Karl Marx And Max Weber's Inequality In Society

In our world, inequality among men is not a divinely ordained attribute of the human condition. Inequality among men is an aspect of social organization. Inequality remains unjustified. Goodness and talent are often neglected and those who are poor suffer social discrimination (Bendix, 1974). The 20th century sees materialism and its very domain covering three traits—possessiveness, nongenerosity, and envy. These very traits depict how an individual grips his possession, how he dislikes the idea of sharing his possession with the other people, and how he feels when others have more than of what he possesses (Fitzmauarice and Comegys, 2006). Tracing history, Marx based his distinction on materialism between the means on production and how

For Marx, he considered class in relation to the means to production. He saw a shift from a feudal society on agriculture, where the land owning classes are classified from the peasant class. Scribes, information dealers, intelligencia and civil servants, who did not contribute to the production in the economy, are considered of no use and ar classless. On the other hand, Weber saw class on several layers (Bartle, 2007). Such differences can be understood in a sociological perspective. Sociologists analyze social phenomena at different levels using different perspectives. Sociologists study everything—from the micro level of analysis of small social patterns to the macro level analysis of large social patterns. Sociological perspective includes three (3) approaches: The Symbolic Interactionism which involves the micro level of analysis using symbols and face to face interactions; the Functionalism perspective which involves the macro level of analysis and gives emphasis on the relationship between parts of society and how the aspects of the society becomes functional; and the Conflict Theory using the macro level of analysis which focuses on the competition for scarce resources and how elites control the poor and weak (“Three Major Perspectives in Sociology,” 2015). With the given differences, Weber can be closely related to being a ‘Conflict Structuralist’. In Weber’s perspective that his sociological analysis focused as to how people’s relationship influence people’s behavior. Weberian sociology can also be seen as a ‘pluarlist perspective for the reason that his saw societies involving different groups and each possessing or competing for greater or lesser forms of power. A earlier discussed, such groups may be of the class,