Search

Marx and Weber devoted little space to the discussion of class, but the importance of that theme in their work is well known, The present paper contrasts the Marxian argument concerning the foundation of class in the organization of production with Weber's greater emphasis upon status-differences and organized collective action. The discussion distinguishes as Marx and Weber did between modern and pre-modern types of inequality and society. The paper does not attempt to go beyond a comparison between two classic writers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present paper began with an attempt to formalize the Davis-Moore functional theory of social stratification. It was found that the theory could be represented by a static model consisting of two algebraic equations with appropriate constraints on the functions. Then the tools of path analysis were used to evaluate the empirical adequacy of the Davis-Moore and Parsonian functional theories of social stratification as representations of cultural beliefs about stratification. Because of the likely presence of measurement and sampling errors, it was impossible to reject definitely either of the models. However, the estimated path coefficients were more consistent with the Parsonian theory than the Davis-Moore theory. This led to an inquiry into the conditions under which one model would be a better representation than the other. It was argued that the Davis-Moore scheme would provide a more accurate representation of cultural beliefs under conditions of high organizational interdependence whereas the Parsonian framework would give a better representation under conditions of low interdependence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper attempts both to ‘bring up to date’ the author's conception of social stratification as set forth in two previous general papers written in 1940 and 1953, and to broaden the field of consideration by giving special attention to the forces pressing toward equality in various respects, as well as the bases of inequality, The position taken is that the erosion of the legitimacy of the traditional bases of inequality has brought to a new level of prominence value-commitment to an essential equality of status of all members of modern societal communities. Inequalities, among units of societal structure which are essential in such fields as economic productivity, authority and power, and culturally based competence, must be justified in terms of their contribution to societal functioning. The balancing of the respects in which all members of the societal community and many of its collective subunits must be held to be equal with the imperatives of inequality constitutes one of the primary foci of the problem of integration in modern society. A few suggestions about the mechanisms by which this integrative process can operate are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An analytical framework is proposed for the systematic study of occupations in their social environments. This paper explores the ways in which occupations influence and are influenced by specific social contexts, taking into account both subjective and factual elements of the environment. Drawing upon past research on social stratification and current social developments, the framework is systematically illustrated, with emphasis on the dynamic nature of the connective relationships between occupations and publics. Neglected areas of research and theory are derived using the framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has been almost twenty years since Davis and Moore published their famed theory of stratification. During this period, the discussions which it has engendered have been numerous and highly instructive. It is now time to address ourselves to problems which concern the testability of the theory and its experimental validity. This paper reports the results of an empirical study of one of the basic issues raised by Davis and Moore. A major proposition of their theory argues that in the final analysis, social stratification arises in a society because of differential rewards for performance in the social positions therein. These rewards can be of several types. For our purposes, two are of major importance: symbolic and economic rewards, hereafter referred to as "prestige" and "reward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the role of social reform in reducing the degree of inequality of opportunity in a capitalist society. The primary source of the data is a 1962 Current Population Survey, augmented by data from the National Opinion Research Center and other sources. The contribution of inequality of educational opportunity to the correlation between socioeconomic background and income is significant. By far the largest contribution, however, is the direct effect of socioeconomic background. Three immediate objectives of employers seem relevant to the formulation of job-adequacy criteria: the technical efficiency of the productive process, the maintenance of secure top-down control over production, and the legitimation of the authority structure and property relations of the enterprise. Differentiation occurs also within each level of schooling. The correspondence between the social relations of production and the social relations of childhood socialization itself is not, however, confined to schooling. There is strong evidence for a similar correspondence in the structure of family life. Thus criteria of worker adequacy reflect more than the employer's desire that workers be hardworking and capable. They reflect as well the need for acquiescence to the employer's monopolization of power. Yet the perpetuation of economic inequality does not originate with the family or the school, for the structure of home life and of education is but a reflection of the broader social structure.

The ubiquity and the antiquity of such inequality has given rise to the assumption that there must be something both inevitable and positively functional about such social arrangements. Clearly, the truth or falsity of such an assumption is a strategic question for any general theory of social organization. It is therefore most curious that the basic premises and implications of the assumption have only been most casually explored by American sociologists. The key term here is "functionally important." The functionalist theory of social organization is by no means clear and explicit about this term. The minimum common referent is to something known as the "survival value" of a social structure. This concept immediately involves a number of perplexing questions. Among these are: (a) the issue of minimum vs. maximum survival, and the possible empirical referents which can be given to those terms; (b) whether such a proposition is a useless tautology since any status quo at any given moment is nothing more and nothing less than everything present in the status quo.

In the article attempts in Polish sociology to explain social structure and social stratification in socialist society are analyzed. The author claims that an adequate stratification principle or social determinant to explain the distribution of social attributes in socialist society is lacking. The theoretical significance of the concept "socialist intelligentsia" is analyzed and claimed to disguise an eventual social élite. The socialist intelligentsia and the Communist Party are, in theoretical contexts, treated as "black box" entities without regard to internal differentiation, an approach which covers basic social inequalities in socialist society. Problems of social conflict are usually reduced to the technical problem of setting fair wage limits. The thesis of social decomposition or status incongruency is contested and questioned as an indicator of social equality. The author argues that control over the economy might serve as an adequate social determinant in socialist society from which it is possible to derive secondary social attributes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The system of social inequality in American science has been the subject of numerous empirical investigations in the last decades. A persistent theme of such studies has been the attempt to de-mystify the social organization of academic life as supposedly exemplary of the domination of the universalistic-achievement pattern. Investigators have stressed the descriptive-like antecedents and consequences of the reputation of universities or departments as a career contingency for individual scientists. Given the various independent dimensions of the analysis, zero-order correlations were computed as a gross index of the relation among the variables, both for the year 1959 and 1970. For both time periods, standardized regression coefficients are used for art assessment of the predictive utility of each independent dimension when the effects of the remaining independent variables are removed. The model used assumes additive effects for variables in both time periods, this may be useful as a first approximation but it is, of course, conceivable, for example, that the dimension highest degree would interact with other independent variables.

Parsons' conceptual analysis of social stratification is representative of the several well-known functional analyses of stratification. A heated controversy has occurred over the functional approach to stratification, yet almost no analysis of Parsons' contribution appears in the literature. Since Parsons' work on stratification is beset by problems similar to other functional analyses of stratification, a critical analysis of Parsons' approach may also help to clarify some of the problems faced by other functional analyses. Our concern here, however, is particularly with Parsons and specifically with his "Revised Analytical Approach to the Theory of Social Stratification." Our task will be to examine in detail Parsons' revised theory and to offer some comments upon it. Analysis of the theory and comments will be strictly separated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses conflicts in Yugoslavia that occur because of unequal distribution of material values, or because of stratification in participation in their distribution. There is no doubt that in Yugoslavia, there are also many other types of social stratification, sometimes almost as important as stratification on the basis of material wealth. Thus, stratification on the basis of political power is particularly important. These forms of stratification, however, should be discussed separately, and that it is impossible here. However, something will be said about material stratification on the basis of this power. In discussing the material stratification of society, we should distinguish between two types. One type of stratification arises on the basis of differences in the relative shares of material goods that originate in differences in the productivity of labor of individual strata. Thus, some strata produce fewer goods, or goods of lower material value, than others; and therefore, among them arise inequality in property or stratification according to economic position into richer and poorer. What is essential in this type of stratification is that it does not arise on the basis of exploitation.

Work on the emergence and stabilization of stratification in small groups is reviewed. The work on emergence points to three basic conditions underlying the development of stratification in small groups and raises the question as to what mechanism substitutes for some of these conditions in larger systems. Several theories are shown to offer possible solutions. The work on stabilization raises questions as to the nature of the social-psychological processes involved. The relevance of various reinforcement and cognitive consistency theories is considered. Finally, a number of theories concerning the ways stability may be achieved in small groups and larger systems are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In education, as in other respects, Ghana's position has been a lodestar from which other emerging nations chart their course. This pioneer status has attracted many eminent scholars to scrutinize the system at close quarters, and to examine the origins of Ghanaian students. Thus, within three years of the University of Ghana's inception Gustav Jahoda found that 66 per cent of its students came from the top 7 per cent of the working population, while farmers and manual workers were poorly represented. Subsequent scholars have reached similar results, although some have preferred to emphasize long-term trend toward a student body more representative of the population as a whole. Unfortunately, such optimism proves to have been somewhat premature. The debate has also illuminated the variety of interpretations of social stratification. Sociologists take the observed, inequality of life chances as axiomatic evidence of the existence of class differences. They replied that class has a psychological as well as a structural connotation, and he suggests that relative consensus over the value of education itself indicates the classlessness of Ghanaian society.

This article discusses social stratification and intellectual roles in the African American community in the U.S. The author notes the social role of African American intellectuals as symbols of racial worth and as instruments for racial protest and betterment. However, it is noted that part of the symbolic and instrumental function of the African American intellectual is the associated high socio-economic status. African Americans often self-identify with a socio-economic class well above that of the average of the African American community as a whole.

The author presents a logical analysis of the Davis-Moore Theory of stratification. According to the author, a thorough logical analysis of the Davis-Moore theory of stratification is yet to be made. The Davis-Moore article applies the term "stratification" to the system of unequal rewards attached to different positions in a society. It is the existence of such unequal reward systems that the theory tries to explain. Social inequality is said to have certain consequences; it is a determinant which insures that the most important positions are conscientiously filled by the most qualified persons. The qualified version of the Davis- Moore theory introduces qualifications stemming from the differential impact of the family system. The problematic core of the Davis-Moore theory lies in the postulate that different positions have unequal functional importance for the preservation or survival of the society. The postulate of unequal functional importance means that for any given society, the performance of some roles contributes more to the preservation or survival of that society than the performance of other roles.

Presents letters to the editor published in the February 1959 issue of the journal "American Sociological Review." Comment on the theory of stratification; Usage of the theory of stratification in social science.

The article seeks to demonstrate that there are certain fundamental flaws in the way the multidimensional approach to stratification is developed in recent years. Authors of the essay discuss the rank model on its own terms. Successive problems are raised and discussed and they then attempt to show that these damaging internal problems stem from the basic stance taken by rank theorists. The dimension of income is frequently taken as unproblematic as it fits the requirement of having a ratio scale. However, it is likely that individuals do not see income in terms of a ratio scale, but rather they create equivalence classes with respect to income. Having established that the study of rank dimensions themselves should involve study of how they enter into an individual's consciousness it would appear to follow that the same should apply to the study of status inconsistency. But it is seldom made clear whether the relationship between status inconsistency and some behavior is independent of the individual's perception of that inconsistency.

This article discusses the significance of dominant and substitute profiles of cultural orientations for the analyses of social stratification. It is opined that highly differentiated societies show dominant cultural orientations and alternative orientations. To be more precise, societies have a discoverable dominant profile of cultural orientations and also discoverable substitute profiles. It is opined that some kind of stratification will be found in all societies. Stratification, as well as other aspects of social structuring, will vary in accord with the tendency of a particular segment of the social system to follow the values and norms which express the dominant orientations, or to behave in terms of norms which express one or more alternative orientations. Further, all societies find some or the other kind of phraseology within a range of possible phraseologies of basic human problems. This assumption, according to the author, has been derived partly from a logical, deductive, consideration of possible variation and partly from a study of cultural systems themselves.

The article presents reply to James P. Pitts in response to his comments on group disorders in the public school by Sociologists Pual Ritterband and Richard Silberstein. The authors say that in "Group Disorders in the Public Schools," they set out to understand and explain the distribution of two related sets of events in the high schools of New York City. The article was not set out to explain inequality in the schools nor did it attempt to describe the ways in which schools sort people into the general social structure. The authors did not and do not feel that every sociologist who deals with questions of race has to recapitulate the history of inequality. On the most primitive empiricist level, the authors were able to show that the distribution of non-political disorder was relatively random in the New York City High School context during their study. They deny inequality in school resources and achievement. They demonstrated that more money is spent on black pupils in New York City than Puerto Ricans or Whites, though the way the money is spent makes no dent in the educational problem.