The tendency of society is toward stability, harmony, or equilibrium, in other words toward balance. It is argued that if abilities were inherent, there would be no need of a reward system. 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. Scarcity of talent is not an adequate explanation of stratification. Stratification is not positively functionally for a society–it is dysfunctional.
Talented and trained individuals are scarce because acquisition of training and skills requires people to be sufficiently motivated to pursue them. These critics have suggested that structural inequality inherited wealth, family power, etc. 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. Scarcity of talent is not an adequate explanation of stratification. Societies are complex systems of interrelated and interdependent parts, and each part of a society significantly influences the others. Views Read Edit View history. Davis and Moore argue like this:
thhe The answer they come up with is this: The tendency of society is toward stability, harmony, or equilibrium, in other words toward balance. 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.
Why do the higher positions carry more status and rewards? Filling the positions within a social structure is a basic need of any society.
Moore in a paper published in Davis and Moore argue like this: The distribution of positions cannot be understood merely by achievement but achievement itself is conditioned by ascription of status. 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.
Main thesiss of structural functionalism: The Davis—Moore hypothesissometimes referred to as the Davis—Moore theoryis a central claim within the structural functionalist paradigm of sociological theory, and was advanced by Srtatification Davis and Wilbert E. Views Read Edit View history. Davis and Moore argue that the most difficult jobs in any society are the most necessary and require the highest rewards and compensation to sufficiently motivate individuals to fill stratiflcation.
High income, power, prestige of a particular position are due to functional importance or scarcity of meritoracy personnel. Rather it draws a high income because it is functionally important and the available personnel is for one reason or another scarce. The universality of stratification does not mean it is necessarily beneficial or inevitable.
Stratification is not positively functionally for a society–it is dysfunctional. Society must distribute its members among the various positions in society.
Davis and Moore claimed that their theory was applicable to all forms of society. It is argued that if abilities were inherent, there would be no need of a reward system.
It must solve the problem of motivation at two levels: Inept progeny of rich tycoons took over companies while intelligent children of workers went uneducated. There must be rewards to provide inducements and those rewards must be distributed unequally to assure that all positions get filled. Stratiifcation itself can be though of as implying a set of life chances and obstacles to social mobility.
We must also consider the problem of deskilling and the control of workers see Braverman –the detailed division of labor. People have to be motivated to fill certain positions and perform their duties. These critics have suggested that structural inequality strayification wealth, family power, etc.
The hypothesis is an attempted explanation of social stratificationbased on the idea of “functional necessity”. There is in stratification systems artificial limits to the development of whatever potential skills there are in society.
Social positions have varying degrees of functional importance. 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.
Davis–Moore hypothesis – Wikipedia
This argument has been criticized as fallacious from a number of different angles. Once the roles are filled, the division of labour functions properly, based on the notion of organic solidarity advanced by Emile Durkheim.
As a structural functionalist theory, it is also associated with Talcott Parsons and Robert K. Summary of the Davis-Moore Thesis: