TA: John Paulo Sousa
Tues and Thurs 11:30-12:50 in Rozanski Hall 103 (ROZH 103)
Goals: This is a substantive content course on inequalities,
especially class, status and power inequities. It is an examination
of the persistent bases of social inequalities. These include class
(economic class, wealth, income, ownership), status (prestige, honor)
and power (political activity, political influence). The two extremes
are complete inequality with no social mobility versus a utopian society
which might take the form of a “meritocracy” with high levels
of social mobility or might move to greater “distributive justice”
( “a just civilization” Bakker 1993). A rigid stratification
system is characteristic of most traditional societies throughout human
history. Different terms are used to describe pre-capitalist societies
(e.g. Max Weber’s patrimonial-feudalism versus Marx’s Feudal
Mode of Production.) There were often organized religious justifications
for inequalities ( Durkheim 1995 [1912]).
We will examine class, status and power in terms of such ideas as class
consciousness and false consciousness (class for itself versus class
in itself). Most attention will be focused on contemporary industrial
societies, but there will be some attention to historical societies
(e.g. China, India, Indoensia) and comparative-historical sociological
generalizations. Some theorists resist using the term “stratification”
since it implies a non-Marxist perspective and reserve “class”
to the study of capitalist societies exclusively. Also, it is common
to just say “class” when, in context, the speaker may mean
class, status and power taken together. The term “inequality”
is a convenient shorthand for class, status and power and stratification
systems generally. (Use of the term “inequality” is meant
to be somewhat neutral in terms of the theoretical paradigm or “paradigmatic
theory” being used.)
Some of the readings will examine sex/gender and race/ethnicity in
terms of strata in society. These can be either independent or dependent
variables in a positivist theory concerning class, status and power.
Does gender cause inequality or does inequality cause gender differences
(e.g. at the workplace)? Does ethnicity cause inequality or does inequality
cause ethnic differences in class, status and power? The three major
Factors ( class, gender and ethnicity) are often used in social science
in various ways to study various dependent variables (e.g. propensity
to commit a crime, likelihood of being convicted of a crime, probability
of getting divorced, etc.)
Theories of class (Marx) or class, status and power (Weber) are central
to sociology as a discipline. There is, surprisingly, very little work
on class, status and/or power per se in economics. In political science,
of course, power is a major factor.
Texts: There are two required texts and they are
bound together to reduce the cost. Both books may be available as used
books at the textbook store or on line.
Grabb, Edward G. 2002. Theories of Social Inequality. Fourth Edition.
Scarborough, Ontario: Nelson Thomson Learning, Thomson Canada Ltd.
Nakhaie, M. Reza (ed.) 1999. Debates on Social Inequality: Class, Gender
and Ethnicity in Canada. Toronto: Harcourt Canada. (Some articles have
wider implications than just Canada.)
Recommended Texts (widely available)
Bakker, J. I. (Hans). 1993. Toward A Just Civilization: A Gandhian
Perspective on Human Rights and Development. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’
Press.
Macionis, John J. and Linda M. Gerber. 2002. “Part III: Social
Inequality” Sociology: Fourth Canadian Edition. Toronto: Prentice-Hall.
[It is also helpful to review Part I.]
Suggested Future Reading (helpful for term papers
in other courses; will be referred to from time to time in lecture as
Curtis et al. 2004):
Curtis, James, Edward Grabb and Neil Guppy (eds.) 2004. Social Inequality
in Canada: Patterns, Problems and Policies. Fourth Edition. Toronto:
Prentice-Hall.
Grades: Your final grade will be calculated as a
result of three exams.
Exam I (33.33%) True-False & Multiple-Choice ( 50 questions, in
class)
Exam II (33.33%) same (This is the Mid-Term)
Exam III (33.33%) same, plus one ESSAY (worth one third of the exam)
FINAL
There will not be any other essay requirement in this course. However,
if you miss Exam I or Exam II for any reason you can make it up by writing
a Critical Book Review of any book (or set of four articles) referenced
in the texts. (Your CBR could also be of Curtis et al. 2004.) The CBR
is not just a book report but must analyze a conceptual problem and
have a “thesis statement” that is defended ( 12 pages or
3500 words, including all apparatus, e.g. bibliographical references).
T.A. Assistance: The T.A. will be available to assist
you to interpret the text. He will help you to understand where you
may have gone wrong on Exam I or Exam II. He will hold regular office
hours and be available through email. Please direct your questions to
John Paulo Sousa first. His office is Johnson Hall Room 018 (basement).
Only after having consulted him should you come to see the professor
during office hours (TBA). Please do not send unnecessary emails.
Office Hours TBA Please do not just drop by as you
happen to be walking around.
Web: The web has many, many resources available on
the classical and contemporary authors we will be briefly discussing
in lecture. Moreover, each of the topics has a great deal of material
that is worth looking at through refereed academic journals. But please
try to avoid the “spam” material that also appears in the
form of popular opinion, unless you are able to take a certain critical
distance from such writing. For example, popular press items are not
the best source of information.
Schedule of Classes (Syllabus in the narrow sense):
Week One
Jan.06: Introduction to the Class; Syllabus handed out and choice of
texts justified.
08: Introduction to Theories of Inequality.
Read: Grabb 2002: 3 - 8. [Hereafter, G: 3-8] and Nakhaie 1999: Debate
2: 29 - 50 [Hereafter N: 29-50.]
Week Two: Marx, Marxism, Marxist Theory ( Critical Super-Paradigm,
Ps)
13: Marx and Marxist Theory of Class (G: 9 - 24)
15: Marx and Marxist Theory of Class (G: 24 - 36)
Week Three: Weber, Weberianism, Weberian Theory (Interpretive Ps)
20: Weber and Weberian Theory of Class, Status and Power (G: 37 -
55)
22: Weber and Weberian Theory of Class, Status and Power (G: 55 - 70)
Week Four: Durkheim, Durkheimianism, Durkheimian Theory (Positive Ps)
27: Durkheim and Structural Functionalist Theory of Stratification
(G: 71-92)
29: Comparison of Marx, Weber and Durkheim (G: 90-94, 111-122)
Week Five: The Davis & Moore Thesis: Neo-Durkheimian S-F (Pr)
Feb.03: Structural Functionlist Theory of Stratification (cont.) (G:
95-111)
05: S-F Theory: the Davis & Moore Thesis & Tumin’s Critique
(N:11-28)
Prof. Bakker will be going to Vancouver for the Couch-Stone Conference.
Week Six: Contemporary Theorists on Inequality
10: Dahrendorf, Lenski (G: 123-145)
12: Poulantzas, Wright, Parkin, Giddens (G: 146- 203)
Week Seven: Winter Break! (There are no classes this week.)
17:
19:
Week Eight: Class and Gender/Sex
24: Class & Gender/Sex (G: 204-211; N: 115-226)
26: Violence, Class & Gender/Sex (N: especially188-203)
Week Nine: Class and Ethnicity/Race
Mar.02:Class & Ethnicity/Race (G: 212-216; N: 324-338)
04: Class & Ethnicity/Race (N: 227-323)
Week Ten: The Major “Research Paradigms” ( Pr )
09: The Major “Perspectives” Today (G: 217-222)
11: Grabb’s Synthesis “Summary Portrait” (G: 223-230)
Week Eleven: CHS and the Case of Java
16: Comparative-Historical Sociology (CHS) & Inequalities
18: Bakker’s Research on “Patrimonialism” (Weberian
Ideal Type Model, ITM)
Week Twelve: SI and Bourdieu’s Habitus
23: Symbolic Interaction (SI) & Inequalities
25: Bourdieu’s Distinctions (habitus, field and doxa in France)
Week Thirteen: Telos or Utopia?
30: Utopian Societies in the Future? Is a classless society possible?
Gandhi’s Telos of a Just Civilization (satyagraha; Martin Luther
King jr., Nelson Mandela, Fritz Schumacher’s Small is Beautiful,
etc.)
April 01: Hegel and Neo-Hegelian Philosophies of History and Social
Change?
Is there an “end goal” (telos) to history?
Do homo sapien sapiens have “species being”? (philosophical
anthro.)
What does evolutionary psychology teach about all this?
Prof. Bakker will be going to Cleveland, Ohio, for the NCSA Conference
(The North Central Sociological Association publishes Sociological Forum.)
Week Fourteen: Exams
April 5 - 19: Final Exam
April 9 = holiday
Format of Exams:
All Exams will have a number of True or False questions. Remember that
a statement is only true if it is entirely true. Thus, for example,
it is common for those who wish to make a rhetorical point to make a
number of true statements before they make the statement which they
want to convince others is true.
True or False?
____1. Canada is a very large country geographically, although there
are regions where very few people live. Much of the urban core of Canada
is located between Windsor and Quebec City, although there are also
a number of other major cities such as Vancouver. The Prime Minister
of Canada was Jean Chretien but is now Paul Martin. The capital of Canada
is Toronto.
You will immediately recognize that Toronto is not the capital of Canada.
But that requires a certain amount of expertise. As a person living
in Canada you are well acquainted with the capital region being Ottawa-Hull.
But many Americans or Europeans would not necessarily know that. Is
this a fair question? It is if you know some very basic facts about
Canada.
Multiple-Choice
____2. The theory of stratification concerns inequality. However, when
we use the term “stratification” it tends to imply that
the theoretical approach ( paradigm ) is in the Neo-Durkheimian Structural-Functionalist
tradition ( research paradigm ). Such an approach would definitely not
include:
a. Marxian and Neo-Marxian analysis of economic class (e.g. Erik Olin
Wright)
b. Weberian and Neo-Weberian analysis of class, status and power ( e.g.
A. Giddens)
c. Feminist analyses of the impact of class on gender/sex
d. All of the above are not, strictly speaking, S-F approaches to “stratification”
in the technical sense ( stratification as a technical term, tt ).
e. a, b and c do not have to be referred to as contributions to the
study of inequality since they all clearly deal with the existence of
strata in society.
The correct answer is “d”. But knowing that the term “stratification”
if often read to imply a Neo-Durkheimian Structural-Functional research
paradigm ( Pr ) is a matter of detailed knowledge, a bit like knowing
the capital city of Canada is not Toronto.
