Social stratification: Difference between revisions

{{Short description|Concept in sociology}}

{{sociology}}

In modern [[Western world|Western societies]], social stratification is typically defined in terms of three [[social class]]es: the [[upper class]], the [[middle class]], and the [[Working class|lower class]]; in turn, each class can be subdivided into the upper-stratum, the middle-stratum, and the lower stratum.<ref name="Saunders1990">{{cite book | author-link=Peter Robert Saunders | url=https://archive.org/details/socialclassstrat0000saun | url-access=registration | title=Social Class and Stratification | publisher=Routledge | last=Saunders | first=Peter | year=1990 | isbn=978-0-415-04125-6}}</ref> Moreover, a social stratum can be formed upon the bases of [[kinship]], [[clan]], [[tribe]], or [[caste]], or all four.

==Overview==

===Definition and usage===

The concept of social stratification is often used and interpreted differently within specific theories. In [[sociology]], for example, proponents of [[Action theory (sociology)|action theory]] have suggested that social stratification is commonly found in [[Development theory|developed]] societies, wherein a [[dominance hierarchy]] may be necessary in order to maintain [[social order]] and provide a stable [[social structure]]. [[Conflict theory|Conflict theories]], such as [[Marxism]], point to the inaccessibility of resources and lack of [[social mobility]] found in stratified societies. Many sociological theorists have criticized the fact that the [[working classes]] are often unlikely to advance socioeconomically while the [[Wealth#The upper class|wealthy]] tend to hold political power which they use to [[Exploitation of labour|exploit]] the [[proletariat]] (laboring class). [[Talcott Parsons]], an American sociologist, asserted that stability and social order are regulated, in part, by [[universal value]]s.  Such values are not identical with "consensus" but can indeed be an impetus for social conflict, as has been the case multiple times through history. Parsons never claimed that universal values, in and by themselves, "satisfied" the [[functional prerequisites]] of a society.  Indeed, the constitution of society represents a much more complicated codification of emerging historical factors. Theorists such as [[Ralf Dahrendorf]] alternately note the tendency toward an enlarged middle-class in modern Western societies due to the necessity of an educated workforce in technological economies. Various social and political perspectives concerning [[globalization]], such as [[dependency theory]], suggest that these effects are due to changes in the status of workers to the [[third world]].

===Social mobility===

====Karl Marx====

In Marxist theory, the modern [[mode of production]] consists of two main economic parts: the base and the superstructure. The base encompasses the [[relations of production]]: employer–employee work conditions, the technical [[division of labour]], and property relations. Social class, according to [[Marx]], is determined by one's relationship to the means of production.  There exist at least two classes in any class-based society: the owners of the means of production and those who sell their labor to the owners of the means of production.  At times, Marx almost hints that the ruling classes seem to own the working class itself as they only have their own [[labor power]] ('[[wage labor]]') to offer the more powerful in order to survive. These relations fundamentally determine the ideas and philosophies of a society and additional classes may form as part of the superstructure. Through the ideology of the ruling class—throughout much of history, the land-owning [[aristocracy]]—[[false consciousness]] is promoted both through political and non-political institutions but also through the [[arts]] and other elements of [[culture]]. When the aristocracy falls,  the [[bourgeoisie]] become the owners of the means of production in the capitalist system. Marx predicted the [[capitalist]] mode would eventually give way, through its own internal conflict, to revolutionary consciousness and the development of more egalitarian, more [[communist]] societies.

According to [[Marvin Harris]]<ref>{{cite book | last=Harris | first=Marvin | author-link=Marvin Harris | year=1967 | title=The Rise of Anthropological Theory: A History of Theories of Culture | publisher=Routledge | isbn=0-7591-0133-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TlgVAAAAIAAJ}}</ref> and [[Tim Ingold]],<ref name="Ingold, Tim 2006 p. 400">Ingold, Tim (2006) "On the social relations of the hunter-gatherer band," in [[Richard Borshay Lee|Richard B. Lee]] and Richard H. Daly (eds.), ''The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Hunters and Gatherers,'' p. 400. New York: Cambridge University Press. {{ISBN|0-521-60919-4}}</ref> [[Lewis Henry Morgan]]'s accounts of egalitarian hunter-gatherers formed part of Karl Marx' and [[Friedrich Engels]]' inspiration for [[communism]]. Morgan spoke of a situation in which people living in the same community pooled their efforts and shared the rewards of those efforts fairly equally. He called this "communism in living." But when Marx expanded on these ideas, he still emphasized an economically oriented culture, with [[property]] defining the fundamental relationships between people.<ref>Barnard, Alan (2006) "Images of hunters and gatherers in European social thought," in [[Richard Borshay Lee|Richard B. Lee]] and Richard H. Daly (eds.), ''The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Hunters and Gatherers,'' p. 379. New York: Cambridge University Press. {{ISBN|0-521-60919-4}}</ref> Yet, issues of [[ownership]] and property are arguably less emphasized in hunter-gatherer societies.<ref name="Gowdy2006">{{cite encyclopedia | isbn=0-521-60919-4 | title=Hunter-gatherers and the mythology of the market | encyclopedia=The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Hunters and Gatherers | publisher=Cambridge University Press | author=Gowdy, John | editor=Lee, Richard B. and Richard H. Daly | year=2006 | pages=391–393}}</ref> This, combined with the very different social and economic situations of hunter-gatherers may account for many of the difficulties encountered when implementing communism in industrialized states. As Ingold points out: "The notion of communism, removed from the context of domesticity and harnessed to support a project of social engineering for large-scale, industrialized states with populations of millions, eventually came to mean something quite different from what Morgan had intended: namely, a principle of redistribution that would override all ties of a personal or familial nature, and cancel out their effects."<ref name="Ingold, Tim 2006 p. 400"/>

====Max Weber====

{{Main|Elite theory}}

The upper class individuals who receive elite educations typically have the essential background and contacts to enter into the three branches of the power elite: The political leadership, the military circle, and the corporate elite.<ref name="Doob" />

==Variables in theory and research==

===Economic===

Social variables, both quantitative and [[qualitative research|qualitative]], typically provide the most explanatory power in [[Causality|causal]] research regarding social stratification, either as [[Independent variable#Independent variable|independent]] variables or as [[intervening variable]]s. Three important social variables include [[gender roles|gender]], [[Race (human classification)|race]], and [[ethnicity]], which, at the least, have an intervening effect on social status and stratification in most places throughout the world.<ref name="Hill1998">{{cite book | title="Toward a new vision: race, class and gender as categories of analysis and connection" in Social Class and Stratification: Classic Statements and Theoretical Debates | publisher=Rowman & Littlefield | author=Collins, Patricia Hill | year=1998 | location=Boston | pages=231–247}}</ref> Additional variables include those that describe other ascribed and achieved characteristics such as [[Job (role)|occupation]] and [[skill]] levels, [[Ageing|age]], [[education]] level, education level of parents, and [[Geography|geographic]] area. Some of these variables may have both causal and intervening effects on social status and stratification.  For example, absolute age may cause a low income if one is too young or too old to perform productive work.  The social perception of age and its role in the workplace, which may lead to [[ageism]], typically has an intervening effect on [[employment]] and income.

====Gender====

{{Main|Ethnocentricity}}

==See also==

{{refbegin}}

* {{cite book | title=Social Stratification: Class, Race, and Gender in Sociological Perspective | publisher=Westview Press | author=Grusky, David B. | year=2014 | location=Boulder | isbn=978-0813346717| edition=4th }}

{{refend}}

{{Library resources box

|by=no

{{Social class}}

[[Category:Social stratification| ]]

[[Category:Anthropological categories of peoples]]