The criteria of social stratification include the amount of power. The subjective criterion of social stratification is

1. Social stratification contemporary Russian societies

   Abstract >> Sociology

   In Russia; - find out features social stratification contemporary Russian societies, the comparative importance of its criteria, trends occurring in the area...

2. Social structure Russian societies (2)

   Report >> Sociology

   Formerly the main differentiator criterion was a place in... V.V. Real Russia: Social stratification contemporary Russian societies. M., 2006. 3. Golenkova Z. T. Social stratification Russian societies M., 2003. 4. Marginalization as...

3. Social stratification (10)

   Coursework >> Sociology

   ... social stratification, as well as criteria estimates contemporary Russian societies and inherent stratification. The aim of this work is to determine the essence stratification ...

4. Social stratification (7)

   Coursework >> Sociology

   ... contemporary Russian society criteria... legal regulations societies. Referenced Concepts social stratification contemporary Russian societies do not exhaust...

5. Social stratification (8)

   Test work >> Sociology

   ... contemporary Russian society the formulation of the stratification system takes place on an economic basis, when the main criteria... legal regulations societies. Referenced Concepts social stratification contemporary Russian societies do not exhaust...

social stratification allows us to imagine society not as a chaotic heap of social statuses, but as a complex but clear structure of status positions that are in certain dependencies.

To assign statuses to one or another level of the hierarchy, appropriate grounds or criteria must be defined.

Criteria of social stratification - indicators that make it possible to determine the position of individuals and social groups on a hierarchical scale of social statuses.

The question of the foundations of social stratification in the history of sociological thought was solved ambiguously. So, K. Marx believed that these should be economic indicators which, in his opinion, determine the state of all other relations in society. Fact a person's possession of property and the level of his income he considered as the basis of social stratification. Marx came to the conclusion that the history of all societies, with the exception of the primitive and the future communist, is the history of classes and class struggle, as a result of which society rises to a higher stage of development. Slaves and slave-owners, feudal lords and peasants, workers and bourgeoisie are irreconcilable in their social position.

M. Weber believed that Marx simplified the picture of stratification, and an accurate picture of inequality can be obtained using multidimensional criteria: along with economic situation needs to be considered prestige of a profession or occupation, as well as measure of power possessed by an individual or his social group. Unlike Marx, he associated the concept of class only with capitalist society, where the market is the most important regulator of relations. In the market, people occupy different positions, i.e. are in a different class situation. Property and lack of property are the basic categories of all class situations. The totality of people who are in the same class situation constitutes, according to Weber, a social class. Those who do not own property and can offer only services on the market are divided according to the types of services. Property owners can be differentiated according to what they own.

This approach was developed by P. Sorokin, who also believed that the position of an individual in the social space can be more accurately described not by a single, but by several indicators: economic (income), political (power, prestige) and professional (status).

In the XX century. many other models of stratification have been created. So, American sociologist B. Barber proposed a whole range of features for the stratification of society: the prestige of the profession; power and might; income and wealth; education; religious or ritual purity; the position of relatives; ethnicity.

The creators of the theory of post-industrial society, the French sociologist L. Touraine and the American D. Bell, believe that in modern society social differentiation occurs not in relation to property, prestige, power, ethnicity, but in terms of access to information. The dominant position is occupied by people who own strategic and new information, as well as the means of controlling it.

In modern sociological science, the following indicators act as the basis of social stratification: income, power, education, prestige. The first three indicators have specific units of measurement: income is measured in money, power - in the number of people to whom it applies, education - in the number of years of study and the status of an educational institution. Prestige is determined on the basis of public opinion polls and self-assessments of individuals.

These indicators determine the overall socio-economic status, i.e. the position of the individual (social group) in society.

Let us consider in more detail the bases of stratification.

Income- This economic characteristic the position of the individual. It is expressed as the amount of cash receipts for a certain period of time. Sources of income can be different income - salary, scholarships, pensions, allowances, fees, cash bonuses, bank charges on deposits. Members of the middle and lower classes tend to spend their income on sustenance. But if the amount of income is significant, it can be accumulated and converted into expensive movable and real estate(car, yacht, helicopter, securities, precious items, paintings, rare items), which will amount to wealth. The main asset of the upper class is not income, but wealth. It allows a person not to work for the sake of a salary, it can be inherited. If a life situation will change and a person will lose high incomes, he will have to turn wealth back into money. Therefore, high income does not always mean great wealth, and vice versa.

The uneven distribution of income and wealth in society means economic inequality. Poor and rich people have different life chances. Having a lot of money empowers a person, allows him to eat better, monitor his health, live in more comfortable conditions, pay for education in a prestigious educational institution, etc.

Power- is the ability of individuals or groups to impose their will on others, regardless of their desire. Power is measured by the number of people who are subject to this influence. The power of the head of the department extends to several people, the chief engineer of the enterprise - to several hundred people, the minister - to several thousand, and the President of Russia - to all its citizens. His status is highest rank in social stratification. Power in modern society is fixed by law and tradition, surrounded by privileges and wide access to social benefits. Power allows you to control key resources. To master them means to gain dominion over people. People who have power or enjoy recognition, authority for their economic, political, spiritual activities, constitute the elite of society, its highest social stratum.

Education- the basis of general cultural and vocational training in modern society, one of the characteristics of the achieved status. As society develops, knowledge becomes more specialized and deep, so modern man spends much more time on education than even a few hundred years ago. On average, it takes 20 years to train a specialist (for example, an engineer) in modern society, given that before entering a university, he must receive a secondary education. The level of education is determined not only by the number of years of study, but also by the rank educational institutions who confirmed in the manner prescribed by law (with a diploma or certificate) that an individual has received education: high school, college, university.

Prestige- the respect with which public opinion relates to a particular profession, position, occupation or individual for his personal qualities. Formation of the professional and job structure of society is an important function social institutions. The nomenclature of professions eloquently testifies to the nature of society (agrarian, industrial, informational) and the stage of its development. It is changeable, just as the prestige of various professions is changeable.

For example, in medieval society, the profession of a priest was perhaps the most prestigious, which cannot be said about modern society. In the 30s. of the last century, millions of boys dreamed of becoming pilots. Everyone had the names of V.P. on their lips. Chkalova, M.V. Vodopyanova, N.P. Kamanina. In the postwar years, and especially after the development of scientific and technological revolution in the middle of the 20th century. the prestige of the engineering profession has grown in society, and computerization of the 90s. updated the professions of computer specialists and programmers.

The most prestigious at all times were considered professions associated with access to valuable resources for a given society - money, scarce goods, power or knowledge, information. A person, as a rule, seeks to emphasize his own high prestige with appropriate status symbols: clothes, accessories, an expensive car brand, awards.

In sociological science, there is such a thing as a ladder of professional prestige. This is a scheme that reflects the degree of public respect that goes to a particular profession. The basis for its construction is the study of public opinion. Such polls are especially popular in the USA. An example of a scale built by American researchers based on a generalization of the results of public opinion polls conducted in 1949-1982 is shown in Table. 6. ( Highest mark, awarded to the profession - 100, the lowest - 1.)

Scale of professional prestige

Table 6

In modern Western sociology, Marxism is opposed by the theory of social stratification.

Classification or stratification? Representatives of the theory of stratification argue that the concept of class is not applicable to the modern post-industrial society. This is due to the uncertainty of the concept of "private property": in view of the wide corporatization, as well as the exclusion of the main shareholders from the sphere of production management and their replacement by hired managers, property relations turned out to be blurred, lost their certainty. Therefore, the concept of "class" should be replaced by the concept of "stratum" or the concept of a social group, and the theory of social class structure of society should be replaced by theories of social stratification. However, classification and stratification are not mutually exclusive approaches. The concept of "class", convenient and appropriate for the macro approach, will be clearly insufficient when we try to consider the structure of interest to us in more detail. In a deep and comprehensive study of the structure of society, the mere economic dimension offered by the Marxist class approach is clearly not enough. Stratification dimension- this is a fairly fine grading of layers within the class, allowing for a deeper detailed analysis of the social structure.

Most researchers believe that social stratification- a hierarchically organized structure of social (status) inequality that exists in a certain society, in a certain historical period of time. hierarchically organized structure social inequality can be imagined as a division of the whole society into strata. Layered, multilevel society in this case can be compared with the geological layers of the soil. In modern sociology, there are four main criteria of social inequality:

ü Income It is measured in rubles or dollars that an individual or family receives during a certain period of time, say, one month or a year.

ü Education measured by the number of years of study in a public or private school or university.

ü 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 desire).

ü Prestige- respect for the status that has developed in public opinion.

The criteria of social stratification listed above are the most universal for all modern societies. However, the social position of a person in society is also influenced by some other criteria that determine, first of all, his " starting opportunities. These include:

ü social background. The family brings the individual into social system, determining in many respects his education, profession and income. Poor parents reproduce potentially poor children, which is determined by their health, education, qualifications. Children from poor families are 3 times more likely to die due to negligence, from diseases, accidents and violence in the first years of life than children from rich families.

ü gender. Today in Russia there is an intensive process of feminization of poverty. Despite the fact that men and women live in families belonging to different social levels, the income, status of women and the prestige of their professions are usually lower than those of men.

ü Race and ethnicity. So, in the US, white people get better education and have a higher professional status than African Americans. Ethnicity also affects social status.

ü Religion. In American society, members of the Episcopal and Presbyterian churches, as well as Jews, occupy the highest social positions. Lutherans and Baptists occupy a lower position.

Pitirim Sorokin made a significant contribution to the study of status inequality. To determine the totality of all social statuses of society, he introduced the concept social space.

In his work " social mobility» 1927 P. Sorokin, first of all, emphasized the impossibility of combining or even comparing such concepts as "geometric space" and "social space". According to him, a person of the lower class can physically come into contact with a noble person, but this circumstance will not in the least reduce the economic, prestige or power differences existing between them, i.e. will not reduce the existing social distance. Thus, two people between whom there are significant property, family, official or other social differences cannot be in the same social space, even if they are embracing.

According to Sorokin, social space is three-dimensional. It is described by three coordinate axes - economic status, political status, professional status. Thus, the social position (general or integral status) of each individual who is integral part given social space, is described using three coordinates ( x, y, z). Note that this system coordinates describes exclusively the social, and not the personal statuses of the individual.

The situation when an individual, having a high status on one of the coordinate axes, at the same time has a low status level on the other axis, is called status incompatibility.

For example, individuals with high level of acquired education, which provides high social status along the occupational dimension of stratification, may occupy a poorly paid position and therefore will have a low economic status. Most sociologists rightly believe that the presence of status incompatibility contributes to the growth of resentment among such people, and they will support radical social change aimed at changing the stratification. And vice versa in the case of the “new Russians” who aspire to get into politics: they are clearly aware that the high economic level they have achieved is unreliable without being compatible with an equally high political status. The same way a poor person who has received a fairly high political status of a deputy State Duma inevitably begins to use the acquired position for the corresponding "pulling up" of his economic status.

The concept of " stratification» ( stratification) in Latin means "layer" or "layer". Thus, stratification should clarify the vertical sequence of the position of social strata, as well as layers in society. Sociologists agree that the basis of stratification is the social inequality of people. However, the way inequality is organized can be different. Currently, sociologists are making repeated attempts to expand the number of criteria. For example, by including the level of education. So, society reproduces and also organizes inequality, taking into account several reasons:

1. level of income and wealth.
2. The level of political power.
3. The level of social prestige and so on.

These types of hierarchies are important to society because they are able to regulate social connections and to guide personal aspirations. Consider a vertical cut of the stratification bases. Researchers face a problem - division on the scale of social hierarchy. In other words, how many social strata need to be distinguished. Of course, one can distinguish great amount segments of the population with different levels welfare. Stratification structure became similar to a socio-professional structure. She split into:

1. Administrators are the highest class of professionals.
2. Mid-level professionals.
3. Commercial class.
4. petty bourgeoisie.
5. skilled and unskilled workers.

And this is not the whole list of social strata of society. When developing a general idea of ​​the social hierarchy of society, it is enough to single out three levels - the highest, the middle, and the lowest. The entire population can be divided into these stratifications, taking into account values ​​and norms. For example, in Western society, the degree of freedom is determined not only by legal and political acts, but also by the size of the budget, which should provide wide access to education. Therefore, in order to be in a prestigious status group, one must take into account the criteria that provide a high income and material independence. To reach the top of the social hierarchy in a totalitarian society Soviet period, it was only necessary to participate in political decisions, as well as to get closer to the power structures.

How can you determine specific gravity each stratum? First of all, the measurement technique depends on statistical methods that allow us to determine the income hierarchy of the population. It cannot be measured mathematically. After all, here you need to study all the rules that have developed in this society. You can use other methods for determining the social profile of society. It is necessary to emphasize the main thing - it is impossible to say with accuracy what social stratification is, if we take into account only statistical data or be based only on data. sociological survey. Need to use A complex approach. First of all, social inequality is the first reason for the hierarchical structure. Every society should strive for inequality. Initially, the society had its own laws in order to maintain the social hierarchy. So, a child in the family of a slave should be a slave, in the family of a serf - a serf, and in the family of a nobleman - a representative of the upper class.

The system of social institutions consisted of the army, the court, the church. They constantly monitored the observance of the rules of the hierarchical structure of society. For example, in India, a hierarchical system was established in the form of castes. Such a hierarchical system was maintained only by force: either with the help of weapons or with the help of religion. In modern society, the hierarchical system is devoid of such cruelty. After all, all citizens have the same rights. Moreover, they are able to occupy different positions in the social space.

Thus, the profile of the vertical slice of society has never been constant. Karl Marx assumed that the configuration of the vertical section of society would change due to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. But Sorokin rejected Marx's thesis and believed that top part the social pyramid rises above the rest. The stability of society is related to the profile of social stratification. The main thing is that the process of stratification should not be carried out at the expense of natural Disasters but through public policy. Stability is maintained in the social hierarchy due to a powerful middle class. Although recently the number of the poorest layers has been increasing. But even this does not prevent the development of the middle class. For example, E. Giddens described the middle class in Great Britain. He noted not only its multiplicity, but also its heterogeneity. Giddens singled out the "old middle class", which includes property owners small business and small business owners. In addition to this class, he singled out the "lower middle class", which includes teachers, employees and doctors. The middle class demonstrates the way of life to the lower stratum with some effort. Thus, the discontent of the lower strata is neutralized when they realize that it is possible to achieve a better position in society. During economic crises, the erosion of the middle class leads to serious upheavals. For example, in Russia, the main part of the people became impoverished in the conditions of price liberalization. And this led to the destruction of the social balance in society.

At the end of the article, we can summarize - the vertical section of society is mobile. After all, its main layers can not only decrease, but also increase. First of all, this is due to the structural restructuring of the economy, with recessions in production and with the nature political regime. Note that the stratification profile can never be extended indefinitely. After all, a special mechanism is being worked out for the redistribution of the national wealth of power, which is presented in the form of spontaneous actions of the masses. To avoid this, you need to regulate this process. The main thing is to take care of the middle stratum of society. In this case, the stability of society will be ensured!

Marxist tradition in class analysis

concept Class used in various scientific disciplines to refer to any set consisting of elements, each of which has at least one property common to all. The term social classification(from lat. classis- rank, class, and facio- do) means a single system large groups people arranged in a hierarchical row, forming together society as a whole.

The concept of ʼʼsocial classʼʼ was introduced into scientific vocabulary in early XIX centuries, French historians Thierry and Guizot, investing in it, mainly political meaning, showing the opposition of the interests of various social groups and the inevitability of their collision. Somewhat later, a number of English economists, including Riccardo and Smith, made the first attempts to reveal the ʼʼanatomyʼʼ of classes, ᴛ.ᴇ. their internal structure.

Despite the fact that social class is one of the central concepts in sociology, scientists still do not have a single 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. Most of Marx's works are connected with the theme of stratification and, above all, with the concept of social class, although, oddly enough, he did not give a systematic analysis of this concept.

We can say that Marx's social classes are economically determined and genetically conflicting groups. The basis of division into groups is the presence or absence of property. Feudal lord and serf in feudal society, bourgeois and proletarian in capitalist society are antagonistic classes that inevitably appear in any society that has a complex hierarchical structure based on inequality. Marx also allowed 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:

1. 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. These resources are considered private property.

2. Classes are determined on the basis of the fact of ownership or non-ownership of the produced property.

3. Class relations presuppose the exploitation of one class by another, ᴛ.ᴇ. one class appropriates the results of the labor of another class, exploits and suppresses it. This kind of relationship is constantly reproduced class conflict, which is the basis of social changes taking place in society.

4. There are objective (for example, possession of resources) and subjective attributes of class (a sense of class belonging).

Despite the revision, from the point of view of modern society, of many provisions of the class theory of K. Marx, some of his ideas remain relevant in relation to currently existing social structures.
Hosted on ref.rf
This primarily applies to situations of interclass conflicts, clashes and class struggle to change the conditions for the distribution of resources. In this regard, Marx's doctrine of class struggle currently has a large number of followers among sociologists and political scientists in many countries of the world.

The most influential alternative Marxist theory of social class is the work of Max Weber. Weber, in principle, recognized the correctness of the division of the population into classes on the basis of the presence or absence of ownership of capital and the means of production. At the same time, he considered such a division to be too rough and simplified. Weber believed that social stratification has three different measures of inequality.

First - economic inequality,ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ Weber called the position of the class. The second indicator is status, or social prestige, and the third - power.

Class is interpreted by Weber as a group of people with the same life opportunities. Weber considers the relationship to power ( political parties) and prestige as one of the most important features social class. Each of these dimensions is a separate aspect of social gradation. However, for the most part, these three dimensions are interconnected; they feed and support each other, but still may not coincide.

Thus, individual prostitutes and criminals have great economic opportunities, but do not have prestige and power. The teaching staff of universities and the clergy enjoy high prestige, but in terms of wealth and power they are usually valued relatively low. Some officials may wield considerable power and at the same time receive little wages and no prestige.

Τᴀᴋᴎᴍ ᴏϬᴩᴀᴈᴏᴍ, Weber for the first time lays the stratification system that exists in a given society as the basis for class division.

In modern Western sociology, Marxism is opposed by the theory of social stratification.

Classification or stratification? Representatives of the theory of stratification argue that the concept of class is not applicable to the modern post-industrial society. This is due to the uncertainty of the concept of ʼʼprivate propertyʼʼ: due to wide corporatization, as well as the exclusion of basic shareholders from the sphere of production management and their replacement by hired managers, property relations turned out to be blurred, lost their certainty. For this reason, the concept of ʼʼclassʼʼ should be replaced by the concept of ʼʼstrataʼʼ or the concept of a social group, and the theory of social class structure of society should be replaced by theories of social stratification. However, classification and stratification are not mutually exclusive approaches. The concept of ʼʼclassʼʼ, convenient and appropriate for the macro approach, will be clearly insufficient when we try to consider the structure of interest to us in more detail. With a deep and comprehensive study of the structure of society, the economic dimension alone is clearly not enough, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ offers a Marxist class approach. Stratification dimension- ϶ᴛᴏ a rather fine grading of the layers within the class, allowing for a deeper detailed analysis of the social structure.

Most researchers believe that social stratification- a hierarchically organized structure of social (status) inequality that exists in a certain society, in a certain historical period of time. The hierarchically organized structure of social inequality can be imagined as a division of the whole society into strata. Layered, multi-level society in this case can be compared with the geological layers of the soil. In modern sociology, there are four basic criteria of social inequality:

ü Income It is measured in rubles or dollars that an individual or family receives during a certain period of time, say, one month or a year.

ü Education measured by the number of years of education in a public or private school or university.

ü 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 desire).

ü Prestige- respect for the status that has developed in public opinion.

The criteria of social stratification listed above are the most universal for all modern societies. At the same time, the social position of a person in society is also influenced by some other criteria that determine, first of all, his ʼʼ starting possibilitiesʼʼ. These include:

ü social background. The family carries out the introduction of the individual into the social system, determining in many respects his education, profession and income. Poor parents reproduce potentially poor children, which is determined by their health, education, qualifications. Children from poor families are 3 times more likely to die due to negligence, from diseases, accidents and violence in the first years of life than children from rich families.

ü gender. Today in Russia there is an intensive process of feminization of poverty. Despite the fact that men and women live in families belonging to different social levels, the income, status of women and the prestige of their professions are usually lower than those of men.

ü Race and ethnicity. Thus, in the US, white people receive a better education and have a higher professional status than African Americans. Ethnicity also affects social status.

ü Religion. In American society, members of the Episcopal and Presbyterian churches, as well as Jews, occupy the highest social positions. Lutherans and Baptists occupy a lower position.

Pitirim Sorokin made a significant contribution to the study of status inequality. To determine the totality of all social statuses of society, he introduced the concept social space.

In his work ʼʼSocial Mobilityʼʼ 1927 ᴦ. P. Sorokin, first of all, emphasized the impossibility of combining or even comparing such concepts as ʼʼgeometric spaceʼʼ and ʼʼsocial spaceʼʼ. According to him, a person of the lower class can physically come into contact with a noble person, but this circumstance will not in the least reduce the economic, prestige or power differences existing between them, ᴛ.ᴇ. will not reduce the existing social distance. Τᴀᴋᴎᴍ ᴏϬᴩᴀᴈᴏᴍ, two people between whom there are significant property, family, official or other social differences cannot be in the same social space, even if they are embracing.

According to Sorokin, social space is three-dimensional. It is described by three coordinate axes - economic status, political status, professional status.Τᴀᴋᴎᴍ ᴏϬᴩᴀᴈᴏᴍ, the social position (general or integral status) of each individual, which is an integral part of a given social space, is described using three coordinates ( x, y, z). Note that this coordinate system describes exclusively the social, and not the personal statuses of the individual.

The situation when an individual, having a high status along one of the coordinate axes, at the same time has a low status level along the other axis, is called status incompatibility.

For example, individuals with a high level of acquired education, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ provide high social status along the occupational dimension of stratification, may occupy a poorly paid position and therefore will have a low economic status. Most sociologists rightly believe that the presence of status incompatibility contributes to the growth of resentment among such people, and they will support radical social changes aimed at changing stratification. And vice versa in the case of the ʼʼʼʼʼ new Russians who aspire to get into politics: they are clearly aware that the high economic level they have achieved is unreliable without being compatible with an equally high political status. Similarly, a poor person who has received a fairly high political status as a deputy of the State Duma inevitably begins to use the position he has acquired to appropriately “pull up” his economic status.