Stratification
1. Summary
People get political, economic, and social positions while living in society. Through these three things, people are divided into layers and placed in society. The person who saw the hierarchical grouping of these three positions is Max Weber. These are the criteria people that become stratified.
1.POWER (political)
2.PROPERTY (economical)
3.PRESTIGE (socialistic)
In these layers, the positions of three elements may be uneven. For example, although a person's reputation is low, he or she may have higher incomes than a person with a high reputation.
In terms of Structural-Functionalism, tiering and inequality argue that it is inevitable and beneficial to society. On the other hand, Conflict theorists argue that society is benefiting from the poor. And argue that stratification is not the inevitable, but people making and maintaining it.
2. What I was interested
I have studied Stratification in high school compared to theory of rank of Marx. I learned that the stratification was easy to explain about today's pluralism, such as status inconsistencies, which is very interesting. Also, it was interesting to divide layers through three elements.
3. Discussion point
About stratification, which of your views is closer to the point of view of the Structural-Functionalism and the conflict theory? Also, what do you think about inequality? I want to talk about this.
Mine is closer to conflict theory than structural-functionalism. In structrual-functionalism, they think even inequailty has their role in society. But to me, it sounds like they acknowledge inequality related to stratification. Like the article said, inequality is worldwide problem. South Korea is not a exception, so we obviously need to attenton to that. But I think a individual can’t make inequality to be lessen. I think the governments and the countries have to take a big role in solving this problem.
ReplyDelete