From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from ” https: People have to be motivated to fill certain positions and perform their duties. Rather it draws a high income because it is functionally important and the available personnel is for one reason or another scarce. And , more importantly what about those aspects of a class society that do not operate like merit systems? The tendency of society is toward stability, harmony, or equilibrium, in other words toward balance.
Some rewards are not functionally determined at all, but rather must be understood within the context of wealth ownership and institution of inheritance. Society is seen as a self-regulating system and all of the constituent elements of a society must contribute to maintaining this state of harmony. Secondly, Davis and Moore do not clearly indicate why some positions should be worth more than others, other than the fact that they are remunerated more, claiming, for example, that teachers are equally, if not more, functionally necessary than athletes and movie stars, yet, they receive significantly lower incomes. Criticism of the Davis-Moore Thesis: Critics of the Davis-Moore viewpoint argued that it did not make much sense in non-competitive societies–for example feudalism, where all positions are distributed not by merit but by birth.
Social positions have varying degrees of functional importance.
The inequality of rewards corresponds to what Davis and Moore call functional importance of the position. Moore in a paper published in Views Read Edit View history.
These critics have suggested that structural inequality inherited wealth, family power, etc. Davis and Moore argue like this: For example, wealth, education, professional associations, etc. Functionalism social theory Sociological theories. Criticism tesis the Davis-Moore Thesis: Once the roles are filled, the division of labour functions properly, based on the notion of organic solidarity advanced by Emile Durkheim.
The Functionalist View of Stratification:
Davis and Moore state: There must be rewards to provide inducements and those rewards must be distributed unequally to assure that all positions get filled. Why are some positions in society higher than others? Hence, every society, no matter how simple or complex, must differentiate persons in terms of both prestige and esteem, and must therefore possess a certain amount of institutionalized inequality.
Critics of the Davis-Moore viewpoint argued that it did not make much sense in non-competitive societies–for example feudalism, where all positions are distributed not by merit but by birth. The distribution of positions cannot be understood merely by achievement but achievement itself is conditioned by ascription of status. Tumin states see Levine, p. Some rewards are not functionally determined at all, but rather must be understood within the context of wealth ownership and institution of inheritance.
Inept progeny of rich tycoons took over companies while intelligent children of workers went uneducated.
Retrieved from ” https: With particular respect to the issue of social stratification or social inequality, the functionalist view argues that social inequality is necessary because it fulfills vital system needs. It is argued that if abilities were inherent, there would be no need of a reward system.
To remedy this problem, Durkheim advocated using public schooling to sift and winnow children according to their native abilities, educationally prepare them according to their potential–what later became known as tracking–and see that they ended up in jobs that paid accordingly.
Davis–Moore hypothesis – Wikipedia
Class itself can be though of as implying a set of life chances and obstacles to social mobility. It must solve the problem of motivation at two levels: Not all positions are equally pleasant, equally importantor equal in terms of required talent and ability.
As a structural functionalist theory, it is also associated with Talcott Parsons and Robert K. We must also consider the problem of deskilling and the control of workers see Braverman –the detailed division of labor.
This argument has been criticized as fallacious from a number of different angles.
Each part of a society exists because it has a vital function to perform in maintaining the existence or stability of society as a whole; the existence of any part of a society is therefore explained when its function for the whole is identified. Societies are complex systems of interrelated and interdependent parts, and each part of a society significantly influences the others.
So, inequality is universal.
Filling the positions within a social structure is a basic need of any society. This is accomplished through the unequal distribution of rewards. Davis and Moore claimed that their theory was applicable to all forms of society.