For Karl Marx, the stratification of social classes was the most significant source of societal conflict. Max Weber's definition of social class differs most notably from Marx's conception of the term in the sense that for Weber, social class and political class cannot simply be lumped together as a single entity. (Humanities)
Weber viewed and defined social and political realms separately in an attempt to put emphasis on the unique dynamic that power possesses in its own right, apart from economic interests. Moreover, he wanted to highlight the irrational features of power by making it clear that the rational interests of a class are not sufficient to explain the dynamics of society, particularly when comparing one society to another. (Humanities).
Marx has a much more optimistic view of conflict theory than Weber. Where Marx would say the proletariat have revolution as an ultimate recourse, Weber says we're screwed pretty much regardless. Marx does not consider inequality to be inevitable (not the natural product of human interaction, so man is not naturally flawed) and the major tenants of Marxism are towards a Better, more Just society (prescriptive goal of social science). Weber, on the other hand, distrusted human nature and saw inequality as inevitable. Our analysis of human interaction, in his opinion, should be value-free and non-prescriptive given such a nature
In today's sociology, we tend to see the same three factors, although Marxist sociologists still emphasize the relations to the means of production (including now the production of ideas and information). Weber saw society as having several layers, not only two, and that factors other than the material were important. Today, there is still a tension between owners and workers, but there are greater proportions of people in other situations, dealers in information, managers, civil servants, which