Functionalism Blog Post #8

Functionalism is one of the three major theories of Sociology. Introduced by Emile Durkheim "functionalism" can be defined as a theory that interprets each part of society in terms of how it contributes to the stability of the whole society (sociology.about.com). This term is like looking at society from the  bigger perspective and society is made up of institutions. The way this idea balances out is by the facts and institutions, everyone is dependent upon one another. Emile Durkheim explained the theory as a "living organism." He also said the society functions are inter-related parts that work together, and the institutions are a basic response to a basic "need in life." The balance of this theory comes from social homeostasis which is the stability to coordinate the institutions. To explain this theory take for example the government, it provides free education up until high school for children in turn the family pays taxes to keep it all running smoothly. When a problem arises adjustments are made to keep the society running smoothly. There are also two types of functions in the Functionalist theory; latent functions, and manifest functions. A manifest function can be attending church the latent function to that could be helping the people understand their reason for going. Manifest functions are easier to identify than latent functions because of the approach. Functionalism is the social change in a society which isn't desirable to people because they don't like change.

Crossman, Ashley. "Everything You Need to Know About Functionalist Theory." About.com Education. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

Free writing Blog: what determines social class

I often wonder how your social class is determined. Many Americans are considered to be middle class Americans, but how? Why is such a small percent deemed upper class just because of money and why do they control "the means of production" when the middle class workers who run their corporations keep their money flowing in. Why do they put up with it?
Karl Marx and Max Weber analyzed the issue of determining social class. Karl Marx called it the "means of production." Money determines your wealth and what social class you obtain. He believes the capitalist own the means of productions and the proletariat people ran the means of production but did not own it. He argued the distinctions among people like clothing, speech, education, and a paycheck determine why you are who you are. While the capitalists keep growing the proletariat stay where they are on the social ladder. The distinction between owner and worker decides everything, Marx stressed property determines people's lifestyles which in time determines the relationships you have with , and in the end shapes their ideas.

 Max Weber understood the social classes much differently than Marx. Instead of wealth by title, he believed one could obtain wealth by property,power, and prestige. Property is a person's material possessions like assets. Power is the ability to carry out your will even over the resistance of others. Prestige is respect, whether it's the respect you hold or give to another. So unlike Marx, Weber didn't believe the position you held determined wealth but rather your power, prestige, and property.
So as you can see Social Class has evolved over many years, and many different ideas of people. To "change classes" for instance to bump from middle class wealth to upper class would be difficult. It would take years. That's why people usually stay in their class, and stay satisfied with what they have because to change your social class would be extremely difficult.

Henslin, James M. "9." Sociolgy a Down to Earth Approach. 12th ed. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 234-35. Print.