According to weber, what are the three dimensions of social stratification? Max Weber, a German sociolog, developed the three-component theory for stratification. This is also known as Weberian or the three-class system. Max Weber defined class, status, and party as different ideal types. Weber created a multidimensional approach to social stratification, which reflects the interplay between wealth, prestige, and power.
Weber believed that power could take many forms. Weber argued that power can come in many forms. It can be displayed in the social order through a person’s status, in their economic order through their class and in their political order through the party.
Not only do they have a lot of impact on their own areas, but they also have a lot of influence over other areas.
- Wealth: This includes real property like buildings, lands and farms, houses, factories, and other assets – Economic Condition
- Prestige – The respect that others have for a person or a status position – Situation
- Party : The ability for people or groups, despite opposition from other people, to achieve their goals. Parties
Weber states that there are two dimensions to power: the possess of the power and the exercise the power.
This essay was written just before World War I. It was published in Weber’s Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft in 1922. The original German translation was “Class, Status and Party”, and then re-translated into English as “The distribution and power within the community: Classes Stande, Parties.”
According to weber, what are the three dimensions of social stratification?
Daftar Isi
Possession of power
Weber states that the ability to have power is based on the individual’s control over various “social resources”. The mode of distribution grants the righttied a monopoly over the possibility to transfer property from the sphere as ‘wealth’ to the sphere as ‘capital’, that is, it gives them the entrepreneurial function, and all opportunities to share directly or in indirect returns on capital. (Lemert 2004 :116). These resources could be any and all: they could include land, capital and social respect.
Exercising power
There are many ways to define power, but they all refer to the ability to make your own decisions and share the burden with others. “For instance, we can see that an individual’s ability to do their will against another person is affected by their social status, class, and membership in a group of political people” (Hurst 2007 :202). Weber analyzed the relationships between power and social stratification by analyzing the different ways societies are structured in hierarchical systems that dominate and subordinate using the major concepts.
Power and class
“Class is at its core an economic concept. It is the market position that determines a person’s class position. It is where one is located in the market that directly impacts one’s chances of success” (Hurst 2007 :203). Weber argued that this was due to “unequal access” to material resources. Weber argued that if someone has something you need or want, then this could make him more powerful than you. You are subordinate because he has access to the desired social resource. This is the classic example of the relationship between an employee and employer.
Social power (status, Stande)
“The most common sign of the existence of status groups is in the form
- Endogamy, or restricted social intercourse.
- Sharing of food and other benefits among groups
- Status conventions and traditions
- Monopolistic acquisition of certain economic opportunities, or the avoidance certain types of acquisitions. (Hurst 2007:204)
Respecting someone and viewing him as your social superior will allow him to potentially exercise power over you (since he will respond positively to his commands / instructions). Social status, in this sense, is a social resource because someone may have it and you might not. “Not all power is equal. The typical American Boss and the typical large speculator deliberately give up social honor. “Quite often,’mere’ economic power, especially ‘naked money power, are by no means an acknowledged basis or social honour” (Lemert 2004, 116).
Notable: The German word Stande, plural Stande (English, “status”, or “status group”) can sometimes be left untranslated by Weber[5] to preserve the historical roots of the concept in medieval guilds and professions as well as feudal classifications.
Party power (political power)
Parties are organizations that seek to secure “power within an organisation [or the state]for its leaders in order attain ideal or material benefits for its active members” Hurst 2007:206 This power is related to how the State is organized in modern social system (including the ability to create laws). You can make a difference in the creation of laws. You can influence the decision-making process and you will have power even though you might not be directly exercising it. They are an organizational way to have power through the mechanisms of the state. These include all formally organized parties as well as any group that can influence how power is legitimately exercised through the machinery. “Parties are focused on such goals as getting their programs accepted or developed and gaining influence within organizations. It is evident that they only operate within a rational order in which these goals can be achieved and only when there is a fight for power” (Hurst 2007 :206).
Social action
Social action is directly related to the “political power or party power” when combined with the class situation. The social actions of members of the classes determine the influence of laws. “The direction of interest may change depending on whether social action of a greater or lesser portion of those who are commonly affected by the situation of class, or even an association between them, e.g. a trade union has grown out of that situation, which may be promising for the individual” (Lemert 2004, 117). The general cultural conditions, particularly those of an intellectual nature, are linked to the degree to which “social action” or possible associations arise from the collective behavior of members of a class. It can also be compared to the degree of existing contrasts” (Lemert 2004, 118). Weber states that class-conscious actions are more likely when the connection between the causes of and the consequences of “class situation” is clear or transparent. Individuals will be more likely to take action if they can see the connection between the structure and the outcomes for their lives (Hurst 2007 :204). The likelihood of them rising to action will increase if there are more people in these classes.
Mobility
It is not difficult to see that each person’s class situation limits his ability to rise in the hierarchy and tends keep him within the same class. It is a barrier to rising into a higher social class and a pair of water wings in relation to the classes below…Class type and relations with fellow class members, control over outward resources that are adapted to class situations, and so forth” (Schumpeter 1951, 163-164). Movement between classes in capitalist society is possible. To show people’s ability to rise to higher classes through hard work and ingenuity, the term “The American Dream” was used. “Class composition is constantly changing to the point that there may be completely new families” (Schumpeter 1951,165).
Weber identified four classes: The propertied, the non-propertied, the petit Bourge, and the manual laborer class.