Final answer:
Both functionalism and conflict theory attempt to explain social stratification, with functionalism emphasizing beneficial aspects for the society, while conflict theory highlights inequality and class conflict.
Step-by-step explanation:
It is true that both functionalism and conflict theory attempt to explain social stratification. Social stratification is a system by which a society ranks categories of people in a hierarchy, and these two theoretical frameworks offer different perspectives on this process.
Functionalism posits that social stratification exists because it has beneficial functions for society. It suggests that various social structures and roles must be filled and that social stratification ensures that the most qualified individuals fulfill the most important roles. Though not always explicit, this implies some degree of societal consensus about the value of different positions.
On the other hand, conflict theory, which draws heavily from the ideas of Karl Marx, views stratification through a lens of dominance and subordination. It suggests that stratification exists because it benefits those in power at the expense of those with less power. This theory emphasizes social inequality and class conflict, arguing that the rich and powerful preserve their status by exploiting and controlling the less privileged.
While functionalism highlights the stabilizing functions of stratification, conflict theory focuses on the tensions and disparities it creates. Both frameworks are informative, yet they emphasize different aspects of social reality, prompting ongoing debate about which best explains how societies operate.