7:1 Science and the Arts: Divergence and Convergence.
In The Educated Imagination, Frye (1912) outlines:
Northrop Frye:Three Levels Of Engagement with the World
Objects of natural world are incorporated in human world at three levels, in which language plays an important
role. The Robinson Crusoe analogy:
Divergence 1) Level of Mind oscillates between the intellect whicSpeculative/contemplative
consciousness or collects accurate empirical data (science)language. Nouns (intellect)
awareness and the emotions which make judgments and adjectives (emotions).
- intellect (arts). This is where arts and science begin.
- emotions Intellect=science; emotions=arts.
Convergence 2) Level of Emotions and intellect work together to Practical sense: verbs or
action humanize world. Change things you don’t words of action and
Impossible to tell arts and science apart
Divergence 3) Level of the From “I don’t like this” to“I imagined thisull scope of English
imagination. differently”: ideas, plans, scenarios. Muslanguage employed—mind
return to level two for practical outcome.can soar.
Art: free to imagine.
Science: only use imagination to explain
Science: empirical, accumulative, shows progress. Must grasp the reality of world.
Arts: limitless imagination, so do not improve or progress—best remains best. Do not need to be
completely tied to realities.
Sociology is a science because its main objective is not to inspire/entertain. Terminologies need to be
consistent for academic purposes. However: sociology studies the level of action where intellect and
emotion are inseparable.
1) Socially constructed world is more fluid, so one needs to use creative terminologies.
2) Studies the world of action, but uses levels of consciousness (intellect and emotions) and imagination to
Science begins with empirical world but also rely on imagination and creativity, e.g. language.
Arts start with imagination but also rely on empirical world to make creations plausible.
Both establish unity/identity between human mind and the external world. 7: 2 Sociology as a Science
Logical Positivism (1920s-1950s)
Thomas Kuhn (1962) and other logical positivists have three objectives:
1) Recognize that science is not based exclusively on direct, unmediated observation, that language
preliminarily guides observation.
2) Therefore, use clear and precise scientific terms to replace vague everyday language, connected through
the structure of formal logics. (makes it easier for scientists)
3) Establish unity of all science, including sociology with the same conceptual practices.
7:2:1 Kuhn: Progress and Paradigm Shift
Kuhn: accumulative science is a “piecemeal process”, so what counts as progress?
Periods of normal science: scientists use deductive reasoning to build on established hypotheses, guided by a
certain paradigm rooted in language.
Scientific revolution: when anomalies are too many to be ignored, new paradigm is established.
Scientific progress: which is the best matrix (of scientific theories) to understand the world?
E.g. Marx’s materialism replaces Hegel’s idealism; Weber’s importance of culture challenges Marx’s economic
7:2:2 Foucault: the modern episteme in Le mot juste
Episteme def: fundamental principles of order without which human world will fall into chaos. (e.g. Do you sort
out balls by colour or by size?)
Different areas of knowledge share the same epistemes for any given era:
The Classical age (mid 1600s to early 1800s): episteme of knowledge= reflective representation.
Taxonomies (static classifications), “picture theory’.
The modern age: episteme=historicity: knowledge organized around notions of progress and change.
Representations are cast aside.
1) The episteme of an era shapes three levels of engagement. It influences the intellect’s apprehension and
emotion’s assessment of the world; therefore shapes human action; therefore framework for imagination.
2) Modern episteme focuses upon change, development and progress because static representations gave way
to notions of evolutionary development. E.g. from studying “correct grammar” to philology—the root of
arbitrary use of language.
3) Human sciences did not exist prior to the modern episteme. As a recent discipline, originates from various
sciences, which explains ongoing debates.
7:3 Sociology: the Theoretical Debate
Sociology never experienced a period of “normal science” because there has never been a universally
accepted disciplinary matrix.
Talcott Parson: Structural-functionalism and Scientific Naturalism
- “Orthodox consensus” from late 40s to 60s (post WWII), most successful dominant matrix. Spurred
research in all areas of social life.
- Like Marx, Comte, Durkheim, Weber etc, tries to make a synthesis of perspectives. Why successful?
Substance: Although theory shifts focus from social action to the nature of social systems, yet addresses both macro and
micro—full range of theoretical issues.
Time and Place:
Interwar period: crisis of nihilism and irrationalism. ParInflux European intellectuals. However sociology was new in
taps into crisis, believes his new social theory can overcUS, with empirical focus on progress and urbanization and
the limitations of Utilitarianism and liberal individualislittle on theoretical work. So Parson filled the void, bridging
(which he believed gave rise to irrationalism and far-righUS and European thoughts. Parson also used the reputation
extremists) and create new moral, social and political ordand resources of Harvard and Columbia to ensure dominance.
Fits in with scientific enterprise: offers a comprehensive theoretical system that guides the empirical study of society.
The Critique of Parson
1) Overly integrational—social conflicts seen as “pathology” social integration=system “requisite” (see “5,
Weber-modernism”), supports status quo. This gave rise to conflict theory.
2) Focuses too much on social system (Dennis Wrong)—conflicts with agency-centered theorists like symbolic
interactionists, phenomenologists, ethnomethodologists and social constructionists.
Functionalism’s most significant contribution is that it spurred the “most far reaching,
continuous examination of sociology that the field had yet witnessed (Demerath and Peterson).
1970s to 1990s: debate over functionalism leads to common ground—synthesis—metatheory.
Metatheory def (Ritzer): the systematic study of sociological theory.
3 types of metatheory: M =aUdeeper understanding of a theory; M =a prPlude to theory development;
M Ooverarching combinations of sociological theory.
Alexander (late 1980s): To move forward in metatheory (synthesis), one must realize the similarities between
social and natural sciences (both have theories and are influenced by language) as well as differences.
Differences 1) Objects of Study. 2) “Normal Science” 3) Nature of Theories
Natural Separate from human mind. There will always be Empirical evidence, inductive
Sciences periods of normal and deductive logics,
Goal: create a disciplinary matrix science explanations through laws.
not distorted by personal/political Focuses on immediate
Social Never separate from human mind. No periods of Discourse—discursive.
Sciences Social constructions come from normal science. Focuses on process of
social actions produced by both reasoning.
intellect and emotions. Terms are Fundamental No plain and evident truth.
necessarily evaluative. differences will
Goal: to create the best (least always distinguish Theory=persuasion
contentious, most persuasive) theories or schools. based on insight, value relevance,
terms linked into a disciplinary rhetorical force, beauty.
matrix not distorted by *Sociology=Science based on
personal/political interests. discourse 7:4 :1 Micro/Macro
Bruno Latour’s Dilemma:
dissatisfaction: too abstract
should look for origin in local situations
norms, values, Micro
culture, structure, flesh and blood
social context situations, interactions
dissatisfaction: still abstract
should look for faraway, underlying elements
Munch and Smelser’s solution to the dilemma: distinction of micro/macro is only analytical and conceptual.
Traditional philosophy: micro and macro=dichotomy.
Sociology: concrete realities, therefore micro and macro=intertwined and none is more important than
7:4:2 Structure/Human Agency
Arose out of critique of structural functionalism
phenomenologists vs structuralists
2 major integration theories of structure and agency: Giddens and Bordieu.
Giddens: Theory of Structuration
Action is in line with established human activities-=recursive practices ordered across space and time.
Starts with neither structure nor agency.
Actions recur because people employ existing knowledge to guide their action.
Human agents reflexively monitor their own actions.
Reflexive knowledgeability: human beings reflect upon their actions and monitor them.
1) discursive knowledge: can reason out and explain their actions
2) Practical knowledge: “that’s now it’s down”—taken for granted.
These knowledges are not produced by actions, rather they guide human actions (recursive).
Structures are rules and resources, agreed patterns of conduct.
The duality of structure: discursive and practical knowledges are bound in space and time, both limit and
enables human action. This is called structuration!
Informal rules: strong, tacit and weakly sanctioned. Primary constraints on people’s actions.
Forma/codified rules: manifestations of informal rules. Shallow, discursive, formalized and strongly
Power: the ability to influence the action of others. All human agents have power. It’s both inherent in
individual and a resource/structure to draw upon.
*Actions can have unexpected outcomes because of complex social relations, despite reflexive monitoring. Bordieu: Making Doxa Transparent
Goal: To make doxa transparent and unmask the social order that creates inequalities.
Field: dynamic, competitive, hierarchical milieu.
Capitals: economic (better pay), social (network), cultural (status) and symbolic (public image) capitals. How
fare up you’re on the hierarchy of the field depends on
1) your total amount of all types of capitals
2) the amount of the kind fo capital that matters the most in tour field.
* Field=a class condition
Habitus: systems of durable, transposable dispositions (knowledge shaped by people shaping people).
automatic, unconscious knowledge of how to play the game. Transposablecan be used in different fields and
Doxa: through their individual habitus (knowledge), players feel “at home” in their field and feel commitment.
It’s the state of taking things for granted.
The combination of field an habitus produces doxa, which makes people unreflectively accept their everyday
lives.Doxa masks the interests of power!!
7:4:3 Sociology’s Relational Nature and Reflexiveness
Instead of creating polar opposites, 21 century sociologists must realize the relational nature of sociology
and build an integrative discourse (taking language into consideration) that addresses social issues of
power, inequality and domination.
Relexive means using objectivationways people construct their objects of study. We need to have an
objetivation of sociologists: Sociology should think reflexively about what they do, be aware that facts can
not prove theories because theories produce facts (the stuff you look for and the question you pose) in
the first place. The Sociology of Work
The Private and the Public Realms
Private activities: holding baby, texting friends
Public activities: agriculture, civil projects, etcproduce the greatest social consequences.
Work links private and public (micro and macro) together
82% Canadians between 15 and 64 work for pay.
1945-73 economic growth, the post industrial society
1073-80: stagflation, shift from Keynesian to neoliberal economic policies.
1980-2008: post-fordism—information economy.
2:1 Social Context’s Impact on Perceptions of Work
How work is organized impacts a society’s value system and people’s perceptions of work, as well as
expectations from work:
Classical Greece: Slavery as Inevitable
- Slavery meets all productive needs, no need for development of technology and vocational education.
- Therefore prevalence of slave labour shapes Aristotle’s view of moral conduct and work (slavery=natural
and inevitable). Aristotle’s Politics: “Some men are born by nature free, and others slaves, and for these
latter slavery is both expedient and right”
Feudal Period: Biblical Images of Work (RCC)
1) Work is a privilege God has entrusted to Adam, a blessing upon humankind;
2) fallen out of Garden of Eden, work becomes burden humans must bear (toil)—self denial, self-sacrifice,
redemption, and glorification of God.
18 Century: Political Economy and Scientific Worldview
Emergence of the market, pursuit of material wealth
Moral context changing, Dickens capture conflict of moral values.
Political economy emerged in 18 century, and by 19 century became a “science” of how to optimize
production, consumption and expansion.
Progress measured in accumulation of wealth/materialism
Growth of Utilitarianism.
2:2 Adam Smith: Moral Framework in The Wealth of Nations
Industrial capitalists used it to justify own interests even though Adam discussed it in a moral framework
What Smith says about the market:
Left to its own devices, laissez-faire will create ginormous wealth—“unseen hand of the market”
When people over-produce and rate of profit falls, move to new area with higher demand. This leads to
overall regulation and balance and work is optimally allocatedthis appears to generate progress.
Wealth of nation relies on division of labour, which is more efficient and enhanced by technology.
However, this also leads to precarious employment, semi-skilled workers and quality of lines of workers go
Smith’s overarching moral framework: Goal of laissez faire is not wealth or the capital, but to give people de quoi vivre—subsistence,
Wealth should supply the state with revenue for public services, enrich both people and sovereign.
Sociologists become the apostles of Smith and other classical political economists (Marx, James, Mill,
Smith, David Richards) who studied work within a larger moral framework. This is why sociology differs from
2:3 Work and Human Potential
After Industrial capitalism, socialists say:
1) workers create wealth, but capital enjoys all fruits of their labour. This is NOT real progress.
2) Labour process deformed by capital oppressive conditions for workers.
2:3:1 Marx’s Study of Labour
Got his moral framework from German idealism—socialism, social justice.
Question of ontology: what’s the fundamental nature of human kind?
Natural, material order vs human order:
The recursive practices of nature happen without conscious reflection, whereas the recursive practices of
the human order begins with consciousness and subjectivity.
Humankind is an organism of nature, it is part of the natural order. The material order of nature id direct,
concrete, and thingly.
Humankind is also part of the human order, which stands separate and alienated from the material order.
We humanize the material through work. Labour is the mediating process between human kind and
Marx: our fundamental nature is our ability to mediate between self and nature (i.e. the creative labour
self-expression (creativity)see Hannah Arendt: externalization of ideas, learn about self, nature and
capacities of mankind, changes it self—its practical and discursive knowledge; its habitus.
produce exchangeable articles, basis for social relationships and control of physical resources.
Non-material knowledge (formulas, theories) externalized and preserved through labour
Technology cannot replace labour because it’s the creative capacity of humans that move societies forward.
Alfred Marshall: “Principles of Economics” (neoclassical)
- work seen as exploitative in late 19 /early 20 centuries, but realizes creative capacities. Work in central to
being human, holds vast potential.
This shows that contemporary discourses order/understand the ontology of hman life through an epistemeof
change (time and space)
Marx’s Theory of Alienation
The concept of alienation is a synthesis of German idealism and British political economy.
In “Phenomenology of Mind”, Hegel says humans go from sensory, immediate understanding to sophisticated
and meditated comprehensive knowledge. Going from passive to controlling force in history, creating more just,
rational ad freer societies.
Marx disagrees with Hegel: it is labour, not knowledge, that is the mainspring of history (because labour
realizes human potential).
British political economy: what is the source of social surplus?
- Physiocrats: nature (seed grows more seed, etc) - Adam Smith: division of labour (favours industrialization)
- Ricardo: Labour theory of value – use mumber of hours, scientific calculation to determine value of
*Marx: “Entwertung” and “Verwertung”: the objectification/actualization of labour=the creation of something
through human action, results in something material., overcoming alienation.
Alienation: the unfulfilled promise of labour. Human creative potential suppressed by industrialization and
increasing bureaucratization. Humans believed they’re controlled by external environment and act accordingly.
As a result of the laws of political economy:
Workers separated from the fruits of their labour and the production process;
competitive nature of capitalist production separates the worker from all other workers.
Workers created these conditions, however, so they can also emancipate conditions for emancipation/
Goal: labour for genuinely creative ends.
2:4 The Employer Labour-Process – Employer relationship
Essential tension=wages vs profit margins
The employer-labour relationship form of work is so deeply entrenched in modern consciousness not even
the communists worked out a different model (USSR used Fordist and Taylorist production models).
The dominant labour structure shapes social whole, creates social inequality, distribution of power (part of
alienation), and the overall concerns about how material and social resources are best mobilized,
allocated and used—production of culture and perception of justice.
Employers are the primary organizers of labour force. The purchase workers’ capacities but not the
workersthis means workers can bargain despite lower power.
What does it “cost” an employee to work?
- surrender autonomy, agree to put forth effort
- fatigue, impairment
- employer provide money, security, some satisfaction, status, andn record of employment
Employer allocate resources to workers, reinforcing the existing employer-worker structure.
Macro: Society creates conditions for some peole to become employers and some employers and others
Giddens: allocative resources: stem from and determine whether you control material resources.
Authoritative resources stem from how human agents coordinate their activities and control their resources.
This usually flows from the control of allocative resources, meaning that what you own determines what you
are and how you behave. Control of capital (allocative resources) determines whether you’re a employer or
employee (authoritative resources).
Employer input Employee inputs
Capital, material resources, personal interests, Skill, knowledge, physical ability, motives, interests,
motives, corporate interests, motives, wages, job goals, ambitions
security, status, career
Where you are on the corporate hierarchy is determined by:
Social variables (macro) (economic, social, cultural, Dependent variable (micro)
Access to capital symbolic capitals) Where you end up on the hierarchy Worldview Influence one’s
Racialization processes and Interests
Exposure to entertainment
Structural tensions resulting from different expectations
At macro level, this tends to reproduce itself.
Employer expectations Employee Expectations
Productivity Financial reward
Punctuality Intrinsic reward
Commitment Measure of Autonomy
Accuracy Job Security
Want to minimize costs and maximize productivity Social mobility
Want to maximize rewards
2:4 History of Wage-Labour process
During the past 100 years, time-tested wage-labour process has not changed significantly. What’s the origin of
this specific employer-employee relationship?
socio-historical conditions over time creates specific labour structure. These then influence the perception
2:4:1 Weber’s History of Wage Labour (macro influences micro, micro reinforces macro)
feudalism: capitalism results from stability, where lords can gain surplus with merchants for exotic
guild masters (monopoly over crafts) also enter market economy
peasants expelled from land, move to city and work for the bourgeoisie.
lords and guild masters gave control to merchants to sell their goods. Work turn from feudal rights to
basis of exchange
development of merchant-capitalists’cottage industry compete with guilds.
emergence of “indstrumental rationality of modernity”—less independence, more profit, division of
Creating a new culture of work
Not natural rhythms
Time becomes a currency – time is measured and spent 2:4:2 Foucault’s “Docile Bodies” and “Technologies of Power”
“The table system”: supervision of large numbers of workers working on different tasks (production lines)
Individual becomes a body “manipulated, shaped, trained, which obeys, responds, becomes skillful and
increases its forces/productive utility.”
Disciplining the body: subtle coercion, supervising highly coded actions/gestures of the body rather than the
Docility-utility, not slavery-violence.
Power and aptitude increased while self-determination and self-realization reduced
Division o labour instill “time, work-discipline”, creates “docile bodies”which makes industrial
Table system/disciplinary system= tried and true to control work and increase output. Never put down to
paper until Taylor. However, Foucault’s discussion of principles of production is different from Taylor: Foucault is
a sociologist that integrates macro and micro.
- micro: policy of coercion that acts upon the body, calculated manipulation and supervision of worker’s
- macro: docile body extends to other institutions than workplace (school, family, prison, etc_ which
ultimately constitute a “disciplinary society” where micro-practives are reproduced.
Echoes Giddens’ “recursive nature of human action”; docile body – Bordieu’s habitus: « durable, transposible
dispositions, structured and structuring »
2:4:3 Taylorism “The Principles of Scientific Management”
“Utilitarianism”: each person acts in a manner that best meets his/her personal needs and wants. Every one is
a utility maximize. Each person’s interest contributes to interests of social whole.
Combines Adam Smith with own work experience, believes scientific management is the interests of owners,
managers AND workers.
“Soldiering”: workers maximize wages while spending minimum energy. Systematic soldiering: means
deliberately hiding efficiency from employers and make it convincing.
Taylorism: Taylor’s solution to soldiering: INCENTIVES!!
Workers scientifically trained, cooperate, equal division of workmodern scientific outlook: reliance
on science and division of labour.
“The Task Idea”: advanced planning, follow instructions, set goals, and time limits,, incentives for
being more productive. However, ensure fair day’s work. Strike balance between profit and
How taylorism affected workers:
1) Scientific management led to more effective use of machinery, reduced size of industrial workforce.
2) overall deskilling of production, removed creative/intellectual aspects. Simplification and routinization.
3) Growing white collar labour that takes on planning process.
*Consequences: will continually simplify tasks, drive down wages, make work less skilled and devoid of intrinsic
reward. 2:4:4 Henry Ford and “Fordism” and Mass Production
Created mass production assembly lines and put out skilled workers.
Mass production: relies on narrowly skilled workers designing products produced by semiskilled workers
tending single purpose machines. This creates LARGE volume products at low unit cost.
Ford is a rationalist: goal-rational actions.
- consistency, standardization, complete interchangeability and simplicity. Less time to assemble a car.
- Introduction of moving assembly line determines worker’s pace.
- Used highly motivated immigrant workers with minimum education
- Good wages to prevent absenteeism.
- Workers divided not into classes but merely different divisions.
Ford did not meet resistance from labour leaders because:
1) does not reduce size of work force due to expanding economy
2) new job opportunities, positive pressure on wages
3) more workers mean more unions and less resistance to collective bargaining.
This resulted in gulf between unionized and non-unionized workers.
However, Ford’s system doesn’t have the ability to individualize products. This is challenged by Toyota’s “Lean
Toyota (late 70s to early 80s)
Post WWII reconstruction, small domestic market, large seembly liens not economical. So they devised more
- Explanations for Japanese success attributed to “national culture,” better technology, greater self-discipline,
- Work in teams: responsible for the quality of each car. Can stop the line when there’s a problem. System
constantly improved, eliminates need of inspectors.
- More variability in tasks and problem solving: more rewarding and gain knowledge, intelligence respected.
- life-long tenure guaranteed: greater commitment, no absenteeism.
- National unions replaced by “Industry Unions”
- “ Just in time” mantra – signal system
- Dualistic wage structure
- “Technologies of power”
Result: Totally dedicated workforce.
2:5 Employers, Employees and the Logic of Collective Action
Government pass legislation to protect employees who have very little power.
Workers respond to the power of capital with informal associations and certified collective bargaining units
e.g. Canadian Union of Public Employer.
HOWEVER, unions aren’t as powerful as imagined. Why?
Central conflict: profits vs wages
Ultimate question: how does the contract affect corporate profits?
The logic of collective action:
Coorporate negotiators logic: - managerial discussions tend to be Union negotiators logic
“instrumental monological”: - Union members don’t always agree on
instrumental means particular end common goals, devates held to decide.
(maintain acceptable profit); - In the event of last resort, union must organize
monological = common agreement over successful strike—this will decrease workers
final objective (profit). bargaining power, because they don’tr want to
- Those at the top of the hierarchy have the final lose jobs. Can lose membership support in the
- Final decision rests within members, no top
Definition of power: the control of material and ideological resources and organization.
Problems with amalgamation (to gain more power/ people to pay membership fee):
1) increased bureaucratization. less direct dialogue between workers and leaders. offsets the gains of expandsd
resources loss of power again.
2) More difficult to find consensus.
negotiation=unequal partnership. Workers have less powerthis reinforces inequality.
The point of unions is not that union workers necessarily get paid more than non-unionized. However
unionized workers do get better compensation packages becuase they have leverage.
Unions are secondary organizers, which means they have to negotiate with workers and that affects theri
Unionized workers have to exhibit a willingness to pay and a willingness to act--basically to be risk takers in
defending their rights.
Owners have more powers than workers, because capital is a very fluid resource and can be re-invested
elsewhere. So if workers make one business fail, they can start another.
Employers will always have power, because labour-power is inseparable from the worker. It's so deeply
entrenched that no matter how many times you switch jobs, you face the same relationship with power all over
again. Social Inequality
Carolyn Huynh: Olympic Wrestler. Illustrates issues of inequality (esp gender). Symbolizes reward of hard work,
also racial openness of Canada.
Challenges the racialization process: race irrelevant.
3:1 Meritocracy and Inequality
Meritocracy def: a hierarchical ranking and reward system where performance determines place in the
hierarchy (e.g. sports, school/education/admission to higher education)which then determines one’s place in
the labour force.
1) Most Canadians support meritocracy. However, depending on the case, some may have contradictory
* Achievement principle: inequality on some issues and equality on others. e.g competition presupposes
equal education and equal conditions.
2) Most Canadians oppose unequal reward based on ascribed status (birth, race, family background…)
3) Canadians firmly oppose inequality especially in social issues.
HOWEVER all of these is not contradictory!! (see next section)
Two types of Social Stratification:
Ascribed: feudal system based on class.
Achievement-based: stems from Enlightenment (break from feudalism and inheritance crap)
This signals the emergence of classic liberalism: which states that the individual is the basisc unit of
society, not family, and has right to pursue own free interests.
Classic liberalism assumes people are different—different interests serve different people. Everyone’s
3:1:1 What is the object of Inequality?
aka: What can/must be allocated unequally?
ranking, salary, status, etc are all objects of inequality
Then, we can see whether current social practices is consistent with that object.
e.g. standardized test: begins with assumption of equal education, leads to unequal
stratification/outcome and allocation of resources. Supports true liberalism, gives smarter individuals
Enriched classes: NOT meritocracy—this is a politically modified scheme to incrase the overall
strength of society.
Special need students: NOT classical liberalism either: politically modified to benefit community
^ Both are planned interventions: shift from market model of classic liberalism.
Antecedent social factors of inequality may prevent true equality in participating in meritocracy. in other words,
meritocracy ignores these antecedent factors.
3:1:2 Opportunity and Social Stratification
Object of inequality in Olympics: World Ranking.
Canada’s best athletes come from Calgary. Why? - Culture
- facilities left over from the 1988 Winter Games
- intenational coaches
- lots of long track ovals
These are all Inequalities of opportunity.
3;1:3 Condition and Social Stratification
Inequality of Condition: stems first from the unequal income structure and control of wealth. Because of that,
people do not enter education system and labour force on the same footing.
3:2 Social Inequality in Canada
Gini Index: standard measure of income inequality.
Range: 0-1, 0=absolutely equal income, 1=one person has all the income. Greater index means higher
The index for market income is higherthan disposable income. This shows Canada’s system is trying to fix the
problem. Still, great disparity between top quintile (1/5) and bottom quintile.
Who are these rich people?
Top 1% predominantly male, 35-64 years old, better educated.
work long hours
senior management, health care professionals, business and finance
Majority of rich people earn their wealth through work, NOT stocks, bonds or property. Hold 14 – 18% of
nation’s total income currently (on the increase).
WHY the increase of inequality?
1) 1980s recession—forced people to take lower paying jobs
2) technology and deindustrialization (less employment)—computers eliminated middle level occupations (like
3) minimum wage, which sets the income floor of a country
4) outsourcing of production (deindustrialization)
5) decline of unions.
Increased inequality at whose expense?
mainly young workers with little marketable skills
also middle level jobs eliminated by computer
3:3 Explaining Inequality
Social inequality: classical tradition. qualitative differences. Implies that you cannot move up or down.
Social Stratification: society as a social arrangement with numerous layers. Although stratified, layers are
permeable. One can move up and down. 3:3:1 Marx and Class Inequality
Manifesto is not the best place to gain Marx’s insight because it suggests a simplistic two-class model.
Marx realizes social layers are complex and denies the existence of true meritocracy in capitalist societies He
maintains that each individual doesn’t have the same opportunities/conditions.
Contrary to classical liberalism, Marx thinks you can’t move across class lines because of high cost of
education. Only downward movement is possible.
Conclusion: classic liberalism is a lie, and justifies exploitation.
Qualitative inequality: because of unequal access to opportunities and conditions, calss-bouondaries canno