Lecture #7: Weber

stratification

weber argues that this should be extended to include elements of prestige such as status and power. structures of authority can change institutions such as change in leadership

what does weber do to marx’s ideas

he does not refute them but round out his ideas. an extension of this is class status power

weber thought that this type of revolt was unlikely

proletariat

life chances were dependent on three central factors

class (economic),status (sociocultural), party (political)

class according to weber

refers to a group of people who can be found in the same economic or market situation

three central factors/influences that had a different effect on social action and can be employed to exert power

class (economic), status (sociocultural), “party” (political)

does social influence depend on wealth

no, these factors are not dependent

class according to weber

refers to a group of people who can be found in the same economic or market situation. belong to a group of people that can control resources in a similar way. have similar living circumstances. its not the same as a community of like minded individuals though, there might not be solidarity and instead a sense of interconnectedness

status according to weber

refers to a group of people who share a similar style of life. this group of people may or may not be rich but they share similar prestige or similar experiences of social life. this is linked to a social set of behaviours expected of members of a given class.

status: monopoly

“if you have to ask how much it costs, you cant afford it”.

party according to weber

refers to a group of people who are organized around a particular political order such as type of government. political parties often but not always represent values of a particular class or status group. focused on the attainment of power.

sociology according to weber

“sociology seeks to formulate type concepts and generalized uniformities of empirical processes. this distinguishes it from history, which is oriented to the casual analysis and explanation of individual actors, structures and personalities possessing cultural significance”. basically looking at society as intricate and there is no one exact path

history and sociology

focused on understanding unique events and actions that individuals have at particular times and places. the two go hand in hand.

a methodological tool for comparative sociology

ideal types

ideal types

sociologists create logically constructed concepts that help them understand the empirical world. concepts are not the empirical world but they are tools to gain a better understanding of reality. dream partner example: we put them in a box based off of our ideal type in a romantic partner. also formed by one sided accentuation of one or more points of view. not always positive or utopian. never fully found in the real world

accentuation

exaggerated forms of the outside world that are only useful when applied to the outside world to see how the world is similar or not similar from the ideal type

abstract models

ideal types are not meant to describe any real world example exactly, but rather they focus on key elements that could be present in an actual case.

traditional authority

based on long standing beliefs, customs and practices. common in pre industrial societies. an example would be the royal family. authority is granted on blood line.

charismatic authority

based on the extra ordinary powers of individuals. charismatic leaders exercise authority over a whole society and are dependent on people following them. can be good or bad but most importantly, has followers and the support of their followers. they are influential, persuasive, and trusting. could be examples such as hitler and jesus. least stable form of authority

rational legal authority

based on the assumed legitimacy of societies. lays and rules and the rights of leaders to act under the rules to make decisions and set policies. common in modern democracies, power is given to people who are elected by voters.

bureaucracies

an impersonal, highly structured system where rules and roles dominate, and personal relationships or emotions are minimized. focus is efficiency, consistency, and a clear division of labor. can be considered a specific case or rational legal types of authority

features of bureaucratic systems

laws, standardized procedures, strict rules. large number of desks or offices. division of labor and responsibility. tasks are clearly defined. clear hierarchies. impersonal professional interactions between employees.