http://www.luxist.com/2011/03/08/bill-gates-gives-up-worlds-richest-man-status-for-philanthrop
Today, we talked about the Weber’s theory of Status. Weber thinks “status groups are normally communities […] that are determined by a specific, positive or negative, social estimation of honor. (191) I think the most interesting part is that status is not necessary cause of wealth or income but tradition or prestige. The concept of tradition, we can see the example of Charles becomes a prince once he was born in the British royal family, so does Prince William and don’t need to get any particular. That royal family keeps the honor from George V (1865-1936) till present. British royal family worth more than $1 billion; comparing with this, Bill Gates’ wealth is US$ 61 billion (2012), 61 times more. Bill also owns status by his contribution to the society, such as his Philanthropy activities once he got huge succeed. He created the Microsoft Empire by his talent in PC system and pushed PC operation system quickly expanding all over the world by visualizing Dos to the simple windows operation system, which let anyone without any program background easily uses it. And then, his system dominates at all worlds’ PC market share till now. According to above link, he gives Up “World’s Richest Man” Status for Philanthropy. It made me think how we use our wealth and return to our society like what Bill Gates does if we were not born with a gold key (honor). Usually, status seems be stability because of the general tradition attribute. However, Bill’ story gives us another concept of honor. Which one would be more impressed in public, especially for our business college students?
