Class Notes (835,474)
Canada (509,196)
Sociology (3,252)
SOC101Y1 (985)
Lecture

soc203-lecture 4

9 Pages
115 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Sociology
Course
SOC101Y1
Professor
Irving Zeitlin
Semester
Winter

Description
Lecture 4 “Class, Status, Party”: True of False? According to Weber: 1. Economically conditioned power is identical with power as such. (p.95) 2. Classes are not communities (groups united by kinship or a sense of belonging). (p. 95) 3. Class situation: the typical chance for a supply of goods, external living conditions, and personal life experiences. (p.96) 4. Property and lack of property are not the basic categories of all class situations. (p. 96) 5. Class interest is relatively unambiguous. (p.97) 6. Propertied and propertyless people cannot belong to the same status group. (p.99) 7. Unlike the actions of classes and status groups, the communal actions of parties always means a socialization (organized group action.) (p.100) Definition of social structure Possibly: Identify authors of “quotes”. “Class conflict” belongs to whom? T/Fs have given is for review and might be on test. Readings for Next Week (The Introduction to Superordination and Subordination) Hannah Arendt (1906 - 1975): “Violence can always destroy power.” Arendt is refers to a particular type of power: power based on coercion -- she means, using force or threatening to use force. Getting people to comply because we threatening them to hurt them and kill them. In other words, threatening to use violence. If a powerful person is using forces and violence against someone. Paradox: you can only get someone to do something as long as you can maintain their live and health if you want to abstract something from their labour. On the other hand, if that person is severe injured or killed, the powerful loses their power in the sense of you can no longer abstract things from them. The idea here is, if the powerful want to abstract something from a weak, they had to observe certain restrain. Certain limitation of power. This leads to the reading this week: Simmel discussed some power paradox. Weber: defined the power: power being the ability to realize someone’s will, despite of the resistance of someone else. The powerful and weak are in a two-way relations. Power is a two-way relationship. Weber: Negotiation There are two parties in the relationship: superordination and subordination. Subordinate is a person under the power with authority someone else. Simmel did not say that subordinate is a lesser person. Just saying they are weaker than the superordinate. Connection to Weber: Relation view of power: Weber argued that we cannot the power relations without taking account of the capacity of resistance of those who are in subordinated position. Similarly, on page 181. Simmel suggest that the “Domination, a Form of Interaction.” Not action, not one-way action, but interaction. It does not deny that one party in the relation would have more power than the other. But nevertheless, according to Simmel, the view of the subordinated person matters. This applies that the subordinated people have some choice, even though the range of their choices might be relatively narrow. This margin of freedom can affect the behaviour of the powerful. Text is sometime abstract, but will-organized. Power is rarely to rule out all subordination’s freedom. ?? Slave: slave is become kind of robot. Slave live in the life like back stage, but they do put some effort on living better. Simmel’s point is looking at interaction between the domination and subordination sides. Different social roles have some power over others: administrators in education and managers. --> a position do not have a authority figure. Thinking about yourself as in superordinate position and subordination. P.181: the subordination is ….passive material …. Subordination also has agency. P.183. 2 basics for authorities  aspects of characteristics and personality. And positional power (over up.) P.185-6; outdated point: how political leaders have to lead people in a appropriate direction  contemporary: sometime, the leaders actually is leading by the opinion of the public. Bismarck (1815 - 98): ruled by William I. very powerful of German politics. P 186-9: superordination and subordination in law: contract relationship. Back to Marx Dialectics and The Communist Manifesto 1. Dialectial reasoning: Plato, The Crito (about 399 B.C) 2. Being is becoming: Marcus Aurelius, Meditations (170 to 180 A.D.) 3. Dialectical idealism: Hegel’s logic (not really Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis) 4. Dialectical materialism: a) Matter changes, not ideas b) The codification of Engels (1877-78): the Triadic Principle o unity of opposites o quantity into quality o negation of the negation c) The Triadic Principle in The Communist Manifesto Grammar of history: identification of underline rules: came from Elements and Marx 1. Dialectial reasoning: Plato, The Crito (about 399 B.C) Engaging in religious activities. Plato: conversation between teacher and students: Sacroti. Truth emerging from different dialogues and conversations between lots of different characters. Back and forth  dialogues. A way of arriving at truth. Crito and Sacroti exchange ideas and opinions. 2. Being is becoming: Marcus Aurelius, Meditations (170 to 180 A.D.) Everything is changing, nothing is staying still forever. You will never stuck in the same river, because water is floating. Marx: philosopher: peace of mind. What is important in life and to what is important? Natural of all the lives: universal nature. Things are cycle. Remembering all the past. Things are born and live and die. 1. Dialectical idealism: Hegel’s logic (not really Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis) Dialogues with others: good reasoning cannot only coming from the conversation with others; it can also be coming from our head when we think it through carefully. All ideas coming from Hegel have limits. There are many opposing ideas for Hegel’s idea. For Hegel: good idea is totally comprehensive. You need to know the context of the dialogues. The next process is always affected by the previous one. The grammar rule underneath how we think. 4. Dialectical materialism: a) Matter changes, not ideas People do not control the means of production have to sell their labour to get the money for human existence. Marx agrees with Hegel in terms of grammar and dialogical approach. b) The codification of Engels (1877-78): the Triadic Principle o unity of opposites o quantity into quality o negation of the negation In 1977-78: Three different illogic working underneath. Unity of opposite: that anything that exist such as society is not harmony nut forces pulling from different directions. P 473 – classes are opposition to each other. “The history of all hitherto…” Marx: In fact, the class conflict is sharper in his day. Capitalism is direct opposite. Quantity into quality  such as the temperature drops enough, then water to ice. P 480: “with the development of industry…” The peoples or groups, such as union, has more and more power, then they can started to change the politics. Self-conscious revolution force. P 486. Crisis of over-production. At the certain point, the production is so sufficient and produces more than we need. Something will replace in the future  Marx predict that socialist will replace capitalism. P 478-9: Capitalism is actually…. c) The Triadic Principle in The Communist Manifesto Hegemony and forces of resistance exist at the same time. Canadian Media to Aboriginal people  shame spot. Historically thinking  the currency changing over time  through the days and months and years, people’s value and idea changing about a certain money  but there is a still trend. Patterns and longer-term. Literal message and spiritual message. Engle’s on Gender Inequality 1. Gender inequality in Canada today 2. Engels (Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State, 1884) o The centrality of production and reproduction o Gender under primitive communism o Private property and gender inequality o Socialism and gender relations: the claim 1. Critical comments o A sociological phenomenon o A historical phenomenon o The meaning of property o Politics matter o Gender equality and capitalism Engle’s on Gender Inequality 1. Gender inequality in Canada today - Gender inequality examples in the past decede: 1. 32% of managers are women. 18% in natural science occupations. Sales and services: 57% of women.Health: 79% of women. - 2000s, women’s salary is about 64% of what men earned. - In top 10 highest paid occupations, Judges, Dentists, Lawyers..etc. Percentage of women is from 6% to 34%. - In terms of unpaid housework: In the family where husband and wife do the same amount of housework, the woman in the labour force, but the man is not. Which means, the wife works the whole day, and the husband do not do anything, then they share the housework. - In any other kinds of family structure, the wife doing more housework than man. The ratio is 3 to 25 more than their husband. 1. Engels (Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State, 1884): it is done better in history than The Communist Manifesto. Question: Do we need to get rid of the capitalism in order to get gender equality? Do we need to eliminate private property in order to achieve gender equality? To what extent is gender inequality the product of the presence of private property in the society? - The debate among feminism: which one is first: On one side: sociologist feminists believe that capitalism is the cause of gender inequality, in order to eliminate gender inequality, it is necessary to get rid of the system such as the means of production and others. BUT, on the other side, the (libera) feminism believe, that it is not because of capitalism led to gender inequality, but also other sources/ elements contributed to it. Therefore, it is necessary to change the policy and law to promote gender equality. They can achieve gender equality without overturn of current mode of production. Quote From Engels: “ According to the materialistic conception, the determining factor in history is, the final instance, production and reproduction of the immediate essentials of life. This, again, is of a twofold character. On the one side, the production of the means of existence, of articles of food and clothing, dwellings, and of the tools necessary for that production; on the other side, the production of human beings themselves, the propagation of the species. The social organization under which the people of a particular historical epoch and a particular country live is determined by boh kinds of production: by the stage of development of labour on the one hand and of the family on the other.” o The centrality of production and reproduction o Gender under primitive communism o Private property and gender inequality o Socialism and gender relations: the claim - Theory draws on the ethnographic work and studies that are just published by American ethologists on the statistics of NY. Just as works done by anthropologists today. - He predict that the way people live provides the mode of how other societies would have lived in the pre-history time. - He finds that, once upon a time, ther
More Less

Related notes for SOC101Y1

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit