In sociology, social stratification is the hierarchical arrangement of social classes, castes and strata within a society. While these hierarchies are not universal to
all societies, they are the norm among state-level cultures (as distinguished from hunter-gatherers or other social arrangements).
Critical overview
|
|
The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.
Please do not remove this message until the dispute is
resolved. |
Social stratification is regarded quite differently by the principal perspectives of sociology. Proponents of structural-functional analysis suggest that since social stratification exists in most state
societies, a hierarchy must therefore be beneficial in helping to stabilize their existence. Talcott Parsons, an American sociologist, indicated that stability and social order is achieved by a
universal value consensus. Functionalists indicate that stratification exists solely to satisfy
the functional prerequisites necessary for functional proficiency in any
society. Conflict theorists consider the inaccessibility of resources and lack of
social mobility in many stratified societies. They conclude, often working from the
theories of Karl Marx, that stratification means that working
class people are not likely to advance socioeconomically, while the wealthy may
continue to exploit the proletariat generation after generation. Marx identified that the
social classes are stratified based on their connection to the means of production
and thus the ruling class, bourgeoisie, and working class, proletariats, maintain their social positions by maintaining their
relationship with the means of production. This maintenance of status quo is achieved by various methods of social control
employed by the bourgeoisie within many aspects of social life, eg.ideologies of submission promoted through the institution of
religion. However, some conflict theorists, mainly Max Weber and followers of his Weberian
perspective, also critique Marx's view and point out that social stratification is not purely based on economic inequalities but
is equally shaped by status and power differentials. They proceed to examine the basis and structure of stratification in society
along all of the three axes. On these bases Weber has indicated the failure on the part of Marx to account for the presence of a
middle class and the structural fractioning of strata that exists in every social class society. Weber therefore moved on to
indicate the presences of four social classes from which he refers to as the propertied upper class, the property-less white
colour workers, the petty bourgeoisie, and the working class. Another important factor to note is found in the work of
Francois Adle who stated that, "The advancement [of] technology has changed the structure of
mobility completely"
Non-stratified societies
Anthropologists have confirmed that social stratification is not universal as once
thought[citation needed]. Non-stratified
egalitarian societies exist which have little or no concept of social hierarchy,
political or economic status, class, or even permanent leadership. Also known as acephalous (or "headless") societies, the best examples of egalitarian cultures all have
hunter-gatherer economies, although not all hunter-gatherers can be considered
egalitarian.
Kinship-orientation
Anthropologists identify egalitarian cultures as "Kinship-oriented," because they value
social harmony more than wealth or status. These are contrasted with Economically-oriented cultures (including States) in which status is prized, and stratification, competition, and conflict are common. Kinship-oriented
cultures actively work to prevent social hierarchies from developing which could lead
to conflict and instability. They do this typically through a process of reciprocal
altruism.
A good example is given by Richard Borshay Lee's [1] account of the !Kung San, who practice
"insulting the meat." Whenever a hunter makes a kill, he is ceaselessly teased and ridiculed (in a friendly, joking
fashion) to prevent him from becoming too proud or egotistical. The meat itself is then distributed evenly among the entire
social group, rather than kept by the hunter. The level of teasing is proportional to the size of the kill--Lee found this out
the hard way when he purchased an entire cow as a gift for the group he was living with, and was teased for weeks afterward about
it (since obtaining that much meat could be interpreted as showing off).
Another example is the Indigenous Australians of Northwest Arnhem Land (and perhaps elsewhere in Australia), who have arranged their
entire society, spirituality, and economy around a kind of gift economy called
renunciation. In this arrangement, every person is expected to give
everything of any consumable resource they have to any other person who needs or lacks it at the time. This has the benefit of
largely eliminating social problems like theft and relative poverty. However, misunderstandings obviously arise when attempting
to reconcile Aboriginal renunciative economics with the competition/scarcity-oriented economics introduced to Australia by Anglo-European colonists.
Marx's inspiration
|
|
The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.
Please do not remove this message until the dispute is
resolved. |
According to Marvin Harris[2], Lewis Henry Morgan's accounts of the egalitarian natives of
Hawaii formed part of Marx's inspiration for Communism. See Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State (ISBN 0-87348-261-1). But Marx's
frame of reference was the highly stratified, economically-oriented society of industrial Europe. So, even though Marx was
concerned with equality, his philosophy emphasizes materialism, economics, and politics. Many people argue that these are less
important issues in an egalitarian society, where relative material and political
equality result naturally from well-maintained, mostly non-competitive social relationships (kinship).
The basic differences in attitude between Kinship-oriented and Economically-oriented societies may, in part, explain some of
the difficulties met when implementing socialist ideals in an already stratified culture.
Weber's inspiration
Weber built on Marx's ideas, arriving at the three-component theory
of stratification and the concept of life chances.
References
- ^ Lee, Richard B. (1976), Kalahari Hunter-Gatherers: Studies of
the !Kung San and Their Neighbors, Richard B. Lee and Irven DeVore, eds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- ^ Harris, Marvin (1968), The Rise of Anthropological Theory: A History of
Theories of Culture ISBN 0-7591-0133-7
External links
See also
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
