Max Weber Sociology

Dimensions of social stratification

Max Weber (2012) paints a more complex picture of social stratification than Marx.

But what exactly is 'social stratification'?

Well…

And if you are wondering what a 'hierarchy' is…

A social hierarchy ranks according to privilege. Those who are most privileged are at the top of the pyramid, and at the bottom are those who are least. Here, privilege can take the form of greater social and economic resources and opportunities awarded to different (stratified) groups or individuals.

To summarise, social stratification looks between whom social inequalities exist within society. It breaks down the hierarchical structure of society.

Who do you think sits at the top of the social hierarchy?

How does social stratification relate to Max Weber?

Karl Marx and Weber both looked deeply at the structure of society, and they both acknowledged that the structure of society is stratified according to social class.

However, unlike Marx, Weber developed this idea of social class further and considered that there were other, non-economic factors in how people are divided. These factors are called dimensions of social stratification.

Weber looked at the following dimensions:

1. Social class

2. Status

3. Power (and authority)

So let's explore these 'dimensions' of social stratification a little further. Let's look at the size, scale and influence of each.

Max Weber and social stratification

Max Weber saw society stratified in 3 main ways: social class, status, and power. Unlike Marx, who focused solely on social class and framed it in terms of a power struggle, Weber looks at how each 3 affect life chances.

Social class

For Weber, social class is defined by both economic (i.e. wealth) and non-economic factors. Social class is one of these non-economic factors, as it relates to life chances. Life chances can vary greatly by the occupation we hold.

In other words,

So, what affects our life chances? Great question...

Well, Weber believed that our life chances are tied greatly to our occupation due to the levels of income different occupations hold. Consequently, non-economic factors like the skills and qualifications people hold affect the types of occupations we can have and the relative wealth that comes from these.

As a result, Weber saw there being 4 main social classes:

1. Property owners
2. Professionals -- e.g. doctors, lawyers, engineers, judges, accountants, consultants
3. Petty bourgeoisie -- e.g. shopkeepers, independent contractors
4. Working class -- e.g. factory workers, cleaners, delivery drivers, retail assistants

The higher social class you are, the greater the opportunities provided to you.

Status

Alongside social class, Weber saw status as another form of social stratification impacting our life chances.

Weber argues that:

1. Different groups have different levels of status.
2. Status is not tied to class or income.

Why is status important?

Status is important as it can affect our life chances. Status can impact our health, family life, education, and our experience with the criminal justice system.

Power

Another important form of social stratification according to Weber is power. For Weber, the influence of 'power' is shown in how it affects the life chances of others.

For Weber, people have power insofar as they can get other people to behave as they want them to. He highlighted 2 main ways in which people exert power:

1. Through force and coercion, e.g., a military invasion or the threat of violence
2. Through authority – i.e., when people willingly agree to do something. People agree because they see this exercise of power as legitimate.

As a result, Weber saw power greatly tied to authority. He argued that there are 3 types of authority:

1. Traditional authority
2. Rational-legal authority
3. Charismatic authority

Take a look at this table explaining the source of each type of authority.

Max Weber and social stratification: criticisms

Weber certainly provides a fuller picture of the different ways in which society is stratified. However, there are a few criticisms that have been levelled his way.

Likewise to Marx, Weber does not consider how the following affect life chances, and how these shape social inequalities:

1. Gender
2. Ethnicity
3. Geographical differences

Social class: similarities between Karl Marx and Max Weber

As alluded to earlier, when it comes to social class, there are similarities between Marx and Weber. After all, Weber was a huge admirer of Marx's work! Let's recap what some of those similarities are:

1. For both, the structure of society is stratified according to social class.

2. Like Marx, Weber believed the main social class distinctions were between those who did and did not own the means of production, e.g. factory/property/company owners and the workers within them. In short, “ownership and non-ownership of property is the most important basis of class divisions” (Wilson, Kidd and Addison, 2017, pg.25).

Social class: differences between Karl Marx and Max Weber

There are several key differences between Karl Marx's treatment of social class and Max Weber's (2012). Let's outline them below:

1. Weber saw both economic and non-economic factors influencing class position. I.e., skills, qualifications; status; power.

2. Weber saw class divisions as four-fold. This refers to the four social classes of property owners, professionals, petty bourgeoisie and working class.

3. Weber believed social class was one form of social stratification, alongside status and power. All three were important to understand as they each combine to affect our life chances.

4. Weber argued that as capitalism expands, so do the middle classes. This, rather than Marx's account that capitalism would inevitably lead to class conflict and a revolution.

5. Marx believed that social class-based revolution was inevitable - it was only a matter of time. Weber (2012), on the other hand, argued that it was not inevitable.

6. Political power doesn't just come from economic power (i.e. class position). Political power is tied to authority, according to Weber.

Types of social action according to Max Weber

Social Action was another significant contribution Weber introduced to sociology. In fact, it became its own theoretical approach – Social Action Theory. Social Action Theory is also known as Interactionism. Why?

Instead of just focusing on how institutions and large social structures affect us as individuals and groups, Weber believed that people and their (inter)actions with others contribute to the shaping of society.

In fact, it is the meanings we attach to our actions and how they may affect others that are important to understand. If you're intrigued, I highly recommend checking out our Social Action Theory article.

But, briefly:

A little confusing, I know, but, hopefully, explaining the 4 types of social action will make it a little clearer.

1. Instrumentally rational action

This is an action performed to achieve a goal efficiently.

2. Value rational action

This is an action performed because it is desirable or expresses a value.

3. Traditional action

This is an action that is done out of a custom or habit.

4. Affectional action

This is an action by which you express emotion(s).