Max Weber Approach

Social Stratification Theory

Max Weber created his own theory of social stratification, defining social differences through
three components: class, status, and power. Here, class is a person’s economic position based on
both birth and individual achievement.
Status is one’s social prestige or honor either influenced or not influenced by class; and, lastly,
power is the ability for someone to achieve their goals despite the resistance of others.
Although Weber was influenced strongly by Marx’s ideas in his theory of social stratification, he
rejected that communism was a possible outcome, arguing that such a system would require an
even greater level of negative social control and bureaucratization than capitalism (Brennan,
2020).
Weber responded to Marx’s theory of the proletariat by outlining more class divisions. Weber
claimed that there are four main classes: the upper class, white-collar workers, petite bourgeoisie,
and the manual working class. These effectively parallel the class structures used by many
sociologists.
Weber treated the three sources of socioeconomic status: class, status, and power, as separate but
interconnected sources of power, each effectinng social action differently. This view differed from
that of Marx, who saw class as the definitive factor in stratification.
For example, while Marx considers both the managers of corporations, who control firms they do
not own; and low-level workers to be members of the proletariat, Weber differentiates these groups
in terms of their economic position.
According to Weber, people could have varying degrees of class, status, and power. For example,
a wealthy immigrant family composed of software engineers may have high economic class, but
little power or status. Similarly, a religious saint may yield high status and exert immense influence
on society, but have little in the way of economic worth (Brennan, 2020).
 Conflict Theory

Max Weber’s theories in sociology can be categorized under conflict theory, though his
perspective on conflict is more multifaceted than Karl Marx’s. While Marx primarily focused on
economic class struggle as the main source of societal conflict, Weber broadened the concept to
include other sources of stratification and conflict.

Weber identified three intertwined sources of conflict:

1. Class: Similar to Marx, Weber recognized economic factors as sources of conflict. However,
his understanding of class was more gradient-based, seeing it as a continuum rather than a
strict dichotomy between proletariat and bourgeoisie.

2. Status (or Stand in German): Weber introduced the idea of “status groups,” which are
groups formed around cultural and social factors like honor, prestige, religion, and race. These
status groups can have their own sources of conflict separate from purely economic struggles.

3. Party/power: Weber recognized the political dimension as another arena for conflict.
“Parties” in Weber’s theory are groups organized to influence various societal institutions,
including politics.

For Weber, conflicts arise from the interplay of these three dimensions, making societal conflicts
more complex than just a product of economic class struggle. While Weber’s theories fall under
the umbrella of conflict theory in sociology, his approach offers a nuanced understanding of the
sources and arenas of societal conflict.

Social Action Theory

Weber sought to highlight how behavior in the social sphere is related to individuals'” sense of
cause and effect, or their instrumental rationality. In essence, Weber believed that human beings
adapt their actions according to social contexts and how these actions affect the behavior of
others.

Four Types of Social Action

Max Weber didn’t just believe that individuals shape society – societies encourage certain types
of motive for action – for example, the religion of Calvinism encouraged people to save money,
which eventually led to capitalism

Weber believes that there are four ideal types of social actions. Ideal types are used as a tool to
look at real cases and compare them to the ideal types to see where they fall. No social action is
purely just one of the four types.
1. Traditional Social Action: actions controlled by traditions, “the way it has always been done”

2. Affective Social Action: actions determined by one’s specific affections and emotional
state, you do not think about the consequences

3. Value Rational Social Action: actions that are determined by a conscious belief in the
inherent value of a type of behavior (ex: religion)

4. Instrumental-Rational Social Action: actions that are carried out to achieve a certain
goal, you do something because it leads to a result

Within the scope of social work philosophy and practice, social action is an action that
endeavours to promote social change and progress by altering existing social structures and
social relationships, adjusting social policies, and reforming social institutions. The process of
social action is utilised to address issues and problems of public concern.