key sociologists

• Marx -The ruling class & the subject class


  Argued that capitalist societies such as Britain were divided into two social classes: the ruling class (bourgeoisie), who owed the means of production & the subject class (proletariat) who were employed by the ruling class to produce goods & services.
• Goldthorpe - Hope-Goldthorpe classification


  Developed the Hope-Goldthorpe scale in order to undertake research into social mobility.

  Distinguished three main classes, which could be further sub-divided into seven occupational classes:

  Service class -> 1. Higher professionals, 2. Lower professionals.

  Intermediate class -> 3. Routine non-manual workers, 4. Small proprietors, 5. Lower-grade technicians.

  Working class -> 6. Skilled manual workers, 7. Semi-skilled & unskilled manual workers.
• Murray - The underclass


  Argued that a new social class, the underclass has emerged below the working class. This consists of the poorest members of society, eg. the unemployed, lone-parent families & chronically sick & disabled people who cannot work. These groups are largely dependent on state benefits.
• Marshall et al - Subjective social class


  Found that many people in their research saw themselves as 'working-class', despite the fact that they were in non-manual/white-collar jobs that many would describe as middle class.
• Savage et all - Subjective social class

  Found that a significant proportion of their respondents were reluctant to identify themselves with a social class at all & concluded that in general the notion of class identity was 'relatively muted
• Weber - Life chances

  Defined 'life chances' to describe how some members of society had much better opportunities than others to achieve the things in life that most people would see as desirabl.

  Including: the chance to live a long & healthy life, the chance to achieve good educational qualifications, the chance to enjoy paid holidays.

  Saw life chances as closely linked to a person's social class background. The higher a person's social class, the greater their opportunities to achieve desirable things in life.
• Rowlingson and Mullineux (Birmingham Commission Report) - Evaluation of the distribution of wealth

  Key findings:

  Wealth inequalities occur in different ways, some people have higher incomes than others, some choose to accumulate wealth rather than spend.

  Wealth affects physical & mental wellbeing, as well as education & employment opportunities.

  Low levels of income reduce the ability to avoid debt &/or accumulate savings.
• Atkinson - Are wealth inequalities based on meritocracy?

  His research reveals that an increasing proportion of national income now comes from inherited wealth, reversing a long-term decline in the importance of inherited wealth going back at least as far as the 19th century.

  Inherited wealth increased from 4.7% in 1977 to 8.2% in 2006.
• Bradshaw - Absolute poverty


  Attempted to develop a budget standard of poverty. This tries to define a minimum acceptable income by calculating what is needed to afford an acceptable living standard based on a coasted list of items deemed as essential.
• Mack & Lansley - The consensual measure of poverty

  Developed a method of measuring relative poverty which involved asking a series of representative focus groups which of a list of items they regarded as 'necessities'. Items that were rated as necessities by 50% or more or respondents were then included in a list.

  The researchers then carried out a living standards survey of a sample of the general population, asking them about how many of these necessities they had to go without because they could not afford them.

  Households that lacked 3 or more necessities were counted as poor & those that went without 5 items were defined as in severe poverty.

  In 2012, 33% of households were defined as suffering from multiple deprivation compared to 14% in 1983.
• Goldthorpe - Oxford Mobility study

  Studied a sample of around 10,000 men & compared the occupational class of sons & fathers.

  Found that in the period after WW2, there had been considerable upward social mobility, though much less downward mobility.

  Suggested that the introduction of free secondary education was not as important as many people believed, he argued that chances in the mid-20th century, there was a reduction in the size of the working class & an increase in the size of the intermediate & service classes.

  This points to an increase in absolute social mobility.
• Marshall - Evaluation of the OMS

  Found evidence of inequality in relative mobility, with someone starting off in the service class having 7x as much chance of ending up in the service class as someone from a working-class background.
• Saunders - Evaluation of the OMS

  Argues that we should focus on absolute rather than relative mobility rates & that the increasing number of working-class children who do well in education & go on to service-class jobs should be celebrated.

  Argues that Goldthorpe's arguments have a left-wing bias, presenting Britain as a class-ridden closed society, rather than highlighting the opportunities presented by capitalism for everyone to achieve.

  Argues that Goldthorpe makes the mistake of assuming that innate ability in the form of intelligence is evenly distributed throughout the social class.

  Argues that children of the service class are likely to inherit higher levels of intelligence & thus have a better chance of achieving service-class jobs because of their ability rather than because they have more opportunities.
• Stanworth & Abbott - Evaluation of the OMS


  Criticised like the OMS for focusing exclusively on men - Goldthorpe claimed there was no need for research on female mobility as in most households men were the main wage-earners & most women took their class position from their husband or father - this ignores the importance of women as wage-earners.

  Argues that women's experiences of mobility are likely to be different from men's.
• Roberts - The NCDS study

  Adapted data from the OMS & the NCDS studies in order to analyse changes in social mobility in the 20th century.

  Found that:

  The working-class continued to contract & the intermediate & service classes to expand, this provided opportunities for upward mobility from the working class.

  The chances of escaping the working-class did not increase greatly - 55% of men originating in the working-class stayed in that class.

  The chances of working-class men rising to the service class did increase significantly from 16% to 20%.

  Women have different patterns of mobility from men.
• Wilkinson & Pickett - Government policy & the social mobility & child poverty commission


  Demonstrates that countries with the highest levels of income inequality also have the lowest levels of social mobility.
• Parsons (Functionalism)


  Argued that in all societies some individuals are better than others than at achieving thing that are regarded as worthy of reward according to the prevailing value consensus.

  Suggests that most people agree that in modern industrial societies, entrepreneurs & executives who successfully run businesses creating wealth & jobs deserve the highest rewards as they contribute most to the smooth running of society.
• Davis & Moore (Functionalism) - Principles of social stratification


  Argued that social stratification of some kind has been a feature of all human societies & therefore concluded that stratification is functionally necessary.

  Argued that the main function of social stratification is to ensure effective role allocation & performance.

  Social stratification does two things:

  1. Allocates the right people to the most important role, ensuring the most important positions in society are filled by the most able by offering them higher rewards.

  2. Ensure that people in these roles perform them to the highest standards. People in key position have many others depending on them so it is important to motivate them to work to the best of their ability for the good of the whole organisation.

  Argue we can tell which positions are most important by two factors:

  1. Functional uniqueness - a position is functionally unique if only one person or a small number could carry out the role.

  2. The degree of dependence of others - eg. many people depend on the consultant surgeon to do their jobs, including junior doctors/nurses who operate under their orders.
• Tumin: A critique of Davis & Moore

  Offered a series of criticisms of Davis & Moore:

  1. It is possible to determine the functional importance of a position? - Which positions are most important is perhaps a matter of opinion rather than fact.

  2. Is there consensus about rewards? - Arguably there is considerable conflict & resentment about the unequal distribution of rewards such as income.

  3. Power & rewards - Can be argued that the high pay of some jobs such as top business executives reflects their power rather than agreement among the rest of society that they deserve it.

  4. The pool of talent - Davis & Moore assume only a small number of people have the talents to perform the top jobs, but many more people may have ability to be doctors, etc but have never been given the opportunity.

  5. Is training a sacrifice? - going to university has its own rewards, such as freedom & the chance to learn what we are interested in.

  6.Motivation - Davis & Moore don't account for people who may be motivated by altruism or a sense of service.

  7. The dysfunctions of stratification - stratification often creates hostility, suspicion & mistrust between different sections of society.
• Saunders (New right) - In defence of inequality


  Doesn't see stratification as an inevitable part of all societies.

  Argues that a society based on social equality would only be possible if considerable force were used, to ensure that everyone did their jobs to the best of their abilities because they wouldn't be motivated by economic rewards.

  Argues that it is right & just that everyone enjoys legal equality, he also supports the principle of equality of opportunity.

  Rejects equality of outcomes - everyone being rewarded in the same way whether they deserve it or not.

  Argues a degree of inequality is desirable & functional in order to motivate people to compete, as long as everyone has an equal opportunity to take part in the competition.

  Critical of attempts of left-wing governments to try & equalise society.
• Murray (New Right) - The Underclass


  Argued that US government policies of providing welfare benefits for groups such as the unemployed & lone-parent families were creating a dependency culture whereby poor people were given no motivation to better themselves, as they were allowed to remain dependent on the state.

  The results was the creation of an underclass of people trapped at the bottom of society.

  The underclass were not only a drain on taxpayers paying for their benefits, but also tended to poorly socialise their children, meaning that they generally underachieved at school & turned to crime.

  Suggested that rising rates of births outside marriage, crime & youth unemployment were all signs that the irresponsible attitudes found in the underclass were infecting certain neighbourhoods in the UK.

  Called for a reduction in welfare benefits & less government intervention to reduce poverty.

  Argued that disadvantages social groups needed to be encouraged to stand on their own feet rather than expecting the state to support them.
• Marx (Marxism)


  The earliest human societies were based on primitive communism where all members worked together to obtain what they needed. As societies evolved & a more specialised division of labour developed, so class relationships began to emerge.

  Capitalism gave rise to two new classes: the bourgeoisie & the proletariat - the bourgeoisie were the ruling class because they owned the means of production that were used to generate wealth. This meant they controlled the political system & cultural institutions that shaped people's ideas, eg. the media.
• Marx (Marxism) - Class conflict


  Argued that thought the bourgeoisie & the proletariat depend on one another, their relationship is also based on conflict or class struggle. While the workers create the wealth of the bourgeoisie, only a fraction of the surplus value that they create comes back to them in wages.

  Argued capitalism suffered from a series of inherent contradictions/problems which would eventually lead to its downfall:

  1. Polarisation of social classes - the divide between the working class & capitalists would grow steadily wider as the bourgeoisie tried to drive down wages & increase profits.

  2. Alienation - workers wouldn't be able to find ay satisfaction/contentment because they would have no control over their own work.

  3. Economic crisis - capitalist economies tend to suffer from periodic crises, eventually a crisis would lead to the collapse of the whole capitalist system.
• Marx (Marxism) - The overthrow of capitalism


  Argued that the working class had the potential to overthrow capitalism because the workers were in the majority & had only to realise their potential by uniting in a revolution.

  They had to throw off 'false class consciousness' & become a class for itself.

  Argued the capitalist class perpetuated an ideology or series of ideas that justified capitalism & its inequalities through the political system, law, mass media, etc.

  Believed a new economic system called communism would replace capitalism where the means of production would be shared by the whole community. Everyone would be expected to contribute something to society 'according to their ability' & instead of wages would receive what they needed in terms of food, etc 'according to their needs'.

  So Social classes based on economic inequalities would disappear & communism would result in a classless society.
• Westergaard & Resler (Marxism) - The continuing importance of social class inequality


  Argued there was little evidence of class divisions in British society disappearing & suggested that such inequalities could only be understood as the result of the way that the capitalism system operates.
• Braverman - The proletarianisation of the middle classes


  Argues that many so-called 'middle-class' workers have in reality been de-skilled. Eg. the skills of clerical workers have been programmed into machines.
• Gramsci (Marxism) - Neo-Marxism

  Developed the concept of hegemony to explain why the working class in western European countries had not risen up in revolution.

  Argued the ruling class rarely need to use force to exert power because they rule through persuasion.

  Hegemony means using cultural & political means to encourage enough of the working class to side with the ruling class & the capitalist system to ensure the stability of the economic system using institutions like the media to control people's minds.

  Argued hegemony is never complete; many of the working class have dual consciousness & are to some degree aware of the inequalities & injustices of capitalism.
• Sklair (Marxism) - Globalisation & transnational corporations


  Nation states now find it difficult to control the activities of TNCs, giving TNCs greater power than national governments. From this perspective, those who control TNCs have become a global ruling class.
• Weber (Weberian theory)


  Saw inequalities in society as based on the struggle between different groups to secure resources such as wealth, but argued that status & power were also resources that could be unequally distributed.

  Sceptical as to whether a revolution resulting in the overthrow of capitalism would occur & suggested that communism might end up being just as oppressive as capitalism.
• Weber (Weberian theory) - stratification


  Suggested there were 3 dimensions to social stratification - social class, status & party
• Weber (Weberian theory) - social class


  Defined a social class as a group who share a similar market situation - members of a social class receive similar economic rewards. Members of a social class also share similar life chances.

  Agreed there was a basic economic division between the property owners & those who sold their labour for wages; argued there was a further division within each of these two groups, eg. owners of big businesses can potentially earn bigger profits than small businesses.

  Suggested that in capitalist societies there are 4 main classes:

  1. The propertied upper class - the wealthy owner of big businesses.

  2. The property-les white-collar workers - have a better market situation than manual workers because of their skills & educational qualification & thus they form a middle class.

  3. The petty bourgeoisie - owners of small businesses. Weber didn't see this class as disappearing/merging into the working class.

  4. The manual working class - has the poorest market situation as they possess neither wealth nor valuable educational qualifications that could be used to improve their market situation.
• Weber (Weberian theory) - Status

  Suggested that in some circumstances people with a common status situation may form a stronger group identity.

  Status refers to the distribution of social honour - how much respect a person receives from others & whether they are seen as superior or inferior to others.

  May be linked to a person's economic or class position but may also derive from other things, eg. ethnicity or lifestyle.

  Argued that while social class may be relatively unimportant for many people as a source of identity, individuals are usually very aware of their status situation & tend to identify with others of a similar status.

  In capitalist societies class & status are closely linked as wealth & income are major sources of status, within social class status distinctions may be important. Eg, in 19th-century British society, there was a divide between the landed aristocracy & the nouveaux riches (those who had recently made their fortunes).
• Weber (Weberian theory) - Party

  Defined parties as groups who were concerned with exercising power or influencing decision-making.

  Broader than conventional political parties, might include groups such as trade unions or pressure groups, eg. Greenpeace.

  Some parties are linked to class interests, eg. many trade unions represent groups within the working class.

  However, pressure groups often draw their members from all social classes.

  Some parties may also represent specific status groups, eg. Stonewall campaigns for the rights of LGBTQ people.
• Abbott (Feminism)


  Criticises Goldthorpe's study of social mobility for completely ignoring women.

  Argues that there is a need to study women's social mobility, as women's experiences of work are different from men - the fact that women actually have lower rates of absolute mobility because they have less chance of reaching top jobs helps to boost men's chances of upward mobility.
• Pakulski & Waters (Postmodernism)


  Argue that in advanced capitalist societies people are now stratified by cultural rather than economic differences, meaning that people now group themselves together according to symbolic values.
• Beck (Postmodernism)


  Argues that the class conflicts of early industrial societies concerned the distribution of wealth, reflecting the fact that many people suffered from poverty & lack of job security.

  Since the 70's, in economically advanced societies, most people have enough to meet their material needs such as food & housing.

  This has led to a focus on new problems & conflicts in what Beck terms 'risk society' - the central problem of society is no longer creating & distributing wealth but of managing the risks created by science & technology.

  Argues that many risks affect everyone, rich & poor alike, & so people's awareness of social class & willingness to act together based on shared class interests had diminished, people have become more individualised & more concerned with their personal interests.

  When people do come together to change things politically, it is more likely to be as part of temporary coalitions, as groups who act together because they have a concern about one issue & then break up when they achieve their goals or lose interest.