Soci 381- Question 2 Flashcards
2.Explain why the functionalists believe that social stratification is universal, desirable, and inevitable in human society, and identify some of the basic criticisms raised by some sociologists (such as Melvin Tumin) in their criticisms of the functionalist theory of social inequality. Ensure that your account demonstrates a knowledge and understanding of the relevant course readings.
Functionalists believe that social stratification is: DUI
Universal: Functionalists see social stratification as a natural and inherent aspect of human society, present across cultures and historical periods.
Desirable: They argue that social stratification is necessary for maintaining social order and stability by ensuring that the most qualified individuals occupy important positions, thus maximizing efficiency and productivity.
Inevitable: According to functionalists, social stratification is an unavoidable consequence of the limited pool of talent and training available to fill critical positions in society.
Criticism of the functionalist theory of social inequality by sociologists like Melvin Tumin includes: ROLS (WIthout the E cause Functionalists can’t Spell)
Role of Qualifications: Tumin challenges the assumption that social stratification ensures the most qualified individuals occupy crucial positions. He argues that this may not always be the case and that the process can perpetuate inequality.
Lack of Social Mobility: Critics argue that functionalist perspectives overlook the limited opportunities for social mobility and the reinforcement of existing power structures within stratified societies.
Systemic Injustices: Functionalists may fail to address how social inequality can perpetuate systemic injustices and hinder societal progress, according to Tumin and other critics.
Oversimplification: Critics suggest that functionalist perspectives oversimplify the complexities of social stratification and its implications, particularly regarding the experiences of marginalized and disadvantaged groups.
Tumin’s criticisms have contributed to the emergence of
alternative theoretical perspectives, such as the conflict perspective, which offer competing explanations for social inequality and challenge the functionalist view.
According to the functionalists, what are the benefits of social stratification?
Functionalists argue that social stratification serves several beneficial functions for society. It ensures that the most important positions are filled by the most qualified individuals, motivates people to work hard and strive for success, encourages specialization and the division of labor, and fosters social cohesion by promoting a sense of order and stability.
What were the basic principles of stratification outlined by Davis and Moore?
Davis and Moore proposed that social stratification is necessary and inevitable for the functioning of society. They argued that every society must have some mechanism for distributing its resources and ensuring that its positions are filled. They outlined three basic principles of stratification: 1) Social inequality is functional because it ensures that the most important positions are filled by the most talented and capable individuals; 2) Social stratification motivates individuals to work hard and pursue education and training in order to attain higher positions; 3) Social inequality promotes social stability by providing individuals with clear expectations about their roles and opportunities within society.
What were some of the basic criticisms raised by conflict theorists (such as Melvin Tumin) in their criticisms of the functionalist theory of social inequality?
Conflict theorists, like Melvin Tumin, criticized the functionalist perspective on social inequality for several reasons. They argued that the functionalist theory fails to adequately explain how social stratification benefits everyone in society, as it often perpetuates inequality and social conflict. Conflict theorists also criticized the assumption that social stratification is based solely on merit, ignoring factors such as race, gender, and social class that can limit individuals’ opportunities. Additionally, they questioned the idea that social inequality promotes social stability, arguing instead that it can lead to resentment and unrest among disadvantaged groups.
What is meant by the term “ascribed characteristics,” and how do they differ from “achieved characteristics”?
“Ascribed characteristics” are traits or statuses that individuals are born with or acquire involuntarily, such as race, ethnicity, gender, and social class. These characteristics are typically beyond an individual’s control and are often used to categorize and stratify people in society. In contrast, “achieved characteristics” are attributes that individuals acquire through their own efforts or achievements, such as education, occupation, and income. Achieved characteristics are generally seen as more indicative of an individual’s merit or abilities, whereas ascribed characteristics are often associated with inequality and discrimination.
What is meant by the term “reverse stratification system”? Provide an example of how this term may be used.
A “reverse stratification system” refers to a social order in which individuals are rewarded and valued based on characteristics or achievements that are typically devalued or marginalized in mainstream society. An example of a reverse stratification system could be a society where individuals with disabilities are highly respected and hold positions of power and influence, while able-bodied individuals face social discrimination and marginalization. This concept challenges traditional notions of social hierarchy and highlights the ways in which social stratification can be fluid and context-dependent.
Answer with 800 words 2.Explain why the functionalists believe that social stratification is universal, desirable, and inevitable in human society, and identify some of the basic criticisms raised by some sociologists (such as Melvin Tumin) in their criticisms of the functionalist theory of social inequality. Ensure that your account demonstrates a knowledge and understanding of the relevant course readings.
Functionalists argue that social stratification is universal, desirable, and inevitable in human society due to its functional necessity for the smooth operation of social systems. According to functionalist perspectives, social stratification serves several essential functions that contribute to the stability and efficiency of society. However, this view has faced criticism from sociologists like Melvin Tumin, who have highlighted various shortcomings and contradictions within the functionalist theory of social inequality.
Functionalists, drawing from the works of scholars like Davis and Moore, contend that social stratification is universal because it is present in all human societies, past and present. They argue that social stratification emerges naturally from the need to organize and allocate societal resources and roles effectively. In every society, certain positions are deemed more important than others, requiring individuals with specific skills and talents to fill them. Social stratification, therefore, arises to ensure that the most capable individuals occupy these crucial roles, promoting the efficient functioning of society as a whole.
Moreover, functionalists assert that social stratification is desirable because it incentivizes individuals to work hard and strive for success. According to this perspective, the promise of higher social rewards motivates individuals to pursue education, training, and skill development. In turn, this investment in human capital benefits society by fostering innovation, productivity, and economic growth. Social stratification, therefore, acts as a mechanism for allocating individuals to roles based on their abilities and contributions, ultimately enhancing social welfare and progress.
Additionally, functionalists argue that social stratification is inevitable because it serves vital functions for social stability and cohesion. By providing individuals with clear expectations about their roles and opportunities within society, social stratification reduces ambiguity and conflict. It establishes a hierarchical structure that organizes social interactions and relationships, minimizing uncertainty and facilitating cooperation. Furthermore, social stratification generates a sense of social identity and belonging, as individuals identify with their respective social positions and roles. This shared understanding of social order fosters solidarity and collective consciousness, promoting social integration and harmony.
Despite these assertions, the functionalist theory of social stratification has faced criticism from various sociologists, including Melvin Tumin, who have raised several key objections. One major criticism is the assumption that social stratification is solely based on merit and individual achievement. Critics argue that social inequality is often perpetuated by factors such as race, gender, and social class, which can limit individuals’ opportunities and access to resources. Additionally, the functionalist perspective overlooks the role of power dynamics and systemic inequalities in shaping social stratification, focusing instead on the perceived benefits of meritocracy.
Furthermore, critics challenge the functionalist notion that social stratification promotes social stability and cohesion. Instead, they argue that social inequality can lead to resentment, conflict, and social unrest, particularly among marginalized and disadvantaged groups. This criticism highlights the potential for social stratification to exacerbate social divisions and disparities, rather than fostering unity and cooperation.
Moreover, critics question the functionalist assumption that social stratification benefits all members of society equally. They argue that the benefits of social stratification are often disproportionately distributed, with privileged groups enjoying greater advantages and opportunities than marginalized groups. This unequal distribution of resources and opportunities can perpetuate cycles of poverty and disadvantage, exacerbating social inequality rather than mitigating it.
In conclusion, functionalists believe that social stratification is universal, desirable, and inevitable in human society due to its functional necessity for organizing and allocating societal resources and roles. However, this perspective has faced criticism from sociologists like Melvin Tumin, who have raised objections regarding its reliance on meritocracy, its implications for social stability and cohesion, and its unequal distribution of benefits. Despite these criticisms, the functionalist theory of social stratification remains a influential framework for understanding the dynamics of social inequality in society.
