An indicator of the social stratification of society is. Social stratification definition

Introduction

Human society at all stages of its development was characterized by inequality. Sociologists call structured inequalities between different groups of people stratification.

Social stratification is the differentiation of a given set of people (population) into classes in a hierarchical rank. Its basis and essence lies in the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, the presence and absence of social values, power and influence among members of a particular community. Specific forms of social stratification are varied and numerous. However, all their diversity can be reduced to three main forms: economic, political and professional stratification. As a rule, they are all closely intertwined. Social stratification is a constant characteristic of any organized society.

In real life, human inequality plays a huge role. Inequality is a specific form of social differentiation in which individuals, layers, classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy and have unequal life chances and opportunities to satisfy needs. Inequality is the criterion by which we can place some groups above or below others. Social structure arises from the social division of labor, and social stratification arises from the social distribution of the results of labor, i.e. social benefits.

Stratification is closely related to the prevailing value system in society. It forms a normative scale for assessing various types of human activity, on the basis of which people are ranked according to the degree of social prestige.

Social stratification performs a double function: it acts as a method of identifying the layers of a given society and at the same time represents its social portrait. Social stratification is characterized by a certain stability within a specific historical stage.

1. Stratification term

Social stratification is a central theme in sociology. It describes social inequality in society, the division of social strata by income level and lifestyle, by the presence or absence of privileges. In primitive society, inequality was insignificant, so stratification was almost absent there. In complex societies, inequality is very strong; it divides people according to income, level of education, and power. Castes arose, then estates, and later classes. In some societies, transition from one social layer (stratum) to another is prohibited; There are societies where such a transition is limited, and there are societies where it is completely permitted. Freedom of social movement (mobility) determines whether a society is closed or open.

The term "stratification" comes from geology, where it refers to the vertical arrangement of the Earth's layers. Sociology has likened the structure of society to the structure of the Earth and placed social layers (strata) also vertically. The basis is an income ladder: the poor occupy the lowest rung, the affluent groups the middle, and the rich the top.

Each stratum includes only those people who have approximately the same income, power, education and prestige. Inequality of distances between statuses is the main property of stratification. The social stratification of any society includes four scales - income, education, power, prestige.

Income is the amount of cash receipts of an individual or family for a certain period of time (month, year). Income is the amount of money received in the form of wages, pensions, benefits, alimony, fees, and deductions from profits. Income is measured in rubles or dollars, which is received by an individual (individual income) or a family (family income) over a certain period of time, say one month or year.

Income is most often spent on maintaining life, but if it is very high, it accumulates and turns into wealth.

Wealth is accumulated income, i.e. amount of cash or materialized money. In the second case, they are called movable (car, yacht, securities, etc.) and immovable (house, works of art, treasures) property. Wealth is usually inherited. Both working and non-working people can receive inheritance, but only working people can receive income. Besides them, pensioners and the unemployed have income, but the poor do not. The rich can work or not work. In both cases they are owners because they have wealth. The main asset of the upper class is not income, but accumulated property. The salary share is small. For the middle and lower classes, the main source of existence is income, since the first, if there is wealth, is insignificant, and the second does not have it at all. Wealth allows you not to work, but its absence forces you to work for a salary.

Wealth and income are distributed unevenly and represent economic inequality. Sociologists interpret it as an indicator that different groups of the population have unequal life chances. They buy different quantities and qualities of food, clothing, housing, etc. People who have more money eat better, live in more comfortable homes, prefer a personal car to public transport, can afford expensive vacations, etc. But in addition to obvious economic advantages, the wealthy strata have hidden privileges. The poor have shorter lives (even if they enjoy all the benefits of medicine), less educated children (even if they go to the same public schools), etc.

Education is measured by the number of years of education in a public or private school or university. Let's say primary school means 4 years, junior high – 9 years, high school – 11, college – 4 years, university – 5 years, graduate school – 3 years, doctoral studies – 3 years. Thus, a professor has more than 20 years of formal education behind him, while a plumber may not have eight.

Power is measured by the number of people who are affected by the decision you make (power is the ability to impose your will or decisions on other people regardless of their wishes).

The essence of power is the ability to impose your will against the wishes of other people. In a complex society, power is institutionalized, i.e. protected by laws and tradition, surrounded by privileges and wide access to social benefits, allows decisions vital for society to be made, including laws that usually benefit the upper class. In all societies, people who have some form of power - political, economic or religious - constitute an institutionalized elite. It represents the domestic and foreign policy of the state, directing it in a direction beneficial to itself, which other classes are deprived of.

The three scales of stratification - income, education and power - have completely objective units of measurement: dollars. Years, people. Prestige stands outside this series, since it is a subjective indicator.

Prestige is the respect that a particular profession, position, or occupation enjoys in public opinion. The profession of a lawyer is more prestigious than the profession of a steelmaker or plumber. The position of president of a commercial bank is more prestigious than the position of cashier. All professions, occupations and positions existing in a given society can be ranked from top to bottom on the ladder of professional prestige. As a rule, professional prestige is determined by us intuitively, approximately.

2. Systems of social stratification

Regardless of the forms that social stratification takes, its existence is universal. There are four main systems of social stratification: slavery, castes, clans and classes.

Slavery is an economic, social and legal form of enslavement of people, bordering on complete lack of rights and extreme inequality. An essential feature of slavery is the ownership of some people by others.

Three reasons for slavery are usually cited. Firstly, a debt obligation, when a person who was unable to pay his debts fell into slavery to his creditor. Secondly, violation of laws, when the execution of a murderer or robber was replaced by slavery, i.e. the culprit was handed over to the affected family as compensation for the grief or damage caused. Thirdly, war, raids, conquest, when one group of people conquered another and the winners used some of the captives as slaves.

Conditions of slavery. Conditions of slavery and slavery varied significantly in different regions of the world. In some countries, slavery was a temporary condition of a person: after working the allotted time for his master, the slave became free and had the right to return to his homeland.

General characteristics of slavery. Although slaveholding practices varied in different regions and in different eras, whether slavery was the result of unpaid debt, punishment, military captivity, or racial prejudice; whether it was lifelong or temporary; hereditary or not, a slave was still the property of another person, and a system of laws secured the status of a slave. Slavery served as a basic distinction between people, clearly indicating which person was free (and legally entitled to certain privileges) and which person was a slave (without privileges).

Slavery has evolved historically. There are two forms:

Patriarchal slavery - the slave had all the rights of the youngest member of the family: he lived in the same house with the owners, participated in public life, married free people; it was forbidden to kill him;

Classical slavery - the slave lived in a separate room, did not participate in anything, did not marry and did not have a family, he was considered the property of the owner.

Slavery is the only form of social relations in history when one person is the property of another, and when the lower stratum is deprived of all rights and freedoms.

Caste is a social group (stratum) whose membership a person owes solely to his birth.

The achieved status is not able to change the individual’s place in this system. People who are born into a low status group will always have that status, no matter what they personally achieve in life.

Societies characterized by this form of stratification strive to clearly maintain boundaries between castes, so endogamy is practiced here - marriages within one's own group - and there is a ban on intergroup marriages. To prevent contact between castes, such societies develop complex rules regarding ritual purity, according to which interaction with members of lower castes is considered to pollute the higher caste.

Clan is a clan or related group connected by economic and social ties.

The clan system is typical of agrarian societies. In such a system, each individual is connected to an extensive social network of relatives - a clan. A clan is something like a very extended family and has similar characteristics: if the clan has a high status, the individual belonging to this clan has the same status; all funds belonging to the clan, meager or rich, belong equally to each member of the clan; Loyalty to the clan is the lifelong responsibility of each member.

Clans also resemble castes: membership in a clan is determined by birth and is lifelong. However, unlike castes, marriages between different clans are quite permitted; they can even be used to create and strengthen alliances between clans, since the obligations imposed by marriage on the in-laws can unite members of two clans. Processes of industrialization and urbanization transform clans into more fluid groups, eventually replacing clans with social classes.

Clans especially unite during times of danger, as can be seen from the following example.

A class is a large social group of people who do not own the means of production, occupying a certain place in the system of social division of labor and characterized by a specific way of generating income.

Stratification systems based on slavery, castes and clans are closed. The boundaries separating people are so clear and rigid that they leave no room for people to move from one group to another, with the exception of marriages between members of different clans. The class system is much more open because it is based primarily on money or material possessions. Class membership is also determined at birth - an individual receives the status of his parents, but an individual's social class during his life can change depending on what he managed (or failed) to achieve in life. In addition, there are no laws defining an individual's occupation or profession based on birth or prohibiting marriage with members of other social classes.

Consequently, the main characteristic of this system of social stratification is the relative flexibility of its boundaries. The class system leaves opportunities for social mobility, i.e. to move up or down the social ladder. Having the potential to improve one's social status, or class, is one of the main driving forces that motivates people to study well and work hard. Of course, the family status inherited by a person from birth can determine extremely unfavorable conditions that will not leave him a chance to rise too high in life, and provide the child with such privileges that it will be almost impossible for him to “slide down” the class ladder.

Whatever typologies of classes scientists and thinkers have come up with. The ancient philosophers Plato and Aristotle were the first to propose their model.

Today in sociology they offer different typologies of classes.

More than half a century has passed since Lloyd Warner developed his concept of classes. Today it has been replenished with another layer and in its final form it represents a seven-point scale.

The upper - upper class includes the "aristocrats by blood" who emigrated to America 200 years ago and over the course of many generations accumulated untold wealth. They are distinguished by a special way of life, high society manners, impeccable taste and behavior.

The lower – upper class consists mainly of the “new rich”, who have not yet managed to create powerful clans that have seized the highest positions in industry, business, and politics. Typical representatives are a professional basketball player or a pop star, receiving tens of millions, but in a family that does not have “aristocrats by blood.”

The upper-middle class consists of the petty bourgeoisie and highly paid professionals, such as large lawyers, famous doctors, actors or television commentators. Their lifestyle is approaching that of high society, but they still cannot afford a fashionable villa in the most expensive resorts in the world or a rare collection of artistic rarities.

The middle class represents the most massive stratum of a developed industrial society. It includes all well-paid employees, moderately paid professionals, in a word, people in intellectual professions, including teachers, teachers, and middle managers. This is the backbone of the information society and the service sector.

The lower-middle class consisted of low-level employees and skilled workers, who, by the nature and content of their work, gravitated toward mental rather than physical labor. A distinctive feature is a decent lifestyle.

The upper-lower class includes medium- and low-skilled workers employed in mass production, in local factories, living in relative prosperity, but with a behavior pattern significantly different from the upper and middle class. Distinctive features: low education (usually complete and incomplete secondary, specialized secondary), passive leisure (watching TV, playing cards or dominoes), primitive entertainment, often excessive consumption of alcohol and non-literary language.

Lower - the lowest class consists of inhabitants of basements, attics, slums and other places less suitable for living. They do not have any or primary education, most often survive by doing odd jobs or begging, and constantly feel an inferiority complex due to hopeless poverty and constant humiliation. They are usually called the “social bottom”, or underclass. Most often, their ranks are recruited from chronic alcoholics, former prisoners, homeless people, etc.

The term "upper class" means the upper stratum of the upper class. In all two-part words, the first word denotes the stratum or layer, and the second – the class to which the given layer belongs. "Upper-lower class" is sometimes called as it is, and sometimes it is used to designate the working class.

In sociology, the criterion for assigning a person to one or another layer is not only income, but also the amount of power, level of education and prestige of the occupation, which presuppose a specific lifestyle and style of behavior. You can get a lot, but spend all the money or drink it on drink. It is not only the income of money that is important, but its expenditure, and this is already a way of life.

The working class in modern post-industrial society includes two layers: lower - middle and upper - lower. All intellectual workers, no matter how little they earn, are never classified in the lower class.

The middle class is always distinguished from the working class. But the working class is distinguished from the lower class, which may include the unemployed, the unemployed, the homeless, the beggars, etc. As a rule, highly skilled workers are included not in the working class, but in the middle, but in its lowest stratum, which is filled mainly by low-skilled mental workers - white-collar workers.

Another option is possible: workers are not included in the middle class, but constitute two layers in the general working class. Specialists are part of the next layer of the middle class, because the very concept of “specialist” presupposes at least a college-level education. The upper stratum of the middle class is filled mainly by “professionals”.

3. Stratification profile

and stratification profile.

Thanks to the four scales of stratification, the sociologist is able to create such analytical models and tools with which it is possible to explain not only the individual status portrait, but also the collective one, that is, the dynamics and structure of society as a whole. For this purpose, two concepts are proposed that are similar in appearance. But they differ in internal content, namely the stratification profile and the stratification profile.

Thanks to the stratification profile, it is possible to examine the problem of status incompatibility more deeply. Status incompatibility is a contradiction in the status set of one person, or a contradiction in the status characteristics of one status set of one person. Now, to explain this phenomenon, we have the right to connect the category of stratification and express status incompatibility in stratification characteristics. If some concepts of a specific status, for example, professor and policeman, go beyond the boundaries of their (middle) class, then status incompatibility can also be interpreted as stratification incompatibility.

Stratification incompatibility causes a feeling of social discomfort, which can turn into frustration, frustration into dissatisfaction with one’s place in society.

The fewer cases of status and stratification incompatibility in a society, the more stable it is.

So, a stratification profile is a graphic expression of the position of individual statuses on four stratification scales.

It is necessary to distinguish another concept from the stratification profile - the stratification profile. Otherwise known as the economic inequality profile.

A stratification profile is a graphical expression of the percentage shares of the upper, middle and lower classes in the composition of the country's population.

Conclusion

According to the evolutionary theory of stratification, as culture becomes more complex and develops, a situation arises in which no individual can master all aspects of social activity, and a division of labor and specialization of activity occurs. Some types of activities turn out to be more important, requiring lengthy training and appropriate remuneration, while others are less important and therefore more widespread and easily replaceable.

The concepts of stratification, in contrast to the Marxist idea of classes and the construction of a classless society, do not postulate social equality; on the contrary, they consider inequality as the natural state of society, therefore strata not only differ in their criteria, but are also located in a rigid system of subordination of some layers to others, privileged the position of the superiors and the subordinate position of the inferiors. In a dosed form, even the idea of some social contradictions is allowed, which are neutralized by the possibilities of vertical social mobility, i.e. it is assumed that individual talented people can move from lower to higher strata, as well as vice versa, when inactive people who occupy places in the upper strata of society due to the social position of their parents can go bankrupt and find themselves in the lowest strata of the social structure.

Thus, the concepts of social layer, stratification and social mobility, complementing the concepts of class and class structure of society, concretize the general idea of the structure of society and help to detail the analysis of social processes within the framework of certain economic and socio-political formations.

This is why the study of stratification is one of the most important areas of social anthropology. According to the Oxford Dictionary of Sociology, there are three main objectives of such research: "The first objective is to establish the extent to which class or status systems dominate at the level of society, establishing modes of social action. The second objective is to analyze class and status structures and factors that determine the process of class and status formation. Lastly, social stratification documents the inequality of conditions, opportunities and incomes, and the ways in which groups maintain class or status boundaries. In other words, it raises the question of social closure (clousure) and examines the strategies by which some groups maintain their privileges and others seek access to them.”

List of used literature

Avdokushin E.F. International economic relations: Textbook - M.: Economist, 2004 - 366 p.

Bulatova A.S. World economy: Textbook - M.: Economist, 2004 – 366 p.

Lomakin V.K. World economy: Textbook for universities. – 2nd ed., revised. and additional – M.: UNITY-DANA, 2001. – 735 p.

Moiseev S.R. International monetary relations: Textbook. - M.: Publishing house "Delo and Service", 2003. - 576 p.

Radjabova Z.K. World Economy: Textbook. 2nd ed., revised. and additional – M.: INFRA-M, 2002. – 320 p.

Social stratification (12)
Abstract >> Sociology
Widely used in sociology concept“social stratification" When considering the problem social inequalities are quite justifiable to proceed from... the principle, then they are social layers. IN social stratification tends to inherit positions. ...
Social stratification (11)
Abstract >> Sociology
Groups of people are widely used in sociology concept « social stratification". Social stratification- (from lat. stratum - ... three fundamental concepts sociology - social structures, social composition and social stratification. In the domestic...
Social stratification as a tool social analysis
Coursework >> Sociology
Between concepts « social stratification" And " social structure”, V. Ilyin also draws a parallel between concepts « social stratification" And " social inequality". Social

Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation

All-Russian Correspondence Financial and Economic Institute

test

in the discipline "Sociology"

on the topic

"Social stratification of society"

Option No. 11

Performer: Khasanova M.V.

Specialty: F and K

Record book number: 04FFD41122

Head: Zainetdinov Sh.R.

INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………….…………3

INTRODUCTION:

Considering the first question, I will reveal the essence of the structuring of society, give a definition of the concept of “stratification”, what social stratification is, what it reflects and what are the reasons for social stratification. What criteria are used for the location of strata.

Considering the types of stratification systems, I will reveal their content.

In answer to the second question, I will characterize Western sociological theories of social stratification: Marxist, functional significance, the concepts of the West German sociologist R. Dahrendorf, the French sociologist A. Touraine, the American sociologist A. Barber.

Setting out the third question, I will consider the concept of stratification, the problem of inequality, what is their view on the placement of layers in hierarchical subordination.

1 question.

The concept of social “stratification of society”. Reasons for social stratification. Types of stratification systems.

Stratification is a hierarchically organized structure of social inequality that exists in a certain society, in a certain historical period of time. Moreover, social inequality is reproduced in fairly stable forms as a reflection of the political, economic, cultural and normative structure of society. The existence of social differentiation can be taken as an axiom. However, the explanation of its nature, the foundations of historical evolution, and the relationships of specific forms remains one of the key problems of sociology.

Social stratification- this is a description of social inequality in society, its division into social strata according to income, the presence or absence of privileges, and lifestyle.

In the case of primitive society, the inequality was not so significant, and because of this, the phenomenon of stratification was almost absent. As society developed, inequality only grew and grew. In complex societies it has divided people by level of education, income, power. Arose castes, Then estates, not so long ago classes.

Term "stratification" originally the term was geological. There it serves to indicate the location of the Earth's layers along a vertical line. Sociology inherited this scheme and made the structure of society, like the structure of the Earth, placing the social layers of society also vertically. The basis for this structure is the so-called income ladder, where the poor have the lowest rung, the middle class of the population has the middle, and the rich have the top.

Inequality or stratification arose gradually, accompanying the emergence of human society. Its initial form was already present in the primitive mode. A tightening of stratification occurred during the creation of early states due to the creation of a new class - slaves
Slavery- this is the first historical system stratification. It arose in ancient times in China, Egypt, Babylon, Rome, Greece, etc. Slavery often deprived a person of any rights at all and bordered on extreme inequality.

Mitigation stratification occurred with the gradual liberalization of views. For example, during this period, in countries with the Hindu religion, a new division of society is created - to castes.

Castes represent social groups of which a person became a member only because he was born from representatives of a particular stratum (caste). Such a person was deprived for the rest of his life of the right to move to another caste from the one in which he was born. There are 4 main castes: peasants, merchants, warriors and priests. In addition to them, there are still about 5 thousand castes and subcastes.

All the most prestigious professions and privileged positions are occupied by the rich segment of the population. Usually their work is associated with mental activity and management of the lower parts of society. Their examples are presidents, kings, leaders, kings, political leaders, scientists, politicians, artists. They are the highest level in society.

In modern society, the middle class can be considered lawyers, qualified employees, teachers, doctors, as well as the middle and petty bourgeoisie. The lowest layer can be considered the poor, unemployed and unskilled workers. Between the middle and the lower, one class can still be distinguished, which often includes representatives of the working class.

Stratification of society occurs using several factors: income, wealth, power and prestige.

Income can be characterized as the amount of money that a family or a certain individual received over a certain period of time. Such money may include: wages, alimony, pensions, fees, etc.
Wealth - this is the possibility of owning property (movable and immovable), or having accumulated income in the form of cash. This is the main feature of all rich people. They can either work or not work in order to get their wealth, because the share of wages in their overall wealth is not large.
Power exercises the ability to impose one’s wishes without taking into account the will of others. In modern society, all power can be regulated by laws and traditions. People who have access to it can freely enjoy a wide range of all kinds of social benefits, have the right to make decisions that, in their opinion, are important for society, including laws (which are often beneficial to the upper class).
Prestige - this is the degree of respect in society for a particular profession. Based on these basis, aggregate socio-economic status is determined for the division of society. In another way, this can be called the place of a certain person in society.

There are many stratification criteria by which any society can be divided. Each of them is associated with special ways of determining and reproducing social inequality. The nature of social stratification and the way it is asserted in its unity form what we call a stratification system.

Below are NINE TYPES OF STRATIFICATION SYSTEMS, which can be used to describe any social organism, namely:

1.Physico-genetic 2.Slaveholding

3.Caste 4.Class

5.Etacratic 6.Social-professional

7.Class 8.Cultural-symbolic

9.Cultural-normative

PHYSICAL-GENETIC stratification system, which is based on the differentiation of social groups according to “natural”, socio-demographic characteristics. Here, the attitude towards a person or group is determined by their gender, age and the presence of certain physical qualities - strength, beauty, dexterity. Accordingly, the weaker, those with physical disabilities are considered defective here and occupy a degraded social position. Inequality is asserted in this case by the existence of the threat of physical violence or through its actual use, and then is reinforced in customs and rituals. Currently, deprived of its former meaning, it is still supported by military, sports and sexual-erotic propaganda.

The second stratification system - SLAVE - is also based on direct violence. But inequality here is determined not by physical, but by military-legal coercion. Social groups differ in the presence or absence of civil rights and property rights. At the same time, certain social groups are completely deprived of any civil and property rights and, moreover, along with things, they turn into an object of private property. Moreover, this position is most often inherited and, thus, consolidated in generations. Examples: this is ancient slavery, where the number of slaves sometimes exceeded the number of free citizens. The methods of reproducing the slave system are also quite diverse. Ancient slavery was maintained mainly through conquest.

The third type of stratification system is CASTE. It is based on ethnic differences, which, in turn, are reinforced by religious order and religious rituals. Each caste is a closed, as far as possible, endogamous group, which is assigned a clear place in the social hierarchy. This place appears as a result of the isolation of the special functions of each caste in the system of division of labor. There is a fairly clear list of occupations that members of this caste can engage in: priestly, military, agricultural occupations. The highest position is occupied by the caste of “ideologists” who possess a certain sacred knowledge. Since position in the caste system is inherited, opportunities for social mobility are extremely limited. And the more pronounced casteism is, the more closed a given society turns out to be.

The fourth type is represented by the CLASS stratification system. In this system, groups are distinguished by legal rights, which, in turn, are strictly related to their responsibilities and are directly dependent on these responsibilities. Moreover, by responsibilities we mean obligations to the state enshrined in law. Some classes are required to perform military or bureaucratic service, others are required to bear the “tax” in the form of taxes or labor obligations.

Some similarities with the class system are observed in the ETAK-RATIC society (from the French and Greek - “state power”). In it, differentiation between groups occurs, first of all, according to their position in power-state hierarchies (political, military, economic), according to the possibilities of mobilization and distribution of resources, as well as according to the privileges that these groups are able to derive from their positions of power. The degree of material well-being, the lifestyle of social groups, as well as the prestige they feel are associated here with the same formal ranks that they occupy in the corresponding power hierarchies. All other differences - demographic and religious-ethnic, economic and cultural - play a derivative role. The scale and nature of differentiation (the extent of power, the size of regulated property, the level of personal income, etc.) in an ethacratic system are under the control of the state bureaucracy. At the same time, hierarchies can be formally and legally established - through official Tables of Ranks, military regulations, assigning categories to state institutions - or they can remain outside the scope of state legislation (a good example is, for example, the system of the Soviet party nomenklatura, the principles of which are not spelled out not in any laws). Independence from legal formalization, the possibility of complete formal freedom of members of society (with the exception of dependence on the state), the absence of automatic inheritance of positions of power - also distinguish the ethacratic system from class divisions. The etacracy system is revealed with greater force, the more authoritarian the state government takes on.

Next comes the sixth, SOCIO-PROFESSIONAL stratification system. Within this system, groups are divided according to the content and conditions of their work. A special role is played by the qualification requirements for one or another professional role - the possession of relevant experience, skills and abilities. The approval and maintenance of hierarchical orders in this system is carried out with the help of qualification certificates (diplomas, licenses, patents), the effectiveness of which is supported by the power of the state or some other fairly powerful corporation (professional workshop). Moreover, these certificates are most often not inherited, although there are exceptions in history. Socio-professional division is one of the basic stratification systems, various examples of which can be found in any society with any developed division of labor. This is the structure of craft workshops of a medieval city and the rank grid in modern state industry, the system of attests and diplomas of education, scientific degrees and titles that open the way to qualified and prestigious jobs.

Social stratification

Social role

Social role- a behavior model focused on this status. It can be defined differently - as a patterned type of behavior aimed at fulfilling the rights and responsibilities prescribed by a specific status.

Others expect one type of behavior from a banker, but a completely different one from an unemployed person. Social norms - prescribed rules of behavior - characterize the role, not the status. The role is also called the dynamic side of status. The words “dynamic”, “behavior”, “norm” indicate that we are not dealing with social relations, but with social interaction. However, we must learn:

· social roles and social norms relate to social interaction;

· social statuses, rights and responsibilities, functional relationship of statuses relate to social relations;

· social interaction describes the dynamics of society, social relations - its statics.

Subjects expect from the king behavior prescribed by custom or document. However, there is an intermediate link between status and role - expectations people (expectations).

Expectations can somehow be fixed, and then they become social norms. If, of course, they are considered as mandatory requirements (instructions). Or they may not be fixed, but that doesn’t stop them from being expectations.

Social stratification - central theme of sociology. It describes social inequality in society, the division of social strata by income level and lifestyle, by the presence or absence of privileges. In primitive society, inequality was insignificant, and therefore stratification was almost absent there. In complex societies, inequality is very strong; it divides people according to income, level of education, and power. Castes arose, then estates, and later classes. In some societies, transition from one social layer (stratum) to another is prohibited; There are societies where such a transition is limited, and there are societies where it is completely permitted. Freedom of social movement (mobility) determines whether a society is closed or open.

The term “stratification” comes from geology, where it refers to the vertical arrangement of the Earth’s layers. Sociology has likened the structure of society to the structure of the Earth and placed social layers (strata) also vertically. The basis is an income ladder: the poor occupy the lowest rung, the wealthy groups occupy the middle rung, and the rich occupy the top rung.

Each stratum includes only those people who have approximately the same income, power, education and prestige. Inequality of distances between statuses is the main property of stratification. She has four measuring rulers, or coordinate axes. All of them are located vertically and next to each other:

· power;

· education;

· prestige.

Income - the amount of cash receipts of an individual or family for a certain period of time (month, year). Income is the amount of money received in the form of wages, pensions, benefits, alimony, fees, and deductions from profits. Income measured in rubles or dollars that an individual receives (individual income) or family (family income) over a certain period of time, say one month or year.

On the coordinate axis we plot equal intervals, for example, up to $5,000, from $5,001 to $10,000, from $10,001 to $15,000, etc. up to $75,000 and higher.

Income is most often spent on maintaining life, but if it is very high, it accumulates and turns into wealth.

Wealth - accumulated income, i.e. the amount of cash or materialized money. In the second case, they are called movable (car, yacht, securities, etc.) and immovable (house, works of art, treasures) property. Wealth is usually inherited. Both working and non-working people can receive inheritance, but only working people can receive income. Besides them, pensioners and the unemployed have income, but the poor do not. The rich can work or not work. In both cases they are owners because they have wealth. The main asset of the upper class is not income, but accumulated property. The salary share is small. For the middle and lower classes, the main source of existence is income, since the first, if there is wealth, is insignificant, and the second does not have it at all. Wealth allows you not to work, but its absence forces you to work for a salary.

Wealth and income are distributed unevenly and mean economic inequality. Sociologists interpret it as an indicator that different groups of the population have unequal life chances. People buy different quantities and different quality of food, clothing, housing, etc. People who have more money eat better, live in more comfortable houses, prefer a personal car to public transport, can afford expensive vacations, etc. But In addition to obvious economic advantages, the wealthy strata have hidden privileges. The poor have shorter lives (even if they benefit from all the benefits of medicine), less educated children (even if they go to the same public schools), etc.

Education measured by the number of years of education in a public or private school or university. Let's say primary school means 4 years, junior high - 9 years, high school - 11, college - 4 years, university - 5 years, graduate school - 3 years, doctoral studies - 3 years. However, a professor has more than 20 years of formal education behind him, while a plumber may not have eight.

Power measured by the number of people affected by the decision you make (power - the ability to impose one’s will or decisions on other people regardless of their wishes). The decisions of the President of Russia apply to 148 million people (whether they are implemented is another question, although it also concerns the issue of power), and the decisions of the foreman - to 7-10 people.

The essence authorities - the ability to impose one’s will against the wishes of other people. In a complex society, power institutionalized, i.e., it is protected by laws and tradition, surrounded by privileges and wide access to social benefits, and allows decisions that are vital for society to be made, incl. laws tend to favor the upper class. In all societies, people who have some form of power - political, economic or religious - constitute an institutionalized elite. It determines the domestic and foreign policy of the state, directing it in a direction beneficial to itself, which other classes are deprived of.

Three scales of stratification - income, education and power - have completely objective units of measurement: dollars, years, people. Prestige stands outside this series, since it is a subjective indicator.

Prestige - the respect that a particular profession, position, or occupation enjoys in public opinion. The profession of a lawyer is more prestigious than the profession of a steelmaker or plumber. The position of president of a commercial bank is more prestigious than the position of cashier. All professions, occupations and positions existing in a given society can be ranked from top to bottom on the ladder of professional prestige. As a rule, professional prestige is determined by us intuitively, approximately. But in some countries, primarily in the USA, sociologists measure it using special methods. They study public opinion, compare different professions, analyze statistics and ultimately obtain an accurate scale of prestige.

Historical types of stratification

Income, power, prestige and education determine the overall socio-economic status, i.e. the position and place of a person in society. In this case status acts as a general indicator of stratification. Earlier we noted its key role in social structure. It now turns out that it plays a vital role in sociology as a whole.

The ascribed status characterizes a rigidly fixed system of stratification, i.e. closed society, in which the transition from one stratum to another is practically prohibited. Such systems include slavery, caste and class systems. The achieved status characterizes the mobile stratification system, or open society, where people are allowed to move freely up and down the social ladder. Such a system includes classes (capitalist society). These are historical types of stratification.

A closed society is one in which the movement of individuals or information from one country to another is excluded or significantly limited. Slavery - historically the first system of social stratification. Slavery arose in ancient times in Egypt, Babylon, China, Greece, Rome and survived in a number of regions almost to the present day. Like slavery, the caste system characterizes a closed society and rigid stratification Caste called a social group (stratum), membership in which a person is obliged solely by birth. He cannot move from one caste to another during his lifetime. To do this, he needs to be born again. Estate - a social group that has rights and obligations that are fixed by custom or legal law and are inheritable. It is important to note that the class system, which includes several strata, is characterized by a hierarchy expressed in the inequality of their position and privileges class society the situation is different: no legal documents regulate the place of the individual in the social structure. Every person is free to move, if he has ability, education or income, from one class to another.

Social stratification - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Social stratification" 2017, 2018.

It is the most accurate structural indicator of social inequality. Thus, the stratification of society is its division into different levels, or strata.

Terminology

It is believed that the term social stratification was first used by the American social scientist Pitirim Sorokin, who has Russian roots. He also developed this theory based on strata as a phenomenon in society.

The word has the following definition: “structured hierarchy

Reasons according to P. Sorokin

Pitirim Sorokin was inclined to highlight the following reasons why society is “stratified”:

First of all, these are rights and privileges. Because, as we know, the noble idea of fair communism does not work in reality.
Secondly, these are duties and responsibilities. After all, in the end it turns out that there are individuals who are capable of taking them upon themselves and coping with what others will call a “burden” and which, most likely, they will try to avoid when the opportunity arises.
Thirdly, there is social wealth and need. Different people need different things, and the results of their labor are at different levels.
The fourth point is power and influence. And here it is appropriate to recall Fromm’s theory about wolves and sheep: no matter how you talk about equality, people are divided into those who are born to command and those who are accustomed to living in submission. This in no way means slavery, which humanity has already passed as a stage in its development. But at the subconscious level there remain leaders and followers. The former subsequently become leaders who “move and roll” the world, but what about the latter? They run nearby and wonder where he is actually going.

Modern reasons for the stratification of society

To this day, stratification in social science is a pressing problem of society. Experts identify the following reasons for its occurrence:

Division by gender. The problem of “man” and “woman” has been acute at all times. Now in society there is another wave of feminism, demanding equality between the sexes, since the system of social stratification is based on the same thing.
Differences at the level of biological abilities. Someone is given to be a technician, someone - a humanist, someone - an expert in the natural sciences. But the problem of society is also that in some people these abilities can be so obvious that they will be geniuses of their time, while in others they practically do not manifest themselves at all.
Class division. The most important reason (according to Karl Marx), which will be discussed in detail below.
Privileges, rights and benefits related to the economy, politics and social sphere.
A system of values, based on which certain types of activities are obviously placed above others.

Stratification in social science is a subject of discussion and reasoning among great scientists. Sorokin presented it in his own way, Weber, developing the theory, drew his own conclusions, as did Marx, who ultimately reduced everything to class inequality.

Marx's ideology

Class conflict, in his opinion, is a source of change in society and directly causes such a phenomenon as the stratification of society.

Thus, according to K. Marx, antagonistic classes are distinguished according to two objective criteria:

the general state of the economy and relationships based on the means of production;
power and their manifestation in public administration.

Weber's opinion

Max Weber made such an important contribution to the development of the theory of social inequality that when considering the topic: “The concept of “stratification,” its origin and essence,” it is impossible not to mention this name.

The scientist did not entirely agree with Marx, but did not contradict him either. He relegated property rights as a cause of stratification to the background. The first was prestige and power.

Levels of social stratification

Based on the prevailing factors, Weber identified three levels of social stratification:

the first of them - the lowest - related to property and determined the classes of stratification;
the second - middle - relied on prestige and was responsible for status in society or, using another definition, social strata;
the third - the highest - was the “elite”, in which, as is known, there is always a struggle for power, and it is expressed in society in the form of the existence of political parties.

Features of social stratification

The stratification structure has distinctive features. Stratification primarily occurs according to ranks, all depending on the reasons for which it occurred. As a result, privileged members of society find themselves at the top, and the lower “caste” is content with little.

The upper layers are always quantitatively smaller than the lower and middle ones. But the proportionality of the last two to each other can vary and, in addition, characterize the current state of society, “highlighting” the position of certain of its spheres.

Types of social stratification

Developing his theory, Pitirim Sorokin also derived three main types of social stratification, relying on the factors that cause it:

based on the criterion of wealth - economic;
on the basis of power, degree of influence - political;
based on social roles and their performance, status, etc. - professional stratification.

Social mobility

The so-called “movement” is usually called in society. It can be horizontal and vertical.

In the first case, this is the acquisition of a new role that does not imply advancement on the social ladder. For example, if another child is born into the family, the existing one will receive the status of “brother” or “sister” and will no longer be the only child.

Vertical mobility is movement along social levels. The system of social stratification (at least the modern one) assumes that one can “rise” or “descend” along it. The clarification was given taking into account that a similar structure in Ancient India (castes) did not imply any mobility. But the stratification of modern society, fortunately, does not set such limits.

The connection between mobility and stratification in society

How is mobility related to stratification? Sorokin said that stratification in social science is a reflection of the vertical sequence of layers of society.

Marx, Weber and Sorokin himself named various reasons for this phenomenon, based on the reasons for stratification discussed above. The modern interpretation of the theory recognizes the multidimensionality and equivalence of the positions proposed by scientists and constantly searches for new ones.

Historical forms of stratification

The concept of stratification is not new. This phenomenon as a stable system has been known for a long time, but at different times it had different forms. Let's look at which ones below:

The slave form was based on the forced subjugation of one group of society by another. There was a lack of any rights, let alone privileges. If we remember about private property, then the slaves did not have it, moreover, they themselves were it.
Caste form (already mentioned in this article). This stratification in social science is a vivid and illustrative example of stratified inequality with clear and precise edges and boundaries drawn between castes. It was impossible to move up in this system, so if a person “descended”, he could say goodbye to his previous status forever. The stable structure was based on religion - people accepted who they were because they believed that they would rise higher in the next life, and therefore were obliged to play their current role with honor and humility.
An estate form that has one main feature - legal division. All these imperial and royal statuses, nobility and other aristocracy are a manifestation of this type of stratification. Belonging to the class was inherited; a little boy in one family was already a prince and heir to the crown, and in another - an ordinary peasant. Economic status was a consequence of legal status. This form of stratification was relatively closed, because there were few ways to move from one class to another, and it was difficult to do so - you could only rely on luck and chance, and then one in a million.
The class form is also inherent in modern society. This is a stratification at the level of income and prestige, which is determined in some almost unconscious and intuitive way. At one point or another, in-demand professions come to the fore, the pay for which corresponds to their status and the product produced. Now this is the IT sector, a few years ago - economics, and even earlier - jurisprudence. The influence of class on modern society can be described by the simplest example: when asked “who are you,” a person names his profession (teacher/doctor/firefighter), and the questioner immediately draws the appropriate conclusions from this for himself. The class form of stratification is characterized by ensuring the political and legal freedom of citizens.

Types according to Nemirovsky

At one time, Nemirovsky supplemented the above list with several more forms of dividing society into layers:

physical-genetic, including gender, other biological characteristics, qualities inherent in the individual;
ethnocratic, in which powerful social hierarchies and their corresponding powers predominate;
socio-professional, in which knowledge and the ability to apply it in practice are important;
cultural-symbolic, based on information and the fact that it “rules the world”;
cultural-normative, presented as a tribute to morality, traditions and norms.

Social stratification(from lat. stratum- layer and facio- I do) is one of the basic concepts sociology , denoting a system of signs and criteria of social stratification and position in society; social structure society; branch of sociology.

Under social stratification is understood as the presence in a given society of many social formations, the representatives of which differ among themselves in the unequal amount of power and material wealth, rights and responsibilities, privileges and prestige. This hierarchically structured distribution of sociocultural goods expresses the essence of social stratification, through which in any social system it becomes possible to stimulate some types of activities and interactions, tolerate others and suppress others. Thus, social stratification differs from social differentiation. The concept of “social differentiation” is broader in scope and implies any social differences, including those not related to inequality, with stimulation (or, conversely, repression) of different forms of activity.

The term “stratification” was borrowed by sociology from geology, where it refers to the arrangement of layers of the earth.

Social stratification- this is the division of society into special layers (strata) by combining various social positions with approximately the same social status, reflecting the prevailing idea of social inequality, built vertically (social hierarchy), along its axis according to one or more stratification criteria (indicators of social status).

The division of society into strata is carried out on the basis of the inequality of social distances between them - the main property of stratification. Social strata are built vertically and in strict sequence according to indicators of well-being, power, education, leisure, and consumption.

In social stratification, a certain social distance is established between people (social positions) and a hierarchy of social layers is formed. Thus, unequal access of members of society to certain socially significant scarce resources is recorded by establishing social filters at the boundaries separating social strata.

For example, social strata can be distinguished by levels of income, knowledge, power, consumption, nature of work, and leisure time. The social strata identified in society are assessed according to the criterion of social prestige, which expresses the social attractiveness of certain positions.

The simplest stratification model is dichotomous - dividing society into elites and masses. In the earliest archaic social systems, the structuring of society into clans was carried out simultaneously with the establishment of social inequality between and within them. This is how “initiates” appear, that is, those who are initiated into certain social practices (priests, elders, leaders) and the uninitiated - laymen. Internally, such a society can further, if necessary, stratify as it develops. This is how castes, estates, classes, etc. appear.

Most researchers believe that social stratification is a hierarchically organized structure of social inequality that exists in a certain society during a certain historical period of time. The hierarchically organized structure of social inequality can be imagined as a division of the entire society into strata (this word comes from the Latin stratum - layer, flooring). A layered, multi-level society in this case can be compared to geological layers of soil. At the same time, compared to simple stratification, social stratification has at least two significant differences. First, stratification is a stratification of rank, when the upper strata are in a more privileged position (in terms of the possession of resources or opportunities for receiving rewards) than the lower strata. Secondly, the upper strata are significantly smaller in number of members of society. Thus, the elite, the upper strata, are certainly a minority compared to the lower strata of society. The same can be said about the remaining layers, if they are considered sequentially from top to bottom. However, in modern, highly developed, prosperous societies, this order is violated. In quantitative terms, the poor layers may be inferior to the layer that makes up the so-called “middle class” and some other layers of the population.

Modern ideas about the stratification model that has developed in society are quite complex - multi-layered (polychotomous), multidimensional (carried out along several axes) and variable (allow the coexistence of many stratification models): qualifications, quotas, certification, determination of status, ranks, benefits, privileges, etc. preferences.

Currently, the most influential point of view on the process of formation of social strata can be considered the theory of stratification by K. Davis and W. Moore. According to this theory, every society must solve the problem of placing and motivating individuals in the social structure. Social order in society is based on the distribution of individuals according to social statuses (in accordance with their functional capabilities, i.e. their maximum contribution to achieving the goals of society) and encouraging them to perform social roles corresponding to these statuses. Society can choose two ways of motivation for the best performance of social roles. Thus, a competitive system is primarily aimed at mobilizing individuals in relation to achieving the most attractive status, while a non-competitive system in relation to social statuses pays more attention to motivation to perform functional duties, i.e. contribution to the activities of society as a whole. A society with any social structure uses both of these systems, just to varying degrees.

The most important dynamic characteristic of society is social mobility. According to the definition of P. A. Sorokin, “social mobility is understood as any transition of an individual, or a social object, or a value created or modified through activity, from one social position to another.” However, social agents do not always move from one position to another; it is possible to move the social positions themselves in the social hierarchy; such movement is called “positional mobility” (vertical mobility) or within the same social stratum (horizontal mobility). Along with social filters that set barriers to social movement, there are also “social elevators” in society that significantly accelerate this process (in a crisis society - revolutions, wars, conquests, etc.; in a normal, stable society - family, marriage, education , property, etc.). The degree of freedom of social movement from one social layer to another largely determines what kind of society it is - closed or open.

K. Sorokin’s point of view is successfully developed by his student, one of the prominent teachers of the Harvard School in sociology, a representative of functionalism T. Parsons, who believes that the basis of stratification is the value orientations of members of society. At the same time, the assessment and assignment of people to certain social strata is carried out according to the following main criteria:

— qualitative characteristics of members of society, which are determined by genetic traits and prescribed statuses (origin, family ties, personal qualities and abilities);
- role characteristics, which are determined by the set of roles that an individual plays in society (position, level of professionalism, level of knowledge, etc.);
- characteristics of possession of material and spiritual values (money, means of production, works of art, opportunities for spiritual and ideological influence on other layers of society, etc.).

Attempts to explain the mechanism of stratification of society were made more than once in different periods of human history. However, only in the last decades of our century have we been able to teach people to comprehend this most important social problem, without understanding which it is impossible to explain the processes occurring in society and to imagine the future of a given society.

Typology of strata

A stratum includes many people with some common status sign of their position, who feel connected to each other by this community. A common feature that allows people to be united into strata can be characteristics of different nature - production, economic, political, socio-demographic, cultural, etc. Thus, the researcher gets the opportunity to analyze the population according to a variety of - important, secondary and even insignificant - criteria. As a result, people belonging to different classes may find themselves in the same stratum, separated, for example, on the basis of education or job characteristics. At the same time, it is necessary to keep in mind that the basis for identifying a stratum is not any attribute, but only a status one, i.e. one that objectively acquires a ranking character in a given society: “higher-lower”, “better-worse”, “prestigious” “not prestigious”, etc. A whole series of characteristics can be used as the basis for identifying only differentiated, but not status groups. For example, fans of folk music or fans of a football team are most often seen as representatives of a certain cultural group, regardless of its status aspect.

What typologies of classes have not been invented by scientists and thinkers. The ancient philosophers Plato and Aristotle were the first to propose their model.

Today sociologists offer different typologies of classes. One has seven, another has six, the third has five, etc. social strata.

The first typology of US classes was proposed in the 40s of the 20th century by the American sociologist Lloyd Warner. It included six classes. In addition to this, other schemes were proposed, for example: upper-higher, upper-lower, upper-middle, middle-middle, lower-middle, working, lower classes. Or: upper class, upper-middle class, middle and lower-middle class, upper working class and lower working class, underclass. There are many options, but it is important to understand two fundamental points:

. there are only three main classes, no matter what they are called: rich, wealthy and poor;
. non-primary classes arise from the addition of strata or layers lying within one of the major classes.

Speaking about the elements of social stratification, they use such units of analysis as "class", "social stratum", "social group", denoting various social communities. The inclusion of people in a particular community is determined primarily by the form of their social interaction, which allows them to be considered as a single whole, as well as by the place or social positions that they occupy in social space.

Social class is a large taxonomic unit of social division. This concept was born long before the advent of stratification theory. It has firmly entered the scientific apparatus of social thinkers of Western Europe in modern times. Before this, they talked about units of social structure based on class ideas, using the names of specific social or public ipynn, representatives of certain professions, etc. At the same time, already in ancient thinkers, primarily in Plato, one can find reasoning, for example, about the rich and the poor.

Let us list the typological groupings of the most important features, some of their empirical referents, as well as the layers that are distinguished on the basis of these features and indicators:

. signs related to the economic situation of people, i.e. the presence of private property, types and amounts of income, level of material well-being; accordingly, the layers are distinguished: rich, middle-income and poor; high and low paid workers; property owners and residents of municipal apartments, etc.;
. characteristics associated with the division of labor, i.e., the field of application, types and nature of labor, hierarchy of professional statuses, level of qualifications and professional skills, professional training; Accordingly, the following layers are distinguished: workers in heavy industry; service workers; persons with secondary specialized education, etc.;
. signs associated with the volume of power: here production relations and labor organization become of great importance, within the framework of which different degrees and unequal volumes of opportunities are formed to influence others through official position, through types and forms of management activities, through the possession of socially significant information, etc. . P.; Accordingly, we can distinguish layers: ordinary workers at a state enterprise; managers at small businesses; senior government managers; elective positions of municipal management, etc.;
. signs associated with social prestige, authority, influence.

Concept of class

Despite the fact that social class is one of the central concepts in sociology, scientists still do not have a common point of view regarding the content of this concept. For the first time we find a detailed picture of class society in the works of K. Marx. We can say that social classes in Marx are economically determined and genetically conflicting groups. The basis for division into groups is the presence or absence of property. The feudal lord and the serf in a feudal society, the bourgeois and the proletarian in a capitalist society, are antagonistic classes that inevitably appear in any society that has a complex hierarchical structure based on inequality. Marx also admitted the existence of small social groups in society that could influence class conflicts. In studying the nature of social classes, Marx made the following assumptions:

Every society produces a surplus of food, shelter, clothing and other resources. Class differences arise when one of the population groups appropriates resources that are not immediately consumed and are not currently needed. Such resources are considered private property.
Classes are determined based on the fact of ownership or non-ownership of produced property. In different historical periods, there were different types of property (slaves, water, land, capital), which were decisive in human relationships, but all social systems were based on two antagonistic social classes. In the modern era, according to Marx, there are two main antagonistic class - the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

H. The importance of studying classes lies in the fact that class relations necessarily presuppose the exploitation of one class by another, i.e. one class appropriates the results of the labor of another class, exploits and suppresses it. This kind of relationship constantly reproduces class conflict, which is the basis of social changes taking place in society.

There is an object (for example, the possession of resources) and subjective characteristics of a class. The latter represent the fact of belonging to a class, which does not necessarily have to be accompanied by awareness of such belonging or a sense of political affinity with the interests of one's class. Only when members of society are aware of their class affiliation, when they begin to act together in the interests of their class, can we talk about a fully formed social class.

Despite the revision, from the point of view of modern society, of many of the provisions of K. Marx’s class theory, some of his ideas remain relevant in the currently existing social structures.

The most influential alternative to Marxist theory of social classes is represented by works by M. Weber. Unlike Marx, Weber identifies other factors influencing the formation of relations of inequality. In particular, he considers prestige as one of the most important signs of social class. However, it examines the connections between opportunities for advancement to higher, more attractive statuses and social class, suggesting that class is a group of people with similar advancement or career opportunities. Just like Marx, Weber sees the relationship to property as the basic status distribution in society and the basis for the formation of social classes. However, Weber attaches much more importance to the division within the main classes (the presence of intermediate classes) than Marx. For example, Weber divides the class of owners and the trading class, divides the working class into several classes (depending on the type of ownership of the enterprises in which they work), based on the opportunities they have to improve their status. Unlike Marx, Weber views bureaucracy as a class, as a necessary link of power in modern society. Weber is the first to lay a system of stratification at the basis of class division; existing in a given society.

Modern theories of social classes are also based on the theory of stratification. Most sociologists see a basic difference in relation to property; nevertheless, they recognize class-forming factors such as official status, power, prestige, etc. If a social stratum can denote a division along one parameter, then a social class is not only an enlarged stratum.

Firstly, a social class is formed on the basis of the proximity of status profiles, i.e., it is based on a number of class-forming parameters, and the ownership (the ability to manage) resources is the basis of the class division of society.
Secondly, each social class has a specific subculture, which is maintained in the form of traditions, taking into account the existing social distances between representatives of different classes, as well as class consciousness, which becomes universal within a given class in conditions of self-identification and collective achievement of class interests.
Third, each class has different social opportunities and privileges, which is a decisive condition for achieving the most prestigious and rewarding statuses.

Models of the class structure of society

Currently, there are a large number of models of class structures, and sociologists are now coming to the conclusion that in modern society the basis of these structures remains unchanged, and only individual structural units change depending on the cultural, economic, structural and other characteristics of each society. At the same time, the determination of the class positions of individuals is carried out using complex indices that evaluate the individual’s positions along many dimensions (in our case, this is the status profile).

Among the stratification models adopted in Western sociology, the most famous should be considered the model of W. Watson, which was the result of research conducted in the 30s in the USA. It should be said that all modern Western models of the class structure of society to one degree or another contain elements of Watson’s model.

When conducting the study, Watson and his colleagues initially focused on a fairly simple three-tier system of class division of society - upper class, middle class, lower class. However, the results of the study showed that it is advisable to identify intermediate classes within each of these consolidated classes. As a result, Watson's model acquired the following final form:

Highest-highest class are representatives of influential and wealthy dynasties, possessing very significant resources of power, wealth and prestige throughout the state. Their position is so strong that it practically does not depend on competition, falls in stock prices and other socio-economic changes in society. Very often, representatives of this class do not even know exactly the size of their empires.
Low-high class consists of bankers, prominent owners of large firms who have achieved the highest status through competition or due to various qualities. They cannot be accepted into the upper-upper class, since they are either considered upstarts (from the point of view of representatives of the upper-upper class), or do not have sufficient influence in all areas of activity of a given society. Typically, representatives of this class are fiercely competitive and depend on the political and economic situations in society.

H. Upper-middle class includes successful businessmen, hired company managers, prominent lawyers, doctors, outstanding athletes, and the scientific elite. Representatives of this class do not claim influence on a state scale, however, in fairly narrow areas of activity their position is quite strong and stable. They enjoy high prestige in their fields of activity. Representatives of this class are usually spoken of as the wealth of the nation.

Lower-middle class consists of hired workers - engineers, mid- and low-ranking teachers, scientists, heads of departments at enterprises, highly qualified workers, etc. Currently, this class is the most numerous in developed Western countries. His main aspirations are increasing status within a given class, success and career. In this regard, economic, social and political stability in society is a very important point for representatives of this class. Standing for stability, representatives of this class are the main support for the existing government.
Upper-lower class consists mainly of hired workers who create surplus value in a given society. Being in many respects dependent on the upper classes for their livelihood, this class throughout its existence struggled for better living conditions. In those moments when its representatives realized their interests and rallied to achieve goals, their conditions of existence improved.
Low-low class comprised of the poor, the unemployed, the unemployed, foreign workers and other members of marginalized groups.

The experience of using Watson's model has shown that in its presented form it is in most cases unacceptable for the countries of Eastern Europe and Russia, where, in the course of historical processes, a different social structure took shape and fundamentally different status groups existed. However, at present, due to the changes that have occurred in our society, many elements of Watson’s structure can be used in the study of the composition of social classes in Russia. For example, the social structure of our society in the studies of N.M. Rimashevskaya looks like this:

“All-Russian elite groups”, combining the possession of property in amounts comparable to the largest Western fortunes, and means of power influence at the all-Russian level.
“Regional and corporate elites” who have significant wealth and influence at the level of regions and economic sectors on a Russian scale.
The Russian “upper middle class”, which has property and income that ensures Western standards of consumption, claims to improve its social status and is guided by established practices and ethical standards of economic relationships.
The Russian “dynamic middle class”, with incomes that ensure the satisfaction of average Russian and higher consumption standards, relatively high potential adaptability, significant social aspirations and motivations, social activity and orientation towards legal ways of its manifestation.
“Outsiders”, characterized by low adaptation and social activity, low incomes and a focus on legal ways of obtaining them.
“Marginal”, characterized by low adaptation and asocial and antisocial attitudes in their socio-economic activities.
“Criminals” with high social activity and adaptation, but at the same time acting quite rationally contrary to legal norms of economic activity.

As you can see, Rimashevskaya’s model is similar in many ways to Watson’s model. First of all, this is noted in relation to the importance of the “dynamic middle class”, which is in the process of formation, which largely influences the existence of significant social instability in modern Russia. Rimashevskaya emphasizes this moment in the development of Russian society: “If it is possible to maintain this type of social dynamics, orient it towards the gradual transfer of social expectations into corresponding status positions, income levels, then this will mean that the “dynamic middle class” will begin to transform into a classical pillar of stability and social order."

In conclusion, we can say that the social class structure is built on the basis of inequality, taking into account such characteristics as heterogeneity. The system of inequality is formed based on the basic parameters of society, which include income, origin, position, power, education and other ranking indicators. The proximity of social statuses leads to the formation of social layers, which, in addition to differences in remuneration, have different attitudes, norms of behavior, ideals, etc.

Social strata can be united into social classes, which have a certain attitude towards the means of production, their own subculture and opportunities for occupying more attractive social statuses. The class structure of society has unique specific features and is subject to change in the course of social development.