Two Conflicting Views On Social Class

Abstract

Social Class is a main part of society, but there are two opposing views of how to determine it in society. The order theorists view occupation as the main factor in determining social class. Conflict theorists place power as the main force that establishes social class in society. In this paper the strengths and weaknesses of each view will be discussed. What is the best view to determine social class, and using that view what is the best way to fix social class problems in real life?

Introduction

Social classes exist in most societies, but the issue arises on what is used to determine social class and how social class effects the individual as well as society. Eitzen, Zinn, & Smith (2017, p. 127) says “Sociologists… disagree on the meaning of social classes for people.” Two conflicting perspectives in sociology is the order theorists and conflict theorists. Order theorists view society as social systems which establish order in society (Eitzen, Zinn, & Smith, 2017, p. 17). Conflict theorists view society as a power struggle that allows for social change and the distribution of power (Eitzen, Zinn & Smith, 2017, p. 17). These two perspectives have two opposing views of sociology and disagree on social class as well.

Body

Strengths

Order theorists focus on the occupation of the individual in determining social class. The occupation of an individual determines where in the social class someone will end up. The individual’s occupation will mainly determine their lifestyle as people who make more money because of what they do are afforded opportunities of higher classes. This view is supported by the findings of Landecker (1960) in which he states that “… it is advantageous to split a population into “white collar” or “blue collar”. Another view, points to vertical social mobility to the opposition of Marx’s conflict theory of social class. This view is supported by Gordon (1949) where he says class distinctions did not exist in America because of the belief of virtually unlimited social mobility. In America, the belief was that anyone could jump to the next class and be in a better occupation that what they were. This view supports the order theorists view of sociology in that occupation is again the main focus of the idea of social class. Conflict theorists on the other hand stress the importance of power in determining where people end up in the class system (Eitzen, Zinn, & Smith, 2017, p. 128). It is the powerful who are in the higher classes and their subordinates who make up the lower classes. Those who have power can determine how the other social classes are made up. This assertion is backed by Lachmann (1990) in that “the fate of producing classes remains largely in the hands of elites.” With this view of social class, the elite group determines how the classes underneath them will live.

Weaknesses

Each view of social class points out the weaknesses of the other theory. Conflict theory states that the main weakness of the order theory of social class is that they understate the centrality of power in determining where people end up in the class system of society (Eitzen, Zinn, & Smith, 2017, p. 128). Conflict theorists stress the importance of power and order theorists focus on occupation as the basis of social class. According to Crompton (1989), “the occupational structure should not be regarded… as the raw material upon which the investigators’ class scheme can be imposed.” Crompton says that the use of occupation solely as the classification of social class should not be done. The main weakness of the order theory is the concentration on occupation and the forbearance of the power struggles of the owners and their subordinates. On the other hand, the weakness of the conflict theory is the concentration of power as the creation of social class. The conflict theory focuses on power too much and ignore other factors that make up social class. This concentration of power as the sole factor in determining social class is the conflict theorists main weakness. A combination of the two views will produce a more realistic model of social class and how it is determined.

Analysis

Using the strengths and weaknesses as stated above, the order theory would be the best way to determine social class. Even though the order theory ignores the idea of power between the elites and the working class, the use of occupation in determining social class is the best option. Occupation of a person will determine their income, where and how they live, and where they rank in comparison to other members of society. The conflict theory places too much view on power on social class. While this is useful in determining who has the power and who doesn’t, it doesn’t paint the whole picture of what the different social classes are like the order theorists view of social class does.

Ethical Situation

Throughout the course book In Conflict and Order conflict theorists mainly point to the problem of society rather than addressing the actions to fix the problem. Order theorists on the other hand, focus on the system in creating the problems. Order theorists recognize there is a lesser privileged class in society, but in terms of why there is such a class can be placed on the system. The lesser privileged class is comprised of people who are unskilled and haven’t finished high school in some cases. According to Eitzen, Zinn & Smith (2017, p. 128) the culture of poverty locks individuals in the lesser privileged class into this position. This limits the individual’s vertical mobility in the social class system. The term lesser privileged class expresses the fact that this group of people doesn’t have all the privileges afforded to them compared to other classes. The term lesser privileged takes away the opportunity to place value on individual life, and exposes the real reason why there is a class with less opportunities to be in higher classes. The lesser privileged class has less privileges than higher classes which limits there chance to move up in social class. Order theorists view on social class would therefore be of utilitarianism. They would view the problem facing social class would be on the system of the government in ignoring the lower class.

How Should Issue be Addressed

The above issues should be addressed by allowing individuals opportunities offered to higher social classes. More programs for the uneducated should be implemented so that the members of the lesser privileged class can educate themselves to give them the opportunity to move up vertically in the social class system. Since occupation is the main focus of order theorists in determining social class, getting the lesser privileged class in higher positions in society will ultimately increase their social class giving them more happiness and opportunity in society.

Conclusion

I believe that this lesser privileged class should be helped in society to move up the rungs of social class. This class in my opinion is stifled by society as a whole and I think that extra help would allow them to obtain a better occupation in society and improving their life. The reason why they are lesser privileged is due to the fact that they have less career opportunities due to lower levels of education. Whereas higher socio-economic classes have more opportunities for higher paying jobs due to their higher education and backgrounds. By educating this lesser privileged class, society will afford them the same opportunities as the higher earning social classes.

References

1. Crompton, R. (1989). Class Theory and Gender. The Journal of Sociology, 40(4), 565-587. Retrieved from SVSU JSTOR database.
2. Eitzen, D. S., Zinn, M. B., & Smith, K. E. (2017). In conflict and order: understanding society. Boston: Pearson.
3. Gordon, M. (1949). Social Class in American Sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 55(3), 262-268. Retrieved from SVSU JSTOR database.
4. Lachmann, R. (1990). Class Formation without Class Struggle: An Elite Conflict Theory of the Transition to Capitalism. American Sociological Review, 55(3), 398-414. Retrieved from SVSU JSTOR database.
5. Landecker, W. (1960). Class Boundaries. American Sociological Review, 25(6), 868-877. Retrieved from SVSU JSTOR database.