Weberian Flashcards
(15 cards)
AO1: Weber on power
- Weber defined power as the ability to make others do what you want, even if they disagree.
- He said that society is structured with some people having more power than others.
- Class Power: (like Marx’s idea of capital). E.g. Business owners control workers through wealth.
- Status: Social respect or prestige. E.g. Religious leaders may not be rich, but are respected due to their role.
- Party: Political influence, not limited to government. E.g. Activists or group leaders (e.g. Greenpeace) can shape laws or policies.
AO3: Weber on power
Strengths:
* Looks at power from more than one angle.
* Explains power beyond wealth.
* Applies well to modern society.
Weaknesses:
* Less focus on conflict and inequality (unlike Marx).
* Hard to measure things like status.
* May focus too much on individuals, not big systems.
AO1: Weber and pluralism
- It is possible to see Weber as being a pluralist.
- This means that power is distributed between a variety of different groups in society in differing amounts.
AO3: Weber and pluralism
Strengths:
* Shows power is shared across different groups.
* Matches how modern societies often work.
Weaknesses:
* Ignores real inequality — some groups have much more power.
* Can be too optimistic about how power is spread.
AO1: Class structure according to Weber
- 1) The propertied class: Have wealth, status, and political power.
- 2) The professional class: Have status, some wealth and political power.
- 3) The petty bourgeoisie: Have less status, wealth, and power, but are important locally.
- 4) The working class: Have low status, wealth, and power. Some may earn more due to in-demand skills, but others have few or no social resources.
AO3: Class structure according to Weber
Strengths:
* More detailed than Marx’s two-class model.
* Includes status and political power.
* Reflects real social differences.
Weaknesses:
* Hard to measure status and power.
* Downplays class conflict.
* Class boundaries can be unclear.
AO1: Goldthorpe
Instead of focusing simply on income and the nature of work, Goldthorpe introduced variables such as employment relationships, conditions of work and life chances into his classifications of class.
AO3: Goldthorpe
Strengths:
* Goes beyond income to include work conditions and life chances.
* Offers a more realistic and detailed view of class.
Weaknesses:
* Can be complex and hard to measure.
* May be less clear-cut than simpler class models.
AO1: Barron and Norris (1976)
- Primary market: Good pay, career jobs (e.g., law), held mostly by middle/ruling-class white men.
- Secondary market: Low-pay, unstable jobs (e.g., retail), where women and ethnic minorities are overrepresented.
- White men maintain control through power and stereotypes, limiting promotions for others and causing inequality.
AO3: Barron and Norris (1976)
Strengths:
* Explains job quality differences clearly (primary vs. secondary).
* Highlights how gender and race affect job access.
Weaknesses:
* May oversimplify by dividing jobs into just two groups.
* Doesn’t explain how to change or improve the secondary market.
AO1: Giddens
- Middle class have recognized skills that help in work.
- Working class mostly sell labor, face job insecurity and are vulnerable to technology reducing their skill value.
AO3: Giddens
Strengths:
* Shows how skills and education help the middle class.
* Explains working-class job insecurity.
Weaknesses:
* Ignores race and gender factors.
* Overlooks bigger power issues.
AO1: Rex & Tomlinson
- Use Weber’s ideas to explain race inequality better than Marxism.
- Ethnic minorities face low class, status, and power, worsened by racism.
- This creates a frustrated, alienated black underclass linked to issues like police racism and riots.
AO3: Rex and Tomlinson
Strengths:
* Explains racial inequality well.
* Links class, status, power, and racism.
* Connects to real social problems.
Weaknesses:
* May ignore minority agency.
* Focuses mostly on black minorities.
* Lacks solutions.
AO3: Overall evaluation of Weberian theory
Strengths:
* Looks at power in many forms (class, status, politics).
* Explains social inequality beyond just money.
* Covers race and gender issues better than some theories.
Weaknesses:
* Hard to measure some ideas like status.
* Can be complicated and unclear.
* Doesn’t focus enough on conflict and economic inequality.
