Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Untitled Document
Untitled Document
Untitled Document
Gloria Nzuzi
Professor Coulter
Soc 210
September 12 , 2017
Theory Paper
people in groups are categorized and ranked by their social status. Social stratification
is set up and grouped in many different ways such as age, gender, class, race, etc. in
all types of societies. Due to the different groups that set up the social stratification in a
society, there are a number of different systems of social stratification as well. Those
different systems include slavery, caste, and social class. In the social class the ranks
are based off of power and wealth and can change throughout the course of ones life.
This system of stratification is clearly different than the other two because it states that
one is in control of where they stand while the other two are in a way forced upon. In
functionalist view, while in another it is toxic and unjust as in the conflict theoretical
perspective, or in the view of symbolic interactionism is created and upheld from the day
The theory of structural functionalism is built on the thought that a society is unified
through its different structures and functions. In the case of social stratification it is clear
that from a functionalist perspective this is very much necessary for the society to
hand with social stratification, it fails to fully explain any change the system of social
class. The theory of functionalism supports the fact that some occupations deserve
better rewards than others and encourages that those rewards are divided unequally
between those of a society. While unconsciously accepted by most, this does come
across as unfair to many. That is not to say that this theory is false or in any way wrong
but this is where we should recognize the limit to how much this theory can explain and
justify social class. Applying this view to social class may lead one to ask how does the
different social classes work together to function? What are the dysfunctions in social
Unlike structural functionalism which supported the view of social class, the conflict
theory disagrees with the prevalence of social inequalities between classes. With the
conflict theoretical perspective one is able to look between the lines and see the unfair
and fixed positions of social class. A strong statement by Melvin Tumin is made which
states that the more rigidly stratified a society is, the less chance does that society
have of discovering any new facts about the talents of its members. This statement
enhances the thought that social class is far fixed to the point where although it can be
changed,...its social structure shapes and sustains inequality(Ferris and Stein). This
Nzuzi 3
eye opening theory would generate the thoughts of questions such as, How are those of
the upper class maintaining those positions? How does one not only change their class
but the system of social class as well? Is there a sense of alienation towards those
underneath the working class? What would it take for those at a disadvantage in the
When looking into the social class through the lenses of symbolic interactionism we
allow ourselves to dig deeper and not just look into the widescale view of things. With
consciousness which leads to assumptions and judgements that could place someone
in a specific position. This is not to say that where we end up is strictly controlled by our
interactions, but through those we help maintain them. In the case of any change to our
social class, it is evident that those day-to-day interactions would change or have a
that explains social class in structural functionalism and conflict theory. This is to be true
because it gives reason into how social class is maintained in the view of functionalism
and explains advantages and disadvantages that would appear due to everyday class
consciousness in conflict theory. A few questions one would ask while looking at this
perspective would be, what meaning would social class have to someone of the upper
class as opposed to someone of the underclass? How in specifics does our interactions
affect our perspective on social class? What is the correlation of an individual to their
social class?
Nzuzi 4
The best way to understand social class is not by choosing a specific theory while
ignoring the others but instead to view that system in all three of the perspectives. This
is very much so the best way because if everything were to be viewed in the
perspective of a functionalist, social class would be seen as justified in every way and
there would be no explanation for any continuous change in that system. On the other
had, the view of the conflict theory sees social class as rigid and unfair and explains that
change is essential to help benefit those a part of the lower social class. Lastly while
looking through the lenses of symbolic interactionism we take into consideration of the
not the system as a whole but the individuals who make up those social classes. Each
theory fails to truly explain social class as a whole on its own, but with that each theory
does contain a strong and helpful viewpoint. Structural functionalism elucidates the
needs of the society and how everything is necessary and works for the greater good,
on the contrary it is unsuccessful in explaining social inequality in any other context than
it is needed. Conflict theory makes up for that by addressing the social inequality within
the social classes while explaining that change will always occur in a society and is a
key point into it well. On the other hand symbolic interactionism makes up for the other
day to day lives in consideration while examining their effect on social class. All in all the
three major theories helps us to see social class in different views that come together to
Works Cited
Book
Ferris, Kerry, and Jill Stein. Chapter 1 & 7. The Real World: an Introduction to
Article