Answer:
Mills criticizes the Parsonian formulation of social order, in particular the idea that the social order can really be seen as a whole. He maintains that each individual does not simply integrate into society, nor does he assimilate the totality of its cultural forms. Furthermore, domination can be seen as an extension of power and social stratification. Brewer (2004) sees The Sociological Imagination as an extension of other MIlls' works such as The Power Elite and White Collar. According to Mills, what theorists call value orientation could actually be a form of domination, and therefore may simply be a form of legitimation (Mills, 1959, 33-36).
Step-by-step explanation:
We live in a society that is still conditioned by the fact that women, even if they work, must be responsible for the care of the home and their children. You can now appreciate the social and macho inequality in this fact. The woman took a great step overcoming Prejudices and reaching their personal achievements, studies, trains, there are women researchers, professionals, but with the limitation that they must be alone and consequently responsible for their children and their home.
In this social order, which has created society itself, the fact of female development continues to be idealized within a culture that has been predominantly male, but despite what women have achieved, despite their attributed status within society from being inferior to men, on the private plane of his home he carries the emotional burden of raising and raising his children, men can develop intellectually but emotional and spiritual responsibility has not been attributed to them in the same equality as women to take care of your children as well as dedicating valuable and quality time.
For Karl Marx social classes can be understood in two ways, either as: 1) groups of individuals who are defined by the same categorization of their ways of relating to the material means of production (particularly the way of obtaining their incomes), or 2) a class consciousness understood as the belief in a community of interests between a specific type of socioeconomic relations.
Weber distinguishes between social classes, status groups and political parties, different strata that correspond respectively to the economic, social and political orders.
Social classes are defined by the economically determinable relationship between their members and the market. These are only one of the forms of social stratification, attending to the conditions of material life, and do not constitute a group conscious of its own unity beyond certain conditions without a necessary community of interests.
Status groups are distinguished by their mode of consumption and by their differentiated social practices that depend both on objective elements (what Pierre Bourdieu would later call social capital) and on other purely subjective elements such as reputation (honor, prestige, etc.)
Political parties can access state power and alter with abstract mandates the abstract rules of society, using their influence to obtain ideal or material benefits for their members, which institutionally unify common interests and social status pre-existing to the State or generated from the.