This means that, as Davis and Moore say: a position does not bring power and prestige because it draws a high income.Rather it draws a high income because it is functionally important and the available personnel Social inequality is thus an unconsciously evolved device by which societies insure that the most important positions are conscientiously filled by the most qualified persons.And, more importantly what about those aspects of a class society that do not operate like merit systems? Scarcity of talent is not an adequate explanation of stratification.
If you believe that this courseware violates your copyright, please contact us.
Lumen Learning provides a simple, supported path for faculty members to adopt and teach effectively with open educational resources (OER).
One of the problems of modern societies, which Durkheim sought to remedy through state action, was the chaotic and inefficient ways in which labor forces were trained and rewarded.
Inept progeny of rich tycoons took over companies while intelligent children of workers went uneducated.
Davis and Moore claimed that their theory was applicable to all forms of society.
Critics of the Davis-Moore viewpoint argued that it did not make much sense in non-competitive societies--for example feudalism, where all positions are distributed not by merit but by birth.This functionalist theory of stratification was first discussed by the authors in 1945 in the article, Some Principles of Stratification which appeared in the American Sociological Review and was later extended and refined in Any society must distribute its individuals and induce them to perform the duties of their positions.It must solve the problem of motivation at two levels: to instill in the proper individuals the desire to occupy certain positions and, once in these positions the desire to perform the duties attached to them Modern medicine, for example, is within the mental capacity of most individuals, but a medical education is so expensive and burdensome that virtually none would undertake it if the position of M. did not carry a reward commensurate with the sacrifice.In the United States, it is perfectly clear that some groups have greater status, power, and wealth than other groups.These differences are what led to social stratification.On the issue of functional importance, Davis and Moore state: two factors...determine the relative rank of different positions.In general those positions convey the best reward, and have the highest rank which (a) have the greatest importance for the society and (b) require the greatest training or talent.In this manner, social stratification systems function as essentially conservative influences in the society in which they are found.As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 79,000 lessons in math, English, science, history, and more.Stratification is not positively functionally for a society--it is dysfunctional.Social stratification systems function to provide the elite with the political power necessary to procure acceptance and dominance of an ideology which rationalizes the status quo, whatever it may be as logical, natural, and morally right.