![]() ![]() ![]() The first approach’s proponents see stratification as a necessary phenomenon, ensuring the proper functioning of society. Overall, the primary difference between fundamentalism and the theory of conflict lies in each model’s views regarding the nature of stratification. However, if the system functioned differently, and there were no oppression in the first place, these people would have enough social opportunities to live without welfare. For example, millions of dollars are allocated annually to funds providing welfare and assistance to people of color in need, such as TANF. They address these issues with limited social reforms, which allegedly serve to create an illusion of progress in terms of equality (Schaefer, 2013). The conflict theory proponents state that today’s policy-makers acknowledge potential challenges caused by continuous oppression. As in other situations, discrimination can be based on various factors, but gender and race remain the key aspects contributing to the disparities. In this case, stratification is viewed as an instrument, which facilitates the abuse of less fortunate social classes (Schaefer, 2013). This philosophy considers history as a continuous struggle between the oppressed and oppressors. Nevertheless, the functionalist perspective does not address unjustified stratification systems, in which people are ascribed to a certain status because of aspects they cannot control, such as race or gender.Īt the same time, the conflict theory perspective utilizes the ideas of Karl Marx as its foundation. This system of rewards responds to the demand for suitable candidates for key positions. It is said that the discussed phenomenon is a form of society’s self-regulatory mechanism, as it wants to ensure that all positions and wealth are distributed according to people’s talents and skills.įunctionalists believe that social inequality serves as a motivation for people to continue their development and attain higher statuses. Proponents of the functionalist perspective argue that stratification is universal (Schaefer, 2013). The problem of stratification has been an area of intense interest for sociologists, and there exist several dominant models, which aim at explaining it. In this case, it becomes difficult for people to move outside their assigned stratum, thus impairing a nation’s social mobility. Gender and racial disparities make it difficult for certain groups to realize their potential in terms of achieved social status. Schaefer (2013) outlines the difference between one’s ascribed and achieved social status. All three elements form a complex stratification framework, as they influence one another both directly and indirectly. Sociologists discern three aspects of discrimination, which are gender, race, and class. According to Schaefer (2013), this phenomenon exists on several levels, from personal relationships between individuals to global inequality patterns. Social stratification is a complex, multi-faceted issue, which is caused by several negative aspects. ![]() The purpose of this essay is to explore social stratification in light of the aforementioned approaches and their key ideas. The issue can be examined from various perspectives and the points of view of functionalism and conflict theory. People around the world experience severe discrimination, which is detrimental to society’s overall development. Despite considerable efforts toward global equality in recent years, society, in general, is still prone to stratification. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |