Karl Marx and Max Weber both agreed that capitalism generates alienation in modern societies, but the cause for it were both different. For Marx it is due to economic inequality in where the capitalist thinks that the workers worth nothing more than a source of labour, that can be employed and dismissed at will. This causes the workers to be dehumanised by their jobs (in the past, routine factory work and in the present-day, managing demands on a computer), which leads to the workers finding slight satisfaction and feeling incapable of improving their situation. It was noted by Marx four methods on how capitalism alienates workers. The first, is alienation from the function of working.
Karl Marx’s Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 presented through his writings this kind of alarming condition which he called the Estranged Labor. He further discussed what merely the cause of an alienated labor. In the text, Political economy is further explained through the level of usefulness of such worker and that shows to very poor quality of work but it is opposite in reality hence the workers shows their ability to produce high quality and meaningful products. Private property is the primary cause why alienated labor exists. Without private property, workers or laborers would not also exist.
The financial, housing, social, clothing, diet and education situations of both of these social classes can be compared – they are complete opposites. “Peasants lived a life of working hard to get things, while nobles were given what they wanted.” [c] A peasant was not allowed to wear the colours/fabrics of what the nobles wore. If so, they would be either fined or put in jail. Nobles let the peasants do their farming work, whilst obtaining the jobs that can be considered “important”, such as judges, council workers. The noble’s houses are the complete opposite of peasants – they were large, and they did not have to share with farm animals.
3. Compare and contrast how different theorists emphasize rational vs. nonrational dynamics underlying and motivating social action. Next, compare and contrast how different theorists emphasize the individual vs. the collective in explicating the basis of social order. 4. Consider the three iconic classical theorists in sociology: Marx, Weber, and Durkheim.
1. The two sociological perspectives that I will be writing about are conflict theory and symbolic interactionism. There are two conflict theories of a social problem Marxist Conflict theory and Non-Marxist Conflict theory. The importance of using social perspective when studying the Marxist and Non-Marxist conflict theories allows individuals a better understanding of the conflicts we face in average life such as class inequality, alienation, and conflicts in competing values in social groups. As for symbolic interactionism, a social problem is created through social interaction from definitions and labels individuals place on particular things.
Capital-in-general as used by Bourdieu does indeed involve power, but it is a distinctive kind of power. It involves a set of different kinds of claims that can be made on the actions of others. For instance, social capital consists of claims to reciprocity and solidarity from particular others. What is fundamental to social capital, however, is that explicit claims are normally excluded from the performances within which they are made, so that the power over the actions of others is radically distinct from exercises of power utilizing the discourse and apparatus of command (Bourdieu 1986:241). Hence, this study relies on CMA to understand the power of culture on the connection between social structure and health behaviour regarding the prevention of diseases (Singer 1995:81; Morsy 1996 as quoted by Singer 2004:26).
Sociology is defined as the study of humans, societies and social groups within societies. It is also said to be the ‘science of society’. The subject of sociology tries to help us to understand why we act in certain ways and that what may come across as inevitable may perhaps be shaped and moulded by historical events and processes. It is important as it helps us gain knowledge of the world in which we live and why certain things happen within this world. Patterns may also develop from the study of sociology.
In the Division of Labor in Society, Emile Durkheim determines how societies form social cohesion. Durkheim finds that social cohesion works differently in “traditional”, otherwise primitive, and modern societies. To better explain this, Durkheim turns to a concrete source of morals or rules that is found in all societies: law. Durkheim notes that one the differences of traditional and modern societies is that they differ in their types of law, repressive or penal law and restoratory or civil law. Durkheim argues that these sources are inherently different from each other and are characteristic of the types of societies that they belong to.
Present at least two different sociological approaches to social inequality and discuss these approaches with reference to a concrete problem area of contemporary relevance. Social inequality can be found in various aspects of society, the question is if inequality is only caused by the lack of economical estate or if other reasons are underlining it. This essay argues how Max Weber distinguishes between social class and strata and how one often leads to the other. Furthermore, it presents Pierre Bourdieu’s notions of habitus, capital and fields as an explanation of how people can achieve different social statuses within different fields because of their capitals. At last, the two different sociological approaches to social inequality is used to analyze the case of non-traditional students at Australian universities and how they are socially disadvantaged compared to traditional students because of their lack economical support, language skills, educational skills and social relations.
The latter consists of the base structures needed for the said societies production and operation; structures such as transport, energy and healthcare are part of the infrastructure. Institutions such as the justice system, military and family, among others, make up the superstructure. Marx viewed the 'state' as being in a relationship with society as one of control and subservience, respectively, therefore creating conflict. In Marx's theory of the state, he postulates the terms of mode/means of production, where the labour force are oppressed by the elite and owners of the production. He conferred that there were different stratifications, which formed economic bases, creating an ideological superstructure which consisted of juridical and