Davis–Moore hypothesis

Argument

The Davis-Moore hypothesis is Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore's explanation and justification of social stratification, based on the idea of "functional necessity." They argue that the most difficult jobs in any society are the most necessary and require the highest rewards and compensation to sufficiently motivate individuals to fill them. Once the roles are filled, society functions properly, based on the notion of organic solidarity. Inequality is in principle justified with reference to the ideal of social stability.

Criticism

This argument has been criticized as fallacious from a number of different angles. The first problem is that they posit rewards as a guarantee of performance, when rewards are supposed to be based on merit in their argument. Additionally, they does not clearly indicate why some positions are worth more than others, other than the fact that they are paid more than others. E.g., teachers are equally, if not more, functionally necessary than athletes and movie stars, yet, they receive significantly lower incomes. These critics have suggested that structural inequality (inherited wealth, family power, etc.), is itself a cause of individual success or failure, rather than a consequence of it.