The Functionalist View Of Stratification Essay
Functionalism is a sociological perspective that focuses on the ways in which a complex pattern of social structures and arrangements contributes to social order. It was designed to carry out the essential functions of human life. A flaw in functionalist perspective is that we have rarely seen anything approaching equilibrium in human society. Ultimately, change is seen as a dysfunction within this school of thought.
Two prominent theorists within the functionalist school of thought were Emile Durkheim and Talcott Parsons. Emile Durkheim was the founder of sociology in France. His best known books are “The Division of Labor in Society”, “Rules of the Sociological Method”, and “Suicide”. Durkheim was the first University professor with a chair in the Social Sciences department and also established the first scientific journal in sociology called “L’année Sociologique”.
Durkheim developed a model of society evolving from the simple to the complex solidarity. According to Durkheim, simple societies do not have division of labor. Also, there is no variation in individuality hence these societies are more unstable and prove to be influence by change. Complex societies, by contrast lead to specialization of labor, individuality and interdependence.
In a feature article from Durkheim entitled “The Dualism of Human Nature and it Social Conditions” Durkheim describes two kinds of tendencies within each individual. These tendencies are sensation and sensory tendencies and conceptual thought and moral activity. Durkheim explains sensation and sensory tendencies and conceptual thought and moral activity as two poles that most often oppose each other. Sensation and sensory tendencies are described as” they are concerned with our individuality and with it alone. When we satisfy our hunger, thirst, etc., without any other tendency in play, it is ourselves and ourselves alone that we satisfy”. Conceptual thought and moral activity, on the other hand, is described as “recognizable by the sign that the rules of conduct to which it conforms are open to universalization; it pursues, then, by definition, impersonal ends”, meaning that conceptual thought and moral activity goes beyond the individual needs and desires.
Talcott Parsons was born on December 13, 1902 in Colorado Springs. He graduated from Amherst College in 1924 where he majored in biology. From 1924 to 1925, Parsons also attended the London School of Economics. Parsons furthered his education by obtaining his doctorate at Heidelberg University in Germany in 1927.
When Parsons read theories proposed by Durkheim, Pareto, and Weber, and was later influenced by them, he fused these theories and wrote “The Structure of Social Action” in 1937. Parsons adopted the social action theory and stressed the structural functional approach as the only way for sociology to achieve efficient theory. He stated that personality formation develops out of action organized around individuals, while action...
Loading: Checking Spelling0%
Assess whether the Weberian approach offers a more sophisticated framework than the functionalist perspective in understanding social stratification.1422 words - 6 pages Sociology is a social sciences discipline with a history of less than 200 years. It examines the nature of human behavior and of human association as well as the resultant products of both. Since it is generally agreed that one of the fundamental problems in all societies is how to distribute resources, unequal distribution of resources which leads to social inequality and the formation of different social stratum, therefore, are of the...
Evaluate the functionalist theory of the family1393 words - 6 pages Evaluate the functionalist theory of the familyIn this essay, I intend to analyse some of the theories behind the functionalist perspective of the family, it is my intention to look at two main theorists in this field, Murdock and Parsons. I to analyse their theories and give objective argument for the pros and cons of the functionalist...
The Major Dimensions of Social Stratification2848 words - 11 pages The Major Dimensions of Social Stratification For one to attempt the question, “what are the major dimensions of social stratification?” , one must first define the term social stratification. Social stratification is often used interchangeably with social inequality and one must distinguish between the two terms. Social inequality refers to the existence of socially created inequalities. Social stratification is a form...
The Functionalist and Marxist Views on the Purpose of Socialisation2309 words - 9 pages The Functionalist and Marxist Views on the Purpose of Socialisation Functionalists and Marxists have very similar theories as to the socialisation process. I intend to show this and compare these similarities. There are many well-known functionalists but I am mainly focusing on the views of Talcott Parsons and Emile Durkheim in particular. There are many aspects of the socialisation process to cover both ...
Assessing the Role of Education From the Functionalist Perspective1240 words - 5 pages Assessing the Role of Education From the Functionalist Perspective Functionalists believe that education performs very important roles for individuals, the economy and the wider social structure. It provides secondary socialisation, passing on shared culture enables individuals to develop their potential and regulates their behaviour. Functionalists argue that education has three broad; socialisation where education...
Examine Functionalist and Marxist explanations of the family.662 words - 3 pages Functionalists and Marxist diverse had views on the family. Functionalist theory asserts that there will be a specific pattern of family organisation corresponding to different types of society. Hence there is a particular family form that best suits the conditions of industrial...
The Contribution of Functionalist Sociology to an Understanding of the Role of Education in Society3253 words - 13 pages The Contribution of Functionalist Sociology to an Understanding of the Role of Education in Society Functionalists have constructed two questions to help them research education. The first question is. "What are the functions of education for society as a whole?" and the second question is. "What are the functional relationships between the education system and other parts of the social system". Firstly,...
Comparing the Marxist and Functionalist Views on the Role of Education in Industrial Society1928 words - 8 pages Comparing the Marxist and Functionalist Views on the Role of Education in Industrial Society The functionalists and the Marxists both believe that the education system benefits everyone, but both have different views on society. The Marxist views of the education system are that there are conflicts because there is an inequality between the working class and the higher classes. They believe that there are two different...
Describe the Functionalist (Emile Durkheim), Conflict (Marxist) and Interactionist approach to the Socialization of Education.895 words - 4 pages Describe the Functionalist, Conflict and Interactionist approach to the Socialization of Education.Education - A Functionalist PerspectiveEmile Durkheim proposed an explicitly functionalist explanation of the role of education in society....
The View of Pacifism1775 words - 7 pages The View of Pacifism Works Cited Missing The question of whether or not going to war is appropriate is a pragmatic question that causes controversial answers. A great range of opinions exists to answer this question. The idea that war is never appropriate is called pacifism. Although pacifists have several beliefs in common, different varieties and different variations exist. "Pacifism is not a single unitary theory about war and peace but...
View of the Cell.822 words - 3 pages Chapter 7: A View Of The CellCh. 7.1 The Discovery of CellsThe History of the Cell Theory-Before microscopes disease thought to come from supernatural meansCells- the basic unit of living organismsDevelopment of light microscopes-Simple microscopes vs. compoundCompound light microscopes- a series of lenses to magnify objects in steps, magnify up to 1,500 timesThe Cell Theory-Anton...
The Functionalist View of Stratification:
1. Main principles of structural functionalism:
a. Societies are complex systems of interrelated and interdependent parts, and each part of a society significantly influences the others.
b. Each part of a society exists because it has a vital function to perform in maintaining the existence or stability of society as a whole; the existence of any part of a society is therefore explained when its function for the whole is identified. In other words, the function of anything, which is assumed to be “beneficial function” explains why a structure exists.
c. The tendency of society is toward stability, harmony, or equilibrium, in other words toward balance. Society is seen as a self-regulating system and all of the constituent elements of a society must contribute to maintaining this state of harmony.
d. Overall, the assumption of functionalism is that all social structures contribute to the maintenance of the system and the existence of any given structure is explained by means of its consequences (functions) which must, by definition be beneficial to the maintenance of stable order.
2. Functionalism on stratification: the Davis-Moore thesis:
a. With particular respect to the issue of social stratification or social inequality, the functionalist view argues that social inequality is necessary because it fulfills vital system needs.
b. One such functionalist view of social inequality was developed by Kinsley Davis and Wilbert Moore and has come to be known as the “Davis-Moore Thesis.” This functionalist theory of stratification was first discussed by the authors in 1945 in the article, “Some Principles of Stratification” which appeared in the American Sociological Review and was later extended and refined in ’s book Human Society (1948).
c. Davis and Moore argue like this:
• They claim that no society is unstratified. So, inequality is universal.
• This universal nature of stratification must mean that inequality is not only unavoidable, but indeed necessary to the smooth working of society.
• Then Davis and Moore set out to explain how inequality benefits society. (They assume it is beneficial then try to explain how it must be beneficial.)
• They ask: Why are some positions in society higher than others? Why do the higher positions carry more status and rewards? The answer they come up with is this:
1. Societies are stratified because inequality fulfills an important need of all social systems.
2. Society must distribute its members among the various positions in society.
3. People have to be motivated to fill certain positions and perform their duties.
4. Filling the positions within a social structure is a basic need of any society. This is accomplished through the unequal distribution of rewards.
“Any society must distribute its individuals and induce them to perform the duties of their positions. It must solve the problem of motivation at two levels: to instill in the proper individuals the desire to occupy certain positions and, once in these positions the desire to perform the duties attached to them” (Davis 1948, pp. 366-367).
5. Not all positions are equally pleasant, equally important, or equal in terms of required talent and ability.
6. There must be rewards to provide inducements and those rewards must be distributed unequally to assure that all positions get filled. The inequality of rewards corresponds to what and call functional importance of the position. Davis and Moore state:
“Modern medicine, for example, is within the mental capacity of most individuals, but a medical education is so expensive and burdensome that virtually none would undertake it if the position of M.D. did not carry a reward commensurate with the sacrifice.”
7. The most important positions are rewarded the most--the least important are rewarded the least.
• On the issue of functional importance, Davis and Moore state: “two factors...determine the relative rank of different positions. In general those positions convey the best reward, and have the highest rank which (a) have the greatest importance for the society and (b) require the greatest training or talent.”
• This means that, as Davis and Moore say: “a position does not bring power and prestige because it draws a high income. Rather it draws a high income because it is functionally important and the available personnel is for one reason or another scarce.”
• So that...
“Social inequality is thus an unconsciously evolved device by which societies insure that the most important positions are conscientiously filled by the most qualified persons. Hence, every society, no matter how simple or complex, must differentiate persons in terms of both prestige and esteem, and must therefore possess a certain amount of institutionalized inequality.”
• Ranking of positions occurs according to functional importance and the amount of training or talent associated with the position. High income, power, prestige of a particular position are due to functional importance or scarcity of trained personnel.
3. Summary of the Davis-Moore Thesis:
a. Social positions have varying degrees of functional importance.
b. Talented and trained individuals are scarce because acquisition of training and skills requires people to be sufficiently motivated to pursue them.
c. Stratification, or unequal distribution of rewards ensures that the most talented and trained individuals will fulfill the social roles of greatest importance.
The basic tone of the Davis-Moore thesis, as Irving Zeitlin says, is that, “The rich and powerful and prestigious are at the top because they are the most talented and the best trained and also because they make the greatest contribution to society’s preservation.”
4. Criticism of the Davis-Moore Thesis: The Nature of Social Mobility:
a. Scarcity of rewards is not a “natural” scarcity but rather an artificial scarcity--especially within a system of private property in production--property is, for example, exclusionary rights.
b. Some rewards are not functionally determined at all, but rather must be understood within the context of wealth ownership and institution of inheritance.
• Is wealth ownership functionally important?
• What does the institution of inheritance imply about qualifications, talent, or skill associated with ownership and the power that ownership brings with it?
* Associated idea from Durkheim (See Russell, p. 110):
“One of the problems of modern societies, which Durkheim sought to remedy through state action, was the chaotic and inefficient ways in which labor forces were trained and rewarded. Inept progeny of rich tycoons took over companies while intelligent children of workers went uneducated. Modern societies allocated their collective labor forces inefficiently, wasting talented but poor people in humble positions and suffering from the inept sons of the privileged in powerful positions. To remedy this problem, Durkheim advocated using public schooling to sift and winnow children according to their native abilities, educationally prepare them according to their potential--what later became known as tracking--and see that they ended up in jobs that paid accordingly.”
c. Control of access to training by powerful and privileged groups creates artificialscarcity of talent.
d. Davis and Moore claimed that their theory was applicable to all forms of society. Critics of the Davis-Moore viewpoint argued that it did not make much sense in non-competitive societies--for example feudalism, where all positions are distributed not by merit but by birth. And, more importantly what about those aspects of a class society that do not operate like merit systems?
• The issue of ascribed vs. achieved status was brought up. The distribution of positions cannot be understood merely by achievement but achievement itself is conditioned by ascription of status.
• In other words, ascribed statuses condition access to opportunity structures. Weber’s concept of life chancesis relevant here. Opportunities for achievement are not distributed equally. Class itself can be though of as implying a set of life chances and obstacles to social mobility.
5. Melvin Tumin vs. Davis-Moore Thesis:
a. 1953--Melvin Tumin’s “Some Principles of Stratification: A Critical Analysis” was published in the American Sociological Review.
b. Tumin’s criticism rested on this point:
• The functional importance of varying social positions has not been demonstrated, nor can such a demonstration be made. “Are engineers functionally more important to a factory than unskilled workers.” Here, planning vs. implementation are considered complementary functions of production. We must also consider the problem of deskilling and the control of workers (see Braverman--the detailed division of labor).
c. Scarcity of talent is not an adequate explanation of stratification. There is in stratification systems artificial limits to the development of whatever potential skills there are in society. For example, wealth, education, professional associations, etc. ...these things assure not that the best and the brightest will be selected for powerful positions but that much of society’s potential talent will go un-utilized.
d. The universality of stratification does not mean it is necessarily beneficial or inevitable. Just because stratification is universal does not mean it is a vital aspect or system need of society. Stratification is not positively functionally for a society--it is dysfunctional.
Tumin states (see Levine, p. 108):
“Social stratification systems function to provide the elite with the political power necessary to procure acceptance and dominance of an ideology which rationalizes the status quo, whatever it may be as “logical,” “natural,” and “morally right.” In this manner, social stratification systems function as essentially conservative influences in the society in which they are found.”