Skip to main content

From Max Weber

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Class and Social Honour
  • 48 Accesses

Abstract

An approach to social stratification that draws on the work of Max Weber is outlined. This distinguishes between economically grounded class and the communal or influentially grounded status. It is argued that these jointly enter into the formation of social strata and underpin the distribution of political power.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The background to the writing of what Weber’s widow Marianne published as Economy and Society is discussed in Camic et al. (2005) and Scott (2019).

  2. 2.

    Weber’s fragment was later taken up and elaborated in Germany by Othmar Spann (1924), Ferdinand Tönnies (1931), and Leopold von Wiese (1950), though none added anything significant.

  3. 3.

    Bourdieu (1979) can be read as showing that this relationship between market situation and work situation can be modelled as measures of the volume and composition of capital, where capital is understood to comprise marketable economic and cultural resources. Atkinson (2020) has shown that this holds only if ‘cultural capital’—mastery, ease, and familiarity with advantageous systems of symbols and signs—is operationalised as the amount and type of education that a person has undergone.

  4. 4.

    See, for example, the compilation of research results using various class schema in Marsh (1958) and Reid (1998).

  5. 5.

    ‘Status’ has often been used in sociological work to refer to any social position or role in a social division of labour (see the critical view in Scott 1996: 93–94). It is for this reason that Tribe (2019) has argued that Weber’s term Stände should be translated as ‘rank’ rather than as status. Despite this recommendation, I feel that it is preferable to retain the usage common in stratification studies and to see status as the most general term for a position in a system of social honour. This leaves the term ‘rank’ available for use in strictly hierarchical status orders.

  6. 6.

    Goode uses the term ‘prestige’ rather than honour, though his meaning is very much the same. I will return to this terminological question in Chap. 2 when I consider Parsons’ argument concerning the relationship between particular forms of honour and a generalised concept and measure of prestige.

  7. 7.

    The term ‘hidden injuries’ is taken from Sennett and Cobb’s (1972) discussion of class, while the implications of stigmatisation have been explored by Goffman (1963).

  8. 8.

    Samuel Clark (1995) has referred to this as ‘status power’.

  9. 9.

    Abel and Cockerham (1993) have emphasised the importance of translating Weber’s term Lebensfuhrung as ‘way of life’, so as to distinguish it from a normatively codified ‘style of life’.

  10. 10.

    Methods for identifying demographic boundaries have not been particularly well-developed in contemporary class analysis. Goldthorpe (1980) short-circuited this question by defining a limited number of economic classes and then attempting to confirm their identity as social classes by examining their patterns of association and interaction. More convincingly, Ronald Breiger (1981) worked directly on mobility relations among economic classes (see also Smith 2007). Ken Prandy and colleagues deepened this approach by working directly on unaggregated occupational categories and their associational relations (Prandy 1991; Prandy and Blackburn 1997; see also Blackburn et al. 1980). Most recently, Mike Savage and his colleagues (2015) used self-reported data on economic resources, social relations, and cultural preferences to identify boundaries, without any reference to occupational data.

  11. 11.

    Runciman’s own argument rests on a view that there are three forms of power: economic, communal, and political. For reasons that I have already set out, I prefer to consider only the economic and communal forms as constitutive of social stratification. I also hold, following Parsons, that a wider understanding of power must recognise four forms of power (Scott 2021).

  12. 12.

    The term ‘estate’ is sometimes restricted to the idea of a parliamentary estate, but it is the most linguistically consistent term. It also leaves available the term ‘order’ for more precise usage in later chapters of this book.

References

  • Abel, Thomas and Cockerham, William C. 1993. ‘Lifestyle or Lebensfuhrung? Critical remarks on the mistranslation of Weber’s “Class, Status, Party”’. The Sociological Quarterly 34, 3: 551-556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, Will 2020. The Class Structure of Capitalist Societies, Volume I: A Space of Bounded Variety. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, Bernard 1957. Social Stratification: A Comparative Analysis of Structure and Process. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, Bernard 1995. ‘All economies are “embedded”’. Social Research 62, 2: 387-413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendix, Reinhard and Lipset, Seymour Martin (eds.). 1953. Class, Status and Power. A Reader in Social Stratification. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendix, Reinhard and Lipset, Seymour Martin (eds.). 1966. Class, Status, and Power: Social Stratification in Comparative Perspective. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, R., Stewart, S. and Prandy, K. 1980. Social Stratification and Occupations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre 1979. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. London: Routledge, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre 1982. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre 1990. ‘Symbolic capital and social classes’. Journal of Classical Sociology 13, 2, 2013: 292–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiger, Ronald L. 1981. ‘The social class structure of occupational mobility’. American Journal of Sociology 87, 3: 578-611.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camic, Charles, Gorski, Philip S. and Trubek, David M. (eds.). 2005. Max Weber’s Economy and Society. A Critical Companion. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, Samuel 1995. State and Status. The Rise of the State and Aristocratic Power in Western Europe. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, Roxanne, Gayle, Vernon and Lambert, Paul S. 2016. A review of occupation-based social classifications for social survey research Methodological Innovations 9, Special Issue: 1-14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coser, Lewis 1956. The Functions of Social Conflict. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, Kingsley and Moore, Wilbert E. 1945. ‘Some principles of stratification’. American Sociological Review 10, 2: 242-249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, Hugh Dudley 1962. Communication and the Social Order. New York: Oxford University Press, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenstadt, Shmuel N. 1971. Social Differentiation and Social Stratification. New York: Scott, Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elias, N. 1939. The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erikson, Robert and Goldthorpe, John H. 1992. The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony 1973. The Class Structure of the Advanced Societies. London: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony 1981. A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism, Volume 1: Power, Property and the State. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginsberg, Morris 1934. Sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, Erving 1963. Stigma. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldthorpe, John H. 1980. Social mobility and class structure. Oxford: Clarendon Press Revised edition 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goode, William J. 1978. The celebration of Heroes. Prestige as a Control System. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holton, Robert J 1989. Has Class Analysis a Future? London: Routledge, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jellinek, Georg 1900. Allgemeine Staatlehre. Berlin: O. Häring.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, David 1958. The Black-coated Worker. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, David 1992. Solidarity and Schism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mannheim, Karl 1935. Man and society in an Age of Reconstruction. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1940.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, D. C. 1958. The Changing Social Structure of England and Wales. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, Gordon, Rose, David, Newby, Howard and Vogler, Carolyn 1988. Social Class in Modern Britain. London: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, Karl 1852. ‘The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte’ in Marx, K. (ed.) Surveys From Exile. London: Verso, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, Karl 1858. Grundrisse. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michels, Roberto 1911. Political Parties. New York: Herst’s International Library, 1915.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, C. Wright 1956. The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mommsen, Wolfgang J. 1986. ‘Robert Michels and Max Weber: Moral conviction versus the politics of responsibility’ in Mommsen, W. J. and Osterhammel, J. (eds.) Max Weber and His Contemporaries. London: George Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosca, Gaetano 1896. ‘Elementi di Scienza Politica’ in Mosca, G. (ed.) The ruling class, chapters 1–11. 1 New York: McGraw Hill, 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosca, Gaetano 1923. ‘Elementi di Scienza Politica’ in Mosca, G. (ed.) The Ruling Class, Chapters 11–17. 2 New York: McGraw Hill, 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousnier, Roland 1969. Social Hierarchies. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer, Franz 1914. The State. Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pareto, Vilfredo 1901. The Rise and Fall of Elites. New York: Bedminster Press, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pareto, Vilfredo 1916. A Treatise on General Sociology. New York: Dover, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkin, Frank 1971. Class Inequality and Political Order. London: McGibbon and Kee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkin, Frank 1982. Max Weber. Chichester: Ellis Horwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, Talcott 1940. ‘An analytical approach to the theory of social stratification’ in Parsons, T. (ed.) Essays in Sociological Theory. Revised ed. New York: Free Press, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, Talcott 1951. The Social System. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, Talcott 1953. ‘A revised analytical approach to the theory of social stratification’ in Parsons, T. (ed.) Essays in Sociological Theory. Revised ed. New York: Free Press, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, Talcott 1963a. ‘On the concept of influence’ in Parsons, T. (ed.) Politics and Social Structure. New York: Free Press, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, Karl 1944. The Great Transformation. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, Karl, Arensberg, Conrad and Perason, Harry W. 1957. Trade and markets in the early Empires. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prandy, K and Blackburn, R. M. 1997. ‘Putting men and women into classes: But is that where they belong?’. Sociology 31, 1: 143-152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prandy, K. 1991. ‘The revised Cambridge scale of occupations’. Sociology 24, 4: 629-655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, Ivan 1998. Class in Britain. London: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rex, John A. 1961. Key Problems of Sociological Theory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, David and O’Reilly, Karen (eds.). 1997. Constructing Classes: Towards A New Social Classification or the UK. Swindon: ESRC and Office for National Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, David and Pevalin, David 2003. A researcher’s Guide to the National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runciman, W. G. 1989b. A Treatise on Social Theory, 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runciman, W. G. 1990. ‘How many classes are there in contemporary British society?’. Sociology 24, 3: 377-396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, Joseph 1927. ‘Social classes in an ethnically homogeneous environment’ in Schumpeter, J. (ed.) Imperialism and Social Classes. New York: Meridian Books, 1955.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, John 1972. ‘Some conceptions of social status’. New Sociology 1, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (1976). Towards a Model of Status: a realistic approach to status in the stratification systems of modern society, with particular reference to the contributions of Weber and Parsons. PhD thesis. Glasgow: University of Strathclyde.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, John 1982. The Upper Classes: Property and Privilege in Britain. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, John 1991. Who Rules Britain? Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, John 1994. Poverty and Wealth: Citizenship, Deprivation and Privilege. Harlow: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, John 1996. Stratification and Power: Structures of Class, Status and Command. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, John 2019. The Emerald Guide to Max Weber. Bingley: Emerald Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, John 2020. ‘Contemporary capitalism and the distribution of power in society’ in Hanke, E., Scaff, L. and Whimster, S. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Max Weber. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, John 2021. ‘ Parsons, the symbolic media, and Weber’s view of power and stratification’ in Trevino, A.J. and Staubmann, H. (eds.) The Routledge International Handbook of Talcott Parsons Studies. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, John 2022. Structure and Social Action. On Constituting and Connecting Social Worlds. Bingley: Emerald Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shils, Edward A. 1961. ‘Centre and periphery’ in Shils, E.A. (ed.) Centre and Periphery: Essays in Macrosociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shils, Edward A. 1965. ‘Charisma, order and status’ in Shils, E.A. (ed.) Centre and Periphery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shils, Edward A. 1968. ‘Deference’ in Shils, E.A. (ed.) Centre and Periphery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Ken 2007. ‘Operationalizing Max Weber’s probability concept of class situation: the concept of social class’. British Journal of Sociology 58, 1: 87-104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorokin, Pitirim 1947. ‘What is a social class?’ in Bendix, R. and Lipset, S.M. (eds.) Class, Status and Power. A Reader in Social Stratification. Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spann, Othmar 1924. ‘Klasse und Stand’ in Elster, L. et al (eds) Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften, Vol. V. Jena: G. Fischer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, Keith 2020. In Pursuit of Civility. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tönnies, Ferdinand 1931. ‘Estates and classes’ in Bendix, R. and Lipset, S.M. (eds.) Class, Status and Power. A Reader in Social Stratification. Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tribe, Keith 2019. ‘Introduction to Max Weber’s Economy and Society’ in Tribe, K. (ed.) Max Weber. Economy and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, Bryan S. 1988. Status. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veblen, Thorstein 1899. The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max 1914a. ‘The distribution of power within the political community: Class, status, party’ in Roth, G. and Wittich, C. (eds.) Economy and Society. New York: Bedminster Press, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max 1914b. ‘Ethnic groups’ in Roth, G. and Wittich, C. (eds.) Economy and Society. New York: Bedminster Press, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max 1915. The Religion of China. New York: Macmillan, 1951.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max 1916. The Religion of India. New York: Macmillan, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max 1920a. ‘Social ranks and social classes’ in Tribe, K. (ed.) Economy and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max 1920b. ‘Types of rule’ in Tribe, K. (ed.) Economy and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Wiese, Leopold 1950. ‘Social security and social ascent as problems of our time’ in Bendix, R. and Lipset, S.M. (eds.) Class, Status and Power. A Reader in Social Stratification. Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wouters, Cas 2007. Informalization: Manners and Emotions since 1890. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, Erik Olin 1985. Classes. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, Erik Olin et al. 1989. The Debate on Classes. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Scott, J. (2024). From Max Weber. In: Class and Social Honour. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45948-1_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45948-1_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-45947-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-45948-1

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics