Explain the functional perspective on social stratification.
Basketball is one among the highest-paying professional
sports. there's stratification even among teams. as an example , the Minnesota
Timberwolves distribute rock bottom annual payroll, while the l. a. Lakers
reportedly pay the very best . Kobe Bryant, a Lakers shooting guard, is one
among the very best paid athletes within the NBA, earning around $30.5 million
a year (Forbes 2014). Even within specific fields, layers are stratified and
members are ranked.
In sociology, even a problem like NBA salaries are often
seen from various points of view. Functionalists will examine the aim of such
high salaries, while conflict theorists will study the exorbitant salaries as
an unfair distribution of cash . Explain the functional perspective on social stratification. stratification takes on new meanings when it's
examined from different sociological perspectives—functionalism, conflict theory,
and symbolic interactionism.
In sociology, the functionalist perspective examines how
society’s parts operate. consistent with functionalism, different aspects of
society exist because they serve a needed purpose. what's the function of
social stratification?
In 1945, sociologists Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore
published the Davis-Moore thesis, which argued that the greater the functional
importance of a social role, the greater must be the reward. the idea posits
that stratification represents the inherently unequal value of various work.
Explain the functional perspective on social stratification. Certain tasks in society are more valuable than others. Qualified people that
fill those positions must be rewarded quite others.
According to Davis and Moore, a firefighter’s job is more
important than, as an example , a grocery cashier’s. The cashier position
doesn't require an equivalent skill and training level as firefighting. Without
the motivation of upper pay and better benefits, why would someone be willing
to rush into burning buildings? If pay levels were an equivalent , the
firefighter might also work as a grocery cashier. Davis and Moore believed that
rewarding more important work with higher levels of income, prestige, and power
encourages people to figure harder and longer.
Davis and Moore stated that, in most cases, the degree of
skill required for employment determines that job’s importance. They also
stated that the more skill required for employment , the less qualified people
there would be to try to to that job. Certain jobs, like cleaning hallways or
answering phones, don't require much skill. the workers don’t need a university
degree. Other work, like designing a transportation system or delivering a
baby, requires immense skill.
In 1953, Melvin Tumin countered the Davis-Moore thesis in
“Some Principles of Stratification: A critical appraisal .” Tumin questioned
what determined a job’s degree of importance. The Davis-Moore thesis doesn't
explain, he argued, why a media personality with little education, skill, or
talent becomes famous and rich on a reality show or a campaign trail. Explain the functional perspective on social stratification. The
thesis also doesn't explain inequalities within the education system or
inequalities thanks to race or gender. Tumin believed stratification prevented
qualified people from attempting to fill roles (Tumin 1953). for instance , an
underprivileged youth has less chance of becoming a scientist, regardless of
how smart she is, due to the relative lack of opportunity available to her. The
Davis-Moore thesis also doesn't explain why a basketeer earns many dollars a
year when a doctor who saves lives, a soldier who fights for others’ rights,
and an educator who helps form the minds of tomorrow will likely not make
millions over the course of their careers.
The Davis-Moore thesis, though open for debate, was an early
plan to explain why stratification exists. The thesis states that
stratification is important to market excellence, productivity, and efficiency,
thus giving people something to strive for. Davis and Moore believed that the
system serves society as an entire because it allows everyone to profit to a
particular extent.
Conflict theorists are deeply critical of stratification ,
asserting that it benefits just some people, not all of society. as an example
, to a conflict theorist, it seems wrong that a basketeer is paid millions for
an annual contract while a public school teacher earns $35,000 a year.
Stratification, conflict theorists believe, perpetuates inequality. Explain the functional perspective on social stratification. Conflict
theorists attempt to bring awareness to inequalities, like how an upscale
society can have numerous poor members.
Many conflict theorists draw on the work of Marx . During
the nineteenth-century era of industrialization, Marx believed stratification
resulted from people’s relationship to production. People were divided by one
line: they either owned factories or worked in them. In Marx’s time, bourgeois
capitalists owned high-producing businesses, factories, and land, as they still
do today. Proletariats were the workers who performed the manual labour to
supply goods. Upper-class capitalists raked in profits and got rich, while
working-class proletariats earned skimpy wages and struggled to survive. With
such opposing interests, the 2 groups were divided by differences of wealth and
power. Explain the functional perspective on social stratification. Marx saw workers experience deep alienation, isolation and misery
resulting from powerless status levels (Marx 1848). Marx argued that
proletariats were oppressed by the money-hungry bourgeois.
Today, while working conditions have improved, conflict
theorists believe that the strained working relationship between employers and
employees still exists. Capitalists own the means of production, and a system
is in situ to form business owners rich and keep workers poor. consistent with
conflict theorists, the resulting stratification creates class conflict. If he
were alive in today’s economy, because it recovers from a protracted recession,
Marx would likely have argued that the recession resulted from the greed of
capitalists, satisfied at the expense of working people.
Symbolic interactionism may be a theory that uses everyday
interactions of people to elucidate society as an entire . Symbolic
interactionism examines stratification from a micro-level perspective. This
analysis strives to elucidate how people’s social standing affects their
everyday interactions.
In most communities, people interact primarily with others
who share an equivalent social standing. it's precisely due to stratification
that folks tend to measure , work, and accompany others like themselves, people
that share their same income level, educational background, or racial
background, and even tastes in food, music, and clothing. The built-in system
of stratification groups people together. this is often one among the explanations
why it had been rare for a royal prince like England’s Prince William to marry
a commoner.
Symbolic interactionists also note that people’s appearance
reflects their perceived social standing. Housing, clothing, and transportation
indicate social station , as do hairstyles, taste in accessories, and private
style.
In 1945, sociologists Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore
published the Davis-Moore thesis, which argued that the greater the functional
importance of a social role, the greater must be the reward. the idea posits
that stratification represents the inherently unequal value of various work.
Certain tasks in society are more valuable than others (for example, doctors or
lawyers). Qualified people that fill those positions are rewarded quite others.
According to Davis and Moore, a firefighter’s job is more
important than, for instance, a grocery cashier’s job. The cashier position
doesn't require similar skill and training level as firefighting. Without the
motivation of upper pay, better benefits, and increased respect, why would
someone be willing to rush into burning buildings? If pay levels were an
equivalent , Explain the functional perspective on social stratification. the firefighter might also work as a grocery cashier and avoid the
danger of firefighting. Davis and Moore believed that rewarding more important
work with higher levels of income, prestige, and power encourages people to
figure harder and longer.
Davis and Moore stated that, in most cases, the degree of
skill required for employment determines that job’s importance. They noted that
the more skill required for employment , the less qualified people there would
be to try to to that job. Certain jobs, like cleaning hallways or answering
phones, don't require much skill. Therefore, most of the people would be
qualified for these positions. Other work, like designing a transportation
system or delivering a baby, requires immense skill limiting the amount of
individuals qualified to require on this sort of labor .
Many scholars have criticized the Davis-Moore thesis. In
1953, Melvin Tumin argued that it doesn't explain inequalities within the
education system or inequalities thanks to race or gender. Tumin believed
stratification prevented qualified people from attempting to fill roles (Tumin
1953).
According to structural-functionalists, stratification and
inequality are inevitable and beneficial to society. The layers of society,
conceptualized as a pyramid, are the inevitable sorting of unequal people. The
layering is beneficial because it ensures that the simplest people are at the
highest and people who are less worthy are further down the pyramid, and thus
have less power and are given fewer rewards than the top quality people at the
highest . The Davis-Moore hypothesis, advanced by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E.
Moore during a paper published in 1945, may be a central claim within the
structural functionalist paradigm, and purports that the unequal distribution
of rewards serves a purpose in society. Inequality ensures that the foremost
functionally important jobs are filled by the simplest qualified people. In
other words, it is sensible for the CEO of a corporation , whose position is
more important functionally, to form extra money than a janitor working for an
equivalent company.
There are several problems with this approach to
stratification. First, it's difficult to work out the functional importance of
any job, because the accompanying specialization and inter-dependence make
every position necessary to the general operation. consistent with this
critique, the engineers during a factory, for instance , are even as important
because the other workers within the factory to the success of a project. In
another example, a grade school teacher within the U.S. earns $29,000 per annum
, whereas a National Basketball Association player can earn the maximum amount
as $21 million per annum . Are basketball players more essential to society
than teachers? Are basketball players more functionally important than
teachers? Explain the functional perspective on social stratification. In 2009, comedian Jerry Seinfeld earned $85 million. Do his earnings
demonstrate his contribution to society? If NBA players or famous comedians went
on strike and decided to not work, most of the people wouldn't notice. However,
if teachers, bus drivers, nurses, cleaners, garbage collectors, or waitresses
stopped working, society would close . Thus, functionalism are often critiqued
on the idea that there's little connection between income and functional
importance.
Second, functionalism assumes that the system of
stratification is fair and rational, which the “best” people find yourself on
top due to their superiority. But in real world , the system doesn't work so
easily or perfectly. for instance , some would argue that former U.S. president
George W. Bush wasn't the neatest or most politically talented individual, but
he was well connected and born at the highest of the stratification system (white,
male, wealthy, American), and thus was elected to an edge with great power—the
U.S. presidency.
The Legal Field: Lawyers and judges tend to figure very long
hours and are often subject to high stress situations; for instance , as they
determine the fate of individuals’ freedom and therefore the allocation of huge
sums of cash . Functionalists hold that the high pay and standing granted to
lawyers acts as incentive to motivate qualified people to simply accept these
drawbacks.