Revision summary
Davis and Moore: unequal rewards fill important roles; the device is unconscious. Tumin: importance is politically defined. Marx and Weber add exploitation, status, and party. Caste and gender close talent before sorting begins. Use the thesis for incentives; do not use it as a full theory of inequality.
Model answer
Introduction
Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore argued that unequal rewards place talent in functionally important roles. Stratification is, for them, a necessity of complex society and a device that works without a planner. The claim is neat. It is also contested.
Body
Functional necessity
- Some positions are more functionally important and harder to fill. Higher prestige and pay attract training and effort.
- The family and school sort people into those slots. Inequality is treated as a mechanism of allocation, not as theft.
- The device is unconscious: no committee sits to invent caste or class. The pattern is said to arise as a system need.
Limits of the thesis
- Melvin Tumin asked who decides importance. Power, not function, often sets pay, as inherited wealth shows.
- Karl Marx treated class as exploitation, not as a talent contest. Max Weber added status and party.
- Indian caste and gender close talent before the market opens. M. N. Srinivas’s Sanskritisation is group honour, not Davis–Moore sorting.
- Census and NFHS inequalities of education and work sit poorly with a pure necessity story.
Discussion
- The thesis names a real problem of filling skilled roles.
- Calling the device unconscious hides who benefits. Necessity is an overclaim.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD NEED[System need for talent] --> DM[Davis Moore] DM --> REW[Unequal rewards] POW[Power ascription] --> CRIT[Tumin Marx caste] CRIT --> LIM[Not pure necessity]
Conclusion
Davis and Moore made stratification a functional sorter that no one designs. Tumin, Marx, and caste–gender closure show that power and ascription also allocate. Treat the thesis as a hypothesis about incentives, not as a defence of every hierarchy.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
What is the Marxist concept of 'fetishism of commodities'?
Next question in the 2019 paper (Q1). View answer →
-
Did they praise inequality as moral?
They presented it as a system device. Critics say that still naturalises privilege.
-
Is the device really unconscious?
No elite sits to invent the whole map, but laws, schools, and property are quite conscious.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2020 · Q2(b) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
How are Hierarchy and Exclusion the major impediments in the transformation of societies ? Discuss. -
2020 · Q4(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
Critically assess social mobility in closed and open systems. -
2019 · Q4(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 20 marks
Modernization presupposes class society; however caste, ethnicity and race are still predominant. Explain -
2019 · Q6(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 20 marks
Why is gender dimension of social stratification ? How does gender intersect other dimensions of inequality based on caste, class, race and ethnicity ? -
2018 · Q1(d) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
What is the difference between natural and social inequality examples from caste and class dimensions -
2018 · Q5(e) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
In social mobility possible in closed systems of stratification ? Illustrate from research work. -
2017 · Q4(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 20 marks
What is Weberian critique of Marxist notion of social stratification -
2017 · Q4(b) · Sociology GS 1 · 20 marks
Examine gender. Ethnicity and race as major dimensions of social stratification
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2019 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Discuss the historical antecedents of the emergence of Sociology as a discipline
Sociology
Sociology emerged when industry, the state, and revolution made society a problem. Enlightenment comparison and Saint-Simon–Comte positivism supplied permission. Nisbet’s conservative themes of community and authority also fed the field. Marx, Durkheim, and Weber turned the name into a discipline. Census offices made method a public craft.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2019 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
What is the Marxist concept of 'fetishism of commodities'?
Sociology
Fetishism of commodities: social relations among producers appear as relations among things. Exchange-value hides labour time as price. The illusion is socially real, not a personal superstition. Lukács extended it as reification. Gig pay and piece-rates still carry the appearance.
Q1(d) · UPSC Mains 2019 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Present a sociological review on the 'new middle class'
Sociological Thinkers: Karl Marx
New middle class: salaried professionals and managers, not owners of capital. Mills, Wright, and Bourdieu map white-collar dependence and cultural capital. Indian liberalisation made consumption the public face. Caste and gender still cut the slab. A minority layer beside informal labour.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.