Conflict Theory assumes that those who have wealth perpetually try to increase their wealth at the expense and suffering of those who do not have wealth. It is a power struggle that is most often won by the wealthy elite and lost by the common person of common means. Power is the ability to get what one wants even in the presence of opposition. Authority is the institutionalized legitimate power. By far the Bourgeoisie, or wealthy elite (royalty, political, and corporate leaders), have the most power. Bourgeoisie are the “Goliaths” in society who often bully their wishes into outcomes. The Proletariat are the common working class, lower class, and poor members of society. According to Marx (see diagram below) the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat cannot both have it their way, and in order to offset the wealth and power of the Bourgeoisie the Proletariat often rise up and revolt against their oppressors (the French, Bolshevik, United States, Mexican, and other revolutions are examples).
Figure 2. The Core Issues in the Conflict Theory
© 2009 Ron J. Hammond, Ph.D.
In fact, Marx and Weber realized long ago that society does have different classes and a similar pattern of relatively few rich persons in comparison to the majority who are poor -- and the rich call the shots. Look below at the photographic montage of homes in one U.S. neighborhood that were run down, poor, trashy, and worth very little. They were on the west side of this gully and frustrated many who lived on the east side, who were forced to drive through these “slums” to reach their own mansions.
Photo Montage of Haves and Have Nots in a US Neighborhood
© 2009 Ron J. Hammond, Ph.D.
The Conflict Theory has been repeatedly tested against scientifically derived data, and it repeatedly proves to have a wide application among many different levels of sociological study. That is not to say that all sociological phenomena are conflict-based. But, most Conflict Theorists would argue that more often than not Conflict assumptions do apply. Functionalist theory
This theory assumes that certain roles in society must be carried out for society to function. The higher rewards for performance ensure that these roles will be filled. So I guess I am saying the higher or more important the role and the more skill needed for the role, the higher the reward should be. So there should be a ratio that's appropriate between the job or skill and the reward. For example, why spend the money and effort on education to be a brain doctor if one won't be rewarded handsomely. What if a burger flipper was paid the same as a nurse. Would a high school kid flip a burger or clean sewers if the pay was the same. A weakness of the theory is that not everyone has equal access to resources such as education. And also they cant explain why rewards don't always fit the social value of the role. Why should movie stars get paid millions when a teacher is paid less. Why do professional athletes get paid more than a member of the armed forces (military)?
But Functionalists also look at two types of functions: manifest and latent functions. Manifest Functions is are the apparent and intended functions of institutions in society. Latent Functions are the less apparent, unintended, and often unrecognized functions in social institutions and processes.As you can already tell, Functionalism is more positive and optimistic that Conflict Theory (the basis for much criticism by many Conflict Theorists). Functionalists realize that just like the body, societies get “sick,” or dysfunction. By studying society's parts and processes, Functionalists can better understand how society remains stable or adjust to destabilizing forces when unwanted change is threatened. According to this theory, most societies find that healthy balance and maintain it (and others collapse, as many have in the history of the world).
No comments:
Post a Comment