 
 The realist analysis holds that an analysis of associations can identify clear class boundaries, though many dispute this
 
  Most people do associate w/ people of the same class, status, etc., however a certain percentage of people do have associates of a different ranking, & a certain amount of people will say / believe they have friends of a different ranking  
  An example of the realist position is that most people marry w/in their rank & w/in rank marriages have a greater chance of success  
 
 The realist analysis is primarily a subjective form of identification
 
  2.  NOMINALIST:  INDEPENDENT CRITERIA ON CLASS  
 
 The nominalist analysis of class location is based primarily on objective criteria based on independently constructed criteria
 
 
 The most important class determinants of the nominalist analysis of class location are the common characteristics of people such as Weber's life chances, membership in prep schools, inclusion on the social register, etc.
 
  3.  SUBJECTIVE:  SELF IDENTIFICATION OF CLASS   
 
 The subjective analysis of class location is based primarily on self identification or whether a class identity has meaning for the individuals themselves  
  When people are asked to self identify which class they are in, most people place themselves in the middle or working class  
  4.  OBJECTIVE:  ACCEPTED CRITERIA ON CLASS   
  The objective analysis of class location is based primarily on definition of class emphasizes observable, widely available factors such as wealth, income, status as measured by a well known survey, etc.   
  The obj analysis of class location is based on rewards from society as objectively determined by education, status, power, whether or not a person recognizes it  
  The objective analysis of class location is used by social analysts from Marx to Wright  
  5.  CONTINUOUS CLASS RANKING:  SCALES OF SUBCLASSES  
  The continuous class ranking analysis of class location ranks subclasses on a scale based on several objective, weighted factors which are used to create a range of class membership  
  6.  DISCONTINUOUS CLASS RANKING:  SCALES OF SUBCLASSES W/ CLEAR BREAKS  
  The discontinuous class ranking analysis of class location ranks subclasses in a discontinuous system when there are clear breaks, recognizing that a continuous class ranking may be possible when there are no clear breaks  
  Kerbo believes there are THREE dimensions of class location:  occupational structure, bureaucratic authority divisions, & property structure
( Not to be confused w/ the 3 dimensions of stratification systems:  class, status, & power or the 6 variables that describe a particular class location  )		  
  A.  OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE IS ONE'S RELATIONSHIP TO THE MARKET  
  i.  primarily based on skill  
  ii.  & thus reward & skill are not directly correlated  
  iii.  & one's contribution to society is not primary factor in determining pay, etc.  
  iv.  where dominant groups shape the occupational reward structure  
       Economy:  MOP:  ROF & FOP  
  Marx's analysis of class & consciousness holds that they are influenced by the base of society; i.e. the larger economic system  
  B.  BUREAUCRATIC AUTHORITY DIVISIONS STRATIFY PEOPLE ON CONTROL OF RESOURCES & PEOPLE  
  Bureaucratic authority divisions are organizations (e.g. Weber & Dahrendorf's imperatively coordinated associations (ICAs) ) each have their own unique power structure, w/ many similarities which stratify people on control of resources & control of other people  
  C. PROPERTY STRUCTURE WAS A CLEAR INDICATOR OF CLASS IN THE PAST, BUT IS NOT TODAY   
  For most of the industrialized world, as recently as 200 yrs. ago, property ownership was a clear indicator of class position  
  In the past, aristocrats owned nearly all the property while the proletariat owned almost nothing  
  Today the concept of property is much more complicated & is not a clear indicator of class location  
  Property structure includes real property & paper property such as stocks, bonds, trusts  
  For Kerbo, the property structure method of class location is problematic because many in middle class own stock & so "own" the means of production (MOP), but have no control over the MOP  
  In practice middle class stock holders own the MOP, but they do not control the MOP  
  On the other hand, farmers & small business people are middle or lower class & own relatively large swatches of property  
  The top 10 % of the US population own over 88 % of all stocks, bonds, & trusts & thus 90 % of the population own less that 12 %  

 
Internal
Links

Top
  An Overview of   Erik Olin Wright
External
Links
  -  Video:  E.O. Wright on Social Class          4:49
Link
Link
 -  Biography & Major Works
 
  Wright believes it a simple, FOUR level class structure of capitalists, managers, workers, & petty bourgeoisie is as effective as a more complex one in demonstrating income hierarchy:  
  a.  capitalists own the means of production ( MOP ) & employ many others  
  b.  managers work for capitalists & control their own labor  
  c.  workers simply sell labor  
  d.  petty bourgeoisie own some of the means of production but employ few others  
 
 Wright found his four level class structure was as accurate at explaining income stratification as occupational status & educational level  
 
 Wright's capitalist class has higher income, even allowing for educational level  
  Comparing only people w/ low education in the capitalist, mgr., worker & petty bourgeoisie classes, the capitalists, never-the-less have higher income  
  Comparing only people w/ high education in the capitalist, mgr., worker & petty bourgeoisie classes, the workers never-the-less have higher income have lower income  
 
 Education is not a panacea in helping workers attain a higher income   
  Education does, generally, help mgrs. attain a higher income  
 
 Within a class, there is little difference in economic achievement btwn races or genders  
  In the working class, men & women, blacks & whites, etc. earn approximately the same level of income  
  For example, women earn 66% of what men earn, overall, but w/in the working class women earn equal wages to men  
 
 Blacks & females are more often in the Wright's working class & thus have an overall lower income  
  The proportions of blacks & females are greater in the working class  
  The proportions of white males are higher in the capitalist & managerial classes  
 
 Robinson & Kelly found similar results as well as separate mobility patterns in terms of class position & occupational status  
  To attain a capitalist class position, it is best to be born of capitalist parents  
  To attain a high occupational position, it is best to be from of parents w/ hi ed & hi occupational position  
Link
 Table 10 - 8  Wright & Perrone's Class Divisions of Authority & Ownership by Race & Sex, 1977, demonstrates a clear hierarchy based on race & sex  
 
 Thus Wright's analysis demonstrates that  a person's relation to the production system does impact their position in society  
 
 The capitalist property dimension has the least amount of social mobility  
  The expertise dimension has a middle level amount of social mobility  
  The authority dimension of class structure has the most social mobility  
 
 Thus the US has more inequality based upon property ownership than any other industrialized country, putting more power in the hands of capitalists & the corporate class  
 
 Wright also found that fewer people from outside the capitalist property class had friendships with people inside the capitalist class  
  Wright found that people in other classes than the capitalist property class had more across class friendships  

 
Top
  

Erik Olin Wright

Department of Sociology 
University of Wisconsin - Madison 
email: wright@ssc.wisc.edu
telephone: 608-262-0068

Top
  
Major Works of EO Wright

The Politics of Punishment:  A Critical Analysis of Prisons in America. New York:  Harper and Row and Harper Colophon Books, 1973. 
Class, Crisis and the State, London:  New Left Books, 1978; Verso paperbacks, 1979.  Translations in Spanish, Portuguese, Japanese, Korean. 
Class Structure and Income Determination, New York: Academic Press, 1979. 
Classes (London: Verso, 1985). Spanish translation, 1994. 
The Debate on Classes (London: Verso, 1990) 
Reconstructing Marxism: essays on Explanation and the Theory of History (with Elliott Sober and Andrew Levine), Verso, 1992 (Portuguese translation, 1993) 
Interrogating Inequality (London: Verso, 1994) 
Class Counts: Comparative Studies in Class Analysis (Cambridge University Press, 1997) 
Deepening Democracy: institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance (with Archon Fung), Verso, 2003. (Spanish Translation, National University of Colombia Press, 2003) 


 
Top
  
Table 10 - 8      Wright & Perrone's Class Divisions of Authority & Ownership by Race & Sex, 1977

The data presented here demonstrate a clear hierarchy based on Race & Sex

Kerbo0410
Class
% White Males
% Black Males
% White Females
% Black Females
Employers
10.9
6.6
3.0
0.0
Managers
42.9
36.8
27.7
22.9
Workers
41.5
55.3
66.6
77.1
Petite Bourgeoisie
4.6
1.3
2.7
0.0
Total
100
100
100
100

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on     William Domhoff:  Power Elite Theory     19  - 
External
Links
Link
 -  Biography & Major Works  
  For Domhoff power is a construct in that it cannot be measured directly  
  Domhoff asks three questions to determine who has power:  a.  Who governs?  b.  Who benefits?  c.  Who wins?  
  a.  Who governs? 
 
  Broad based Social Groups who are well represented among elected & appointed office have power & use it to govern
 
  b.  Who benefits from governmental decisions?
 
  Social groups who consistently have govt actions favor their interests have power
 
  c.  Who wins when social controversies arise?
 
  For Domhoff, the social groups who consistently win have power
 
  For Domhoff, the top 5% of the population, i.e. the elite class, and the next 5% of the population, i.e. the corporate class, consistently have representatives in govt, have govt actions favor their interests, & win controversial issues
 
  Pluralists hold that different groups, at different times, have high scores high on representation in govt, have govt actions favor their interests, win controversial issues
 
  Domhoff also uses the reputational approach where he examines how people repeatedly exercise power
 
  W/ the reputational method, as used by Domhoff, one asks significant people who they believe is powerful
 
  The reputational method, which Domhoff uses, has the weakness that people do not always know who has power and that asking people who has power leads them to assume that someone has power
 
 
 According to Domhoff, 1983. there are three main interest groups trying to influence policy at the national level:   corporate coalition, a small business coalition, and a labor / liberal coalition  
  Domhoff developed an analysis of the key interest groups that shows that, indeed, contrary to what Pluralists believe, one group controls the govt, benefits from govt policy, & wins controversial issues  

 
Top
  

William Domhoff

Began as a interest in the muckrakers
Received a Ph.D. in Psychology, focused on dream research
Became interested in Power Elite Theory as a result of
    his in law family
    the Civil Rights Movement
    E. Digby Baltzell's Philadelphia Gentlemen.  (1958)
    Also was influenced by Mills, Paul Sweezy, Robert Dahl

Top    
Major Works by Domhoff

Who Rules America.  1967
The Higher Circles.  1970
The Powers That Be.  1979
State Autonomy or Class Dominance.  1996
Black in the White Establishment.  1991  Co-author
Diversity in the Power Elite.  1998
Who Rules America.  2001


 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the   Key Interest Groups by Domhoff
External
Links
  -  Project:  Key Interest Groups 
Link
  -  Project:  Key Interest Groups in the Envl Debate 
Link
  THE KEY INTEREST GROUPS INCLUDE CORPORATIONS, SMALL BUSINESSES, & LABOR / LIBERALS  
  According to Domhoff, 1983, there are three main interest groups trying to influence policy at the national level:   the corporate coalition, the small business coalition, & the labor / liberal coalition
 
  In 1990, there were more than 6,800 congressional lobbying groups in the US, however most of them tend to represent certain groups of interests, such as Domhoff three key interest groups
 
  In 2005, there were more than 14,000 registered lobbying groups in Washington, DC, averaging just over two employees each for a total over 30,000 lobbyists (many lobbying firms are small)  
  In 2005, there were approximately 30,000 members of Congress & staff members, making the ratio of lobbyists to officials on the Hill nearly 1 to 1  
  In the early 90s the total value of earmarks added to bills was under $100 mm, while in 2005 the value was over $32 bb  
  A.  THE CORPORATE COALITION INCLUDES THE LARGEST CORPS IN THE WORLD, MANY HAVING MORE ECON POWER THAN THE MAJORITY OF NATIONS   
  The corporate coalition include multinational corporations from around the world
 
  Also included in the corporate coalition group are policy foundations & research institutes that do not call themselves lobbyists, but claim to operate on the behalf of "good govt" or the "national interest"
 
  Examples of conservative policy foundations include the Ford, Rockefeller, & Carnegie Foundations, the Committee for Economic Development (CED), the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Trilateral Commission, & the Business Roundtable
 
  Conservative policy foundations lobby for policies that promote free trade & polices that allow multinationals to operate in the world economy w/ minimum restrictions
 
  The North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA), the General Agreement on Trade & Tariffs (GATT), the US govt's support for the Maquiladores program are examples of the efforts of the policy institutes allied w/ the multinational corporations
 
  B.  THE SMALL BUSINESS COALITION INCLUDES ALL SMALL BUSINESSES, WHICH MAY BE WORTH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, INCLUDING MANY PROFL ORGS   
  The small business coalition includes the Chamber of Commerce & national orgs of professions that operate as small businesses such as the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Dental Association (ADA), & the Farm Bureau
 
  The small business coalition is more conservative that the corporate coalition
 
  The small business coalition concentrates on opposition to govt regs of business
 
  The small business coalition is less involved in foundations & research institutes than corporate coalition
 
  The small business coalition does support the American Enterprise Institute & the Hoover Institute
 
  C.  THE LABOR / LIBERAL COALITION INCLUDES ORGANIZED LABOR AS WELL AS OTHER SOC MVMTS SUCH AS THE CIVIL RIGHTS MVMT, WOMEN'S MVMT, ENVL MVMT, & MORE   
  The labor / liberal coalition is a loose coalition & is the most diverse, & thus the most divided of the coalitions
 
  The labor / liberal coalition includes organized labor, feminists, the civil rights movement, the envl mvmt, et al
 
  Specific orgs w/in the labor / liberal coalition include the AFL CIO, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Urban League, the National Association for Women (NOW), the National Education Association (NEA), the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the Ralph Nader based orgs, et al
 
  Domhoff developed an analysis of the key interest groups that shows that, indeed, contrary to what pluralists believe, one group controls the govt, benefits from govt policy, & wins controversial issues  
  See Also:  A Comparison of Pluralist Theory & Power Elite Theory by Farley  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on an   Analysis of Key Interest Groups
External
Links
 
 Domhoff developed an analysis of the key interest groups that shows that, indeed, contrary to what Pluralists believe, one group controls the Govt, benefits from govt policy, & wins controversial issues  
 
 a.  Who Governs?
 
 
 The corporate coalition is well represented by national elected officials & appointees as seen in the fact that in 2000, 
 
 
 - nearly half of the 100 US Senators are millionaires, while only 1 to 2% of population are millionaires
 
 
 - women, African Americans Latinos, etc. are underrepresented in the both houses of Congress
 
 
 - nine of 100 Senators were women (9 %), and 56 of 435 Representative (12.9%) while women make up 51% of the population
 
 
 - there are no African Americans in the Senate & only two held office in the 1900s, while Blacks make up 13% of the population
 
 
 - there are 38 Black Representatives (9%)
 
 
 In 1996, there were 17 Hispanic Representative (3.9%) while Hispanics make up 13% of the population
 
 
 The representation in the federal legislative branch of women, Blacks, & Hispanics, despite being low, is at near record highs
 
 
 The executive branch and advisory groups who govern behind the scenes are even less diverse than Congress
 
 
 The majority of professors who served on the President's Science Advisory Commission of 16 years had been on the boards of corporations
 
 
 Stryker found that when social scientists' support the interests of the wealthy, their work becomes institutionalized, but when they oppose such interests, their role is usually eliminated
 
 
 A critique of the who governs analysis is that millionaires do not agree on social policy, as illustrated by Ted Kennedy & George Bush
 
 
 Thus, the pluralist Dahl argues that there is no power elite, while Domhoff & Mills would argue that there is such a large amount of consensus in govt that there is a corporate coalition which rules
 
 
 Dahl would also note that politicians must pay attention to their constituents if they expect to be elected & reelected
 
 
 b.  Who Benefits?
 
 
 Measuring who benefits from govt policies is very difficult & is thus the area of focus of the disciplines of social stratification, demographics, & others
 
 
 Examining the stratification of wealth & income gives one indication of who benefits from govt. & corp. policy  
 
 Examining the incidence of taxes & payments by the fed, state, & local govts. gives one indication of who benefits from govt. & corp policy  
  The military industrial Congressional complex ( MICC )  
  Domhoff & power elite theorists believe that the US military policy benefits the corporate coalition  
  A larger share of the US fed budget goes to defense than in other industrialized countries  
  10 of the largest 50 corps rely primarily on sales to the military  
  Critics, including Domhoff, argue that military spending is greater than is needed for national defense, & has two other purposes  
  Defense spending is oversized because the military industrial Congressional complex (MICC) lobbies for it so that they may profit from it  
  Defense spending is oversized because the the corporate coalition benefits from a US, global military presence   
 
 Star Wars / SDI was funded even though the scientific consensus was that it is unfeasible at this time
 
 
 As the movie the "Lord of War" depicts, the largest small arms dealers are the US, UK, Russia, France & China  
  Small arms are more deadly than WMD, killing more people each yr than all the WMD put together  
 
 In many wars, arms dealers & the nations who are the largest arms dealers, arm both sides of a conflict as seen in the recent Balkans War, the two wars against Iraq, the Iran Iraq war, the Israeli Arab conflicts, & more
 
  Taxfare & Welation  
 
 Domhoff & power elite theorists believe that the US Tax policy benefits the corp coalition
 
 
 Wealth & income are more unequally distributed in the second half of the 20th century
 
  The concepts of taxfare & welation denote that the tax code benefits the UC & that the welfare system does not provide an adequate safety net to allow someone to get an education & a job get out of poverty  
  Corp welfare includes the subsidies that go to businesses  
 
 The effective rates of taxation for those in the higher income brackets have fallen
 
 
 Tax reform in the 1980s under President Reagan cut taxes 7% for the middle class & 31% for the upper class
 
  Under the 1980s Reagan tax reform, those earning $100K to 2 mm got a got a tax cu of $7,000 while homes w/ incomes below $10,000 got a $37 tax cut
 
  Under the 1980s Reagan tax reform, the tax burden was shifted from corporations to individuals in that the share of taxes paid by corporations fell from 21% to 17%  
  Since the Reagan era, the capital gains tax has been reduced  
  c.  Who Wins?  
  Domhoff found that when there is substantial disagreement btwn the corporate coalition, the small business coalition, & the labor / liberal coalition, the corporate coalition almost always wins  
  Doctors & hospitals were unable to stop healthcare cost controls desired by corps in the 1980s  
  Early in the Clinton Administration, universal healthcare as supported by the labor / liberal coalition was defeated by the combination of the corporate & the small business coalitions  
  The corporate & the small business coalitions are the most likely allies to each other of the three coalitions  
  The passage of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 was the only clear defeat for the corporate coalition, & it has been significantly weakened over the decades by the Taft Hartley & other Acts  
  The small business coalition appears to have veto power in that the labor / liberal coalition can do little w/o its support, & while the corporate coalition can act alone, it is much more successful if it has the small business coalition on its side  
  The labor / liberal coalition is the least powerful in that it can pass little on its own, & it has the power to veto actions of only the small business coalition  
  The power of the labor / liberal coalition increases during times of social conflict when people are disillusioned w/ the status quo of the corporate coalition & are more likely to become involved   
  Domhoff believes the labor / liberal coalition is the weakest because it has:  
  a.  a looser & more diverse coalition which makes it less unified  
  b.  fewer economic resources  
  c.  less access to govt officials  
 
 d.  very rare common interests w/ the other two coalitions  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on a  Comparison of Pluralist Theory & Power Elite Theory
External
Links
   -  Project:  Comparing Pluralism & Power Elite Theory 
Link
  Pluralist theory holds that society is composed many competing groups, none of which dominates  
  Power elite theory holds that society is composed of one group which dominates, & various other relatively unorganized groups which have little or no power in society  
  Power elite theory holds that society is composed of conflicting groups, including the: 
 
      - power elite which is made up of "old money," multinational corporation, powerful political leaders, powerful military leaders, et al
 
      - many other highly fragmented groups, none of which manages to challenge the power of the P-E
 
  Theorists such as Mills & Domhoff believe that the power elite dominates many spheres of society  
  Farley compares pluralist theory & power elite theory by asking Domhoff's questions of Who govern? Who benefits? & Who wins?
 
  In the 70s there were 2000 interest groups, & in the 90s there were over 6800 interest groups
 
  For Domhoff, society is composed of 3 key interest groups, including:   
  - multinational corporate interest groups
 
  - small business interest groups
 
  - the labor liberal coalition
 
  For Domhoff, national level politicians & their appointments serve the interests of the 3 key interest groups
 
  Congress consists of 30 to 40% millionaires & this trend continues
 
  Who benefits from national policies?
 
  Nat policies have resulted in a budget deficit for every year in the past 40 years (except for a few yrs at the end of the Clinton admin)
 
  A deficit occurs when income (in the form of taxes) is not enough to cover govt expenditures (such as spending on social security, the military, etc.)  
  The national debt grew to over $8.5 T or $28,000 for every American in the mid 2000s  
  Who benefits from the national debt?  
  Defense spending has stayed high, at 30 to 50%, of the budget since WW II resulting in what President Eisenhower warned the public as the military industrial Congressional complex  ( MICC )
Link
  Those who hold govt bonds benefit from national debt in that they have a very secure place to store an immense amount of wealth  
  Who loses?   
  Those who pay the interest on the debt lose, & those whose programs are cut to fund the interest on the debt lose  
  Who wins or loses in relation to federal taxation?  
  A progressive tax is one designed so that the proportion of income paid in taxes increases as income increases  
  A regressive tax is one designed so that the proportion of income paid in taxes decreases as income increases  
  A flat tax is one designed so that the proportion of income paid in taxes is the same regardless of income  
  The US has a progressive income tax, on paper, with 5 tax brackets ranging from  
  17%    23%   27%   32%   33%  
  Many feel that the US tax system is regressive because the higher tax rates were lowered under Reagan, 1986  
  In 1986 tax reform lowered taxes for the lowest & highest tax brackets & either raised taxes or left them the same for the middle three brackets
 
 
 Most analysts agree that overall the fed tax system is flat or regressive because of taxes such as: 
 
  -  payroll taxes such as social security & unemployment taxes  
  -  sales type taxes such at gas taxes & others  
  -  tax deductions such as interest for 2 homes, capital gains, & others  
  -  though tax deductions, they remain an important loop hole for the wealthy  
  -  because capital gains taxes have been reduced, they are an even more important loop hole for the wealthy  
  -  though personal exemptions have slightly increased, they are a small factor in the tax system compared to tax rates & deductions  
  In sum it is a judgment call on whether the modern Western society is more pluralist, ie democratic, or more power elitist, ie corporatist in judging whether the tax system is unfair, the power of interest groups, the concentration of wealth, the control of the econ, the amount of poverty, the importance of the national debt, etc.  
  If one tends to think that the central features of the structure of society are formulated to favor no one, then pluralism exists; while if one believes that the central features of the structure of a society are formulated to favor the rich & powerful, then power elitism exists  
  Another important question is judging the control of society is whether one cares which class dominates in that some believe the upper class should dominate, while others believe the middle class should dominate  
  In general the middle class has the most equality it that lower middle class, middle class, & upper middle class people all treat each other fairly & the range of income, power & wealth is a few million dollars  
  In general the middle class has the highest level of racial & gender tolerance in that in the middle class all people are more accepted than in the lower or upper classes  

 
Internal
Links

Top
Outline on  Stratification by Gender
External
Links
  -  Supplement:  Median Income of Year Round, Full Time Workers, by Sex and Age, 1999
Link
  -  Supplement:  Median Income of Year Round Full Time Workers, by Sex & Level of Education, 1999
Link
  Women typically earn 60 to 70% of what men earn for equal work  
  The gender pay gap is slowly closing, but will probably take 20 to 30 more yrs. to reach equality  
  E.O. Wright found that economic discrimination against women occurs btwn, & not w/in a class or subclass:  
     Within a class, there is little difference in economic achievement btwn races or genders  
     In the working class, men & women, blacks & whites, etc. earn approximately the same level of income  
     For example, women earn 66% of what men earn, overall, but w/in the working class women earn equal wages to men  
     Blacks & females are more often in the Wright's working class & thus have an overall lower income  
     The proportions of blacks & females are greater in the working class  
     The proportions of white males are higher in the capitalist & managerial classes  
  60 to 70% of women work outside the home while only 55% of men work outside the home  
  In general, the class of both spouses is that of the highest class spouse; i.e., the higher class spouse, pulls the other up to his or her level  
  Married women typically earn less than husband, & so technically are in a lower class than their husband  
  But the standard of living, income, property, status, etc. are distributed through the family unit  
  And thus, after a divorce, women usually fall in income while men's income rises  
  In 2002, approximately 30% of wives earn more than their husbands  
  In the recent past, ( i.e. as recently as the 1950s) a married women's class was determined by position of husband; i.e. she would even come down to his position if he were lower  
  In terms of social marital mobility, by far the most people marry w/in their class  
  In terms of social marital mobility, the largest group of people who marry up consists of women   
  In terms of social marital mobility, the smallest group of people who marry up consists of  men   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the Stratification & Sociobiology
External
Links
  Sociobiology is a discipline of study which recognizes that biology affects behavior and that behavior affects biology
 
  Our activities actually have a physical impact on our musculature, our brain, and our neural/hormonal system
 
  Sociobiology has a focus on altruism, cooperation, stratification, asking, 'Why did these social qualities evolve?'
 
  Altruism is believed to have evolved because the survival of the group is more important than individual survival
 
  Cooperation is believed to have evolved because many activities can be done more efficiently in this way with group cooperation
 
  Sociobiologists and anthropologists have found that some cooperative species are highly stratified including wolves, apes, dogs
 
  Stratification allows for cooperation and for dominant members of the group to reproduce more frequently
 
  For most physical & social scientists, there are two roots of human behavior: 
 
  a.  Biology or physical human nature
 
  b.  Socialization which is the shaping of behavior by learning, culture, the social environment & other nonbiological factors
 
  The examination of biological qualities allow us the understand some aspects of behavior while social factors allow us the understand other aspects of behavior
 
  Charles Darwin held that natural selection resulted in the survival of humans who were most genetically fit for the environment in which they lived
 
  It takes many generations for a gene pool to be significantly altered
 
  99 % of human existence has been in an environment with what would now be considered a very low level of stratification & a very high level of cooperation
 
  The uncritical conflict theories (e.g. Weber) & uncritical order theories (e.g. functionalism) assume that conflict & the inequality found in almost all historical stratification systems is the result of selfish human nature
 
  Popular books, like The Naked Ape, also posit that humans are naturally warlike & domineering, but there is little evidence for this  

The End
 
Top