sociology

Social stratification

Syllabus

• Concept - equality, inequality, hierarchy, exclusion, poverty and deprivation.

Equality - The term equality refers to the state of being equal in some respect. It is the condition in
which member of group of society have equal access to powers, prestige and wealth.
Peter Saunders (UK- Australian writer and sociologist) identified equality as a multifaceted
phenomenon and attributed three characteristics to it.
1. Formal or Legal equality - In most of the modern democracies this type of equality is present
de-facto. That means law of the land provides equality to all. For example - Indian
constitution provides right to equality.
2. Equality of opportunity - It is a symbol of merit-based society in which everyone is given equal
access to opportunities.
3. Equality of outcome - It is a symbol of egalitarian society which provides for equality in terms
of outcomes irrespective of the efforts put by the members.
Though the term equality has various interpretations but most of the sociologist discuss the concept
of equality in a social context. Other contexts could be political, legal, philosophical etc.
In the social context example of French revolution can be given which proposed the idea of liberty,
equality and fraternity. And ever since the French Revolution and growth of liberal democracies,
equality has become one of the agenda of politics.
Though a given human society tries to become an egalitarian society where all members are treated
equally but it has been an elusive goal. To a certain extent it is visible in a simple society but a
complex/modern society as characterised by social inequality. So, it can be claimed social inequality
prevails through all the human societies.
Pointing out this fact Rousseau said men are born free and equal but everywhere they are in chains.
Social Inequality
All human society have some form of social inequality and this inequality depends on access to power,
prestige and wealth.
Power refers to the degree to which an individual or group can impose their will on others without or
with the consent of those others.
Prestige relates to amount of honour or esteem associated with social position, quality of individual
and styles of life.
Wealth refers to material possessions defined as valuable in particular societies. It may include land,
live stocks, money and other forms of property owned by individual or social group.
This implies the term social inequality refers to existence of socially created in inequalities.

Social inequality v/s natural inequality

Page | 2
Social inequality with hierarchy gives rise to social stratification that means social stratification is a
particular form of social inequality. There could be other forms as well.

Majority of stratification system reflect a belief that social inequalities are based on biological
conditions. For example, if whites in USA claim they are superior than blacks then it is racial
stratification which is based on biological condition. But this view has been contested and the
relationship between biologically based inequality and socially created inequality, has not been
established yet.
French philosopher Rousseau defines biologically based inequality as natural or physical inequality. It
is because it is established by nature. This inequality depends on difference of age, health, body
strength and the qualities of mind or soul.
On the other hand, socially created inequality consists of different privileges which some men enjoy
to the prejudice of others such as that of being more rich, more honored or even in a position to exact
obedience.
He believed that biological based inequalities between men were small and relatively unimportant
whereas socially created inequalities provide the major basis for systems of social stratification.
(add points from Haralambos page 34 onwards)

Social inequality

without hierarchy with hierarchy

Social differentiation Social stratification

Social Stratification
Social stratification refers to presence of social groups which are ranked one above the other usually
in terms of amount of power, prestige and wealth their members possess. It reflects one of the forms
of social inequality. That means social stratification involves a hierarchy of social groups. These groups
are similar in terms of their access to power, prestige and wealth.
Hierarchy
Literal meaning of the term hierarchy is gradation or ranking system and this term is commonly used
with reference to social stratification. It refers to any relationship of an individual, groups or classes
involving a system of ranking.
In general terms hierarchy refers to ranking of statuses within a society or an organisation based on
some criteria of evaluation which are accepted as relevant.
Hierarchy is an important concept in sociology because by making use of hierarchical principle it is
easy to find out relative position of an individual or a group in a particular society.

Some aspects of Social stratification

Page | 3
particularly USA is no more stratified in terms of a class system. They suggest social classes which
earlier existed have been replaced by a continuous hierarchy of unequal positions.
In the past when stratification was based on social classes members belonging to a particular class had
a common way of life, shared interests and consciousness of kind. This has been replaced by
occupational statuses which have different degrees of prestige and economic rewards.
Thus, it is suggested that hierarchy of social groups has been replaced by hierarchy of individuals.
• There is a tendency among the members of each stratum to develop their own subculture. That
means certain norms, attitudes, values are particular to them. A subculture tends to develop when
some members of society experience similar circumstances and problems which are not common to
other members belonging to different classes. For example- subculture of slum dwellers or subculture
of working class.
• Members of lower stratum in a stratification system tend to have fatalistic attitude towards life
because their position provide them little opportunity for improvement of status.
This fatalistic attitude becomes part of their subculture and gets transmitted from one generation to
another. This stratum considers luck and fate important for shaping life rather than individual effort
and so they accept the situation.
The subculture of a stratum becomes distinctive when there is little opportunity to move from one
stratum to another. (That means when person belonging to a particular social stratum considers that
she/he cannot change the class they belong to then it represents a distinct subculture.)
For example- If there is a society which is closed, then the different strata will have distinct subculture
from the society which has open system.
[Note - The movement from one stratum to another is known as social mobility which could be upward
as well as downward. 'A social stratification where there is little opportunity for social mobility is
described as closed system. On the other hand, stratification system which has a relatively high rate
of social mobility is described as open. In a closed system individual position is ascribed for example -
caste system. On the other hand, in open system individual's position is largely achieved. That means
position of an individual depends on personal qualities and abilities.]
• Social stratification involves a hierarchy of social group that means members of particular
stratum have a common identity, likes, interests and similar life style. In a social stratification ‘the life
chances' of people depends on stratum he belongs to. This implies social stratification may enhance
or reduce life chances of an individual.
Life chances of an individual includes his/her chances of those things which are defined as desirable
and avoiding those things which are undesirable in their society.
According to Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills life chances include, everything from the chance to stay
alive during the first year after birth to the chance to view fine arts, the chance to remain healthy and
grow tall, and if sick to get well again quickly, the chance to avoid becoming a juvenile delinquent and
very crucially, the chance to complete an intermediary or higher educational grade.

Theories related to social stratification

Page | 4
4. Weberian Perspective.
Note - The functionalist perspective will justify the existence of social stratification considering it
functional for the society. On the other hand, Marx will explain social stratification in terms of
ownership of means of production and how it reflects the exploitation of capitalist society. Max weber
on the other hand will analyse social stratification with his multi causality, criticising Marx for being
monocausal.
Functionalist Theory/Perspective.
Functionalist maintain that a certain degree of order and stability are essential for the operation of
social system. They will therefore consider social stratification helps to maintain order and stability in
society.
Functionalist are primarily concerned with the function of social stratification with its contribution to
maintenance and well-being of society.
Talcott Parsons justifies stratification system and claims it is derived from common value that means
stratification in a society comes out of value consensus.
1. According to Parsons stratification is the ranking of unit in social system in accordance with the
common value system.
This implies those individuals who perform successfully in terms of society's values are ranked in
higher positions and they are likely to receive variety of rewards. At the minimum level they will be
given high prestige because they become examples of common values.
Parsons justifies his argument by giving example of a North American tribe Sioux Indians. In this tribe
high value is given to bravery and generosity. So those individuals who excel in these terms receive
high rank in the stratification system. For example-those Sioux warriors who successfully raid
traditional enemies such as Crow and Pawnee reflect bravery and if they capture horses and distribute
them to others then it reflects generosity. For this personification of common values, they may receive
following rewards - these warriors may be given seats in tribal council, other warriors may follow them
and ultimately, they may be chosen as war-chiefs. Their women or wife would create song and sing
their exploits or bravery. This is all about giving them higher ranks in the stratification system of the
tribe.
Another example Parsons provides of American Society which gives importance to individual
achievement, efficiency and productive activity within the economy. This reflects their value system
and so a successful business executive who has achieved his position through his own initiative, ability
and ambition receives high rewards in American society.
2. It is further argued that it is not necessary that stratification in considered as just, right and proper
by all the people because it is expression of shared values. And so there will be a conflict between
those who receive rewards and those who do not.
Recognizing this fact Parsons claim that in western industrial society there will be certain tendencies
such as arrogance on the part of winner and resentment and sour grape attitude on the part of losers.
But Parsons believes this conflict is kept in check by common value system which justifies the unequal
distribution of rewards.
3. Further, in order to explain stratification and its inevitability Parsons took help of relationship
between different social groups in the society. As no social group is self-sufficient therefore exchange
of goods and services takes place between different groups. Depending on the importance of services
stratification comes into existence.

Page | 5
Parsons explain this through example of different organisations in western society. These
organisations involve leadership and authority for smooth functioning so those who have power to
organise and coordinate the activity of others, tend to have higher status than those they direct.
Thus, according to Parsons social stratification is both inevitable as well as functional for the society.
It is inevitable because it depends on shared values which are present in all the social system and it is
functional because it serves to integrate various groups in society. From this assumption it also implies
without social inequality members of society could not effectively cooperate and work together.
Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore
Davis and Moore gave the most famous functionalist theory of stratification in an article entitled
'Some principles of Stratification’ in 1945. They began with the hypothesis that stratification exists in
every known human society. And they tried to explain this hypothesis in functional terms. (that means
they tried to prove their hypothesis through functional perspective.)
For this they argued that all social systems have certain functional prerequisite which must be met for
the system to survive and operate efficiently.
As per them one such functional prerequisite is effective role allocation and performance.
Here ‘effective role allocation and performance' means-
1. All roles must be filed.
2. They be filled by those best able to perform them.
3. Necessary training for these roles be undertaken.
4. Roles be performed conscientiously.
They argued that all societies need some mechanism for this functionalism prerequisite and this
mechanism is social stratification.
A major function of stratification is to match the most able people with the functionally most
important positions. Social stratification does this by attaching high rewards to those positions. The
desire for such rewards motivates people to compete and the most talented wins through. So, Davis
and Moore conclude that social stratification is a device by which societies ensure that the most
important positions are conscientiously filled by the most qualified people.
They also pointed out one difficulty in their theory that it does not show clearly which position is
functionally most important. For this they suggested that the importance of a position can be
measured in two ways.
1. Firstly, by the degree to which a position is functionally unique that means there is no other
position which can perform the same function in a satisfactory manner. So, for example -
a doctor is functionally more important than a nurse, because a doctor’s position involves
many of the skills through which a nurse role can be performed but not vice- versa.
2. Secondly, by the degree to which other positions are dependent on the position in
question. For example - the position of a manager is more important than the routine office
staff because all the routine office staffs are dependent on the direction of manager.
So, it can conclude that according to Davis & Moore social stratification is a functional necessity for all
the societies- They consider it as a solution to a common problem of all the systems which is about
placing and motivating individual in the social structure. This implies they also consider social
inequality as an inevitable future of human society.
Assessment of Davis-Moore theory
Melvin. M. Tumin is the most famous opponent of theory proposed by Davis and Moore. He criticised
their theory on following grounds.

Page | 6
(i) He first questioned the adequacy of measurement of functional importance of position. That
means he was not satisfied the way Davis and Moore described functional importance of a
position. Davis and Moore assumed that most highly rewarded positions are indeed the most
important. Rejecting this hypothesis Tumin claims there are many occupations which have
little prestige or economic reward but they are vital to the society. Tumin claims some labour
force of unskilled workers is as important and indispensable as some labour force of engineers
in a factory. So, there is no objective way of measuring the functional importance of positions,
it is simply a matter of opinion.
(ii) Tumin further criticised Davis and Moore for ignoring the influence of power on the unequal
distribution of rewards. He claimed the difference in pay and prestige between different
occupational groups may be due to their different power status rather than their functional
importance. For example, the wage of farm labourers is different from the coal miner because
of the difference of their bargaining power.
(iii) Tumin further criticised Davis and Moore's assumption that only a limited number of
individuals have the talent to acquire the skills necessary for the functionally most important
positions. Tumin rejected this assumption on following grounds.
(a) An effective method of measuring talent and ability has not been devised yet. (so how
they can claim limited number of individuals are talented).
(b) There is no proof that exceptional talents are required for those positions which Davis
and Moore considered important.
(c) The pool talent in a society may be considerably larger than Davis and Moore assumed
and so unequal rewards may not be necessary to harness it.
(iv) Tumin further questioned Davis and Moore’s view that training should be regarded as a
sacrifice and therefore be compensated. He claims the reward of being a student is already
given in the form of leisure, freedom and the opportunity for self-development. And the loss
of earning can be compensated during the first 10 years of work and not for the whole working
life.
(v) According to Davis and Moore unequal rewards motivate talented individuals so that they can
acquire functionally most important positions. Tumin rejected this view. He claimed social
stratification acts as a barrier to the motivation of requirement of talent. This is clearly visible
in close system such as caste and racial stratification. So, in a closed stratification system
unequal distribution of rewards operate in exactly the opposite way suggested by Davis &
Moore.

Page | 7