1954/08/01 by Gerhard Lenski · 4 citations
Social Sciences · Psychology · Mathematics · #Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice #Dimension (graph theory) #Crystallization #Social status #Sociology #Psychology #Social psychology #Mathematics #Demographic economics #Pure mathematics #Physics #Social science #Economics #Thermodynamics
paper · doi:10.2307/2087459
openalex publication_date 1954/08/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/03
IN recent years there have been numerous indications that, in the analysis of social stratification, sociology is rapidly outgrowing the classical conceptual schemes inherited from the past. Critically inclined students have come increasingly to recognize the inability of the older schemes to incorporate many of the findings of present day research, or to adapt themselves to newer theoretical concerns. This trend is evident even with respect to such a basic matter as the manner in which the vertical structure of groups is conceived. From Aristotle to Marx to Warner, most social philosophers and social scientists have described the vertical structure of human groups in terms of a single hierarchy in which each member occupies a single position. Different exponents of this traditional scheme have not always agreed regarding the nature or characteristics of this hierarchical structure. Nevertheless, all have shared the common conception of a unidimensional structure. Since Max Weber's day, however, this traditional approach has come to be criticized by a growing number of sociologists, who have argued that the uni-dimensional view is inadequate to describe the complexities of group structure. These critics have maintained that the structure of human groups normally involves the coexistence of a number of parallel vertical hierarchies which usually are imperfectly correlated with one another. If this newer approach is sound, the traditional conception of individual or family