Topic 8 - Social Stratification.
By the end of this topic, you should be able to:
1. Explain the factors which influence social inequalities;
2. Describe various types of societies according to its degree of social stratification; and
3. Compare theories of stratification (functionalism and conflict theory).
INTRODUCTION
John is conducting a study on the sultanate system in Malaysia. He has gone to
the National Library to get materials related to his topic. He discovered that the
sultan's role is inherited from generation to generation. For example, according
to the newspaper clipping that he is reading, after the demise of Sultan
Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah, his son Tengku Idris Shah was crowned as the
ninth sultan of Selangor with the title Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah on 22nd
November, 2001. This leads John to think: Apparently not just anybody can
become a sultan in Malaysia. Even if my friend Ahmad wanted to become the
Sultan of Selangor, this surely would never happen!
John then reflected Barack Obama's recent appointment as America's first Black
president. This is in stark contrast to the sultanate system where such a thing
would not have been possible. Obama was able through sheer determination and
belief to scale the social ladder and finally become the most powerful man in the
United States (please refer to Figure 8.1). Americans believe firmly in the idea of
anybody being able to achieve great success through hard work and effort. This
leads John to think: Apparently just about any American can become the
President. In fact, I could become the next President if I really wanted to!
Rajah 8.1: Sultan versus Barack Obama
Social stratification determines our social position in society. Sometimes we are
tied to a particular social status because of hereditary factors, for example, it may
be our destiny to be born into royalty. But there are also cases where we can
work hard to change our destiny, especially in a society with very high social
mobility. How far does social stratification influence our roles in society? This
topic attempts to explore this question by discussing the bases of social
inequality, describing various societies with different stratification systems, and
explaining social stratification from the functionalist and conflict perspectives.
ACTIVITY 8.1
Observe patterns of social stratification in the following situations
and discuss them with your friends:
The office where you work
Your extended family in your hometown
Your tutorial class
8.1 SOCIAL INEQUALITIES
How do we measure social inequalities? According to Max Weber, there are three
basic criteria that can be used to measure the degree of social inequality:
(i) Wealth
(ii) Power
(iii) Status and prestige
8.1.1 Wealth
Firstly, we can be measured or differentiated based on our wealth. Culturally
speaking, wealth takes on various forms in different societies. For example,
among the peasantry, wealth is measured in terms of cattle and land. However,
urbanites may not quite see it the same way. To them, a big pay cheque and a
fancy car would be indicators of wealth (please refer to Figure 8.2).
Figure 8.2: Wealth
Source: www.irfanahmed.org
8.1.2 Power
Weber defines ppower as the ability to achieve success despite obstacles and
resistance. Maybe you are thinking at this point: what then is the difference
between wealth and power? Isn't wealth equivalent to power? However,
powerful people are not necessarily wealthy. I am sure that you are familiar with
the following adage: knowledge is power. This exemplifies the idea that power is
not always synonymous with wealth. For example, you respect your lecturer not
because he is rich, but because of the wealth of knowledge that he has.
8.1.3 Status and Prestige
Status is a manifestation of social inequality. It refers to the degree of respect that
is given to an individual by society due to sociocultural factors.
Prestige is a subset of social status. Prestige is measured based on the ownership
of wealth, while status is given to those who has distinguished themselves in
non-material fields of endeavour, for example, academics or religion. A
millionaire who sports a Rolex, drives a Ferrari, and lives in a country villa is
highly prestigious. On the other hand, people with considerably less material
possessions may command very high status in society because of their excellent
reputation in their respective areas of work, from teachers, priests, professors,
government servants, to judges.
The meaning of status depends on which part of the world you happen to find
yourself in. In Eastern societies, status is proportional to one's age; the older one
is, the more respect one commands. In Western societies, however, one tends to
lose status when one retires and becomes a senior citizen.
SELF-CHECK 8.1
Explain the following criteria used to measure social inequality:
Wealth
Power
Status and prestige
8.2 TYPES OF SOCIETY
According to Morton Fried, anthropologists have distinguished three types of
society based on how they are stratified. These societies include:
Egalitarian societies
Rank societies
Stratified societies
8.2.1 Egalitarian Societies
In an egalitarian society, all individuals would enjoy more or less the same
degree of wealth, power, and status. Everyone is considered equal. As such,
social inequalities are practically nonexistent in egalitarian societies.
Although some individuals may be respected and acknowledged because
of their talents and abilities (for example, hunting), these individuals
do not have more wealth or power
Figure 8.3: The Hadza compared to their neighbours.
Source: www.survival-international.org
Moreover, no matter how much respect an individual commands, he does not have
any power to influence the lives of others. Those with lower status are not denied
their rights to hold any position that they wish to shoulder. For example, the Hadza
in Tanzania is an example of an egalitarian society (please refer to Figure 8.3).
8.2.2 Rank Societies
In rrank societies, the distribution of wealth and power is equal, but unlike
egalitarian societies, some individuals may command more prestige, status, and
rank. In these societies, not just anybody may hold high status positions. Usually,
these positions will be inherited by those from the aristocracy. One is not
appointed to be a leader based on ability, skill, or wisdom; one becomes a leader
by virtue of one's ancestry.
Although the leaders of rank societies may enjoy higher status and certain privileges, they are not
necessarily richer than others. Their standard of living is not that different from that enjoyed by a commoner.
These leaders will customarily receive gifts from others, but these gifts are not usually kept for long.
Any wealth that they may have will be redistributed for the good of society. The Nootka in British
Columbia is an example of a rank society (please refer to Figure 8.4). Nootka men with high status will be
more ornately dressed compared to those of lower status. Unlike Westerners, the more wealth is given
away, the more status a Nootka gains!
Figure 8.4: The Nootka
Source: www.canadianheritage.org
8.2.3 Stratified Societies
Unlike rank societies where inequalities exist only in terms of status, in sstratified
societies inequalities exist in all forms (wealth, power, and status). These
inequalities can be seen from a political, economic, and social angle.
Individuals and groups in stratified societies can be differentiated in terms of
status, wealth, lifestyle, political power, and standard of living. Inequalities in life
chances are often passed down from one generation to another.
According to anthropologists, there are two types of stratified society based on
their level of social mobility:
(i) Class system
(ii) Caste system
(i) Class System
In the cclass system, ssocial mobility is very much alive, meaning that there is
plenty of movement up and down the social ladder. In other words, an
individual can work hard to change his lot, acquiring wealth, power, and
prestige along the way.
In modern society, an individual born in poverty may still claw his way up
the social ladder by working extremely hard (or through sheer dumb luck!)
and ending up with mountains of millions. On the other hand, it is not
impossible for a millionaire's son to end his life begging for scraps in
suburban streets (please refer to Figure 8.5).
Figure 8.5: Social mobility in a class system
Source: frgdr.com
Source: ocri.wordpress.com
This is what is meant by aachieved status, that is, the status achieved by an
individual based on his own merit and qualifications. What is implied here
is that individuals belonging to a class system believe that they can steer a
course for themselves in life, working hard towards achieving their greatest
dreams.
The class system usually consists of the following classes: ccapitalist class,
upper middle class, mworking class, and u
middle class, wunderclass. Table 8.1
explains these classes in greater detail:
Table 8.1: Social classes in a class system
Capitalist class This class consists of wealthy and influential families
(Rockefeller, Carnegie), chief executive officers (CEOs), and
owners of large and lucrative businesses. Their wealth is highly
dependent on assets like shares, bonds, securities, and
properties. Because they control the means of production in
society, they provide jobs for society and determine the fates of
the other social classes.
Upper middle class This class consists of professionals (doctors, lawyers), business
owners, and those who run the corporations owned by the
capitalists. Their wealth is mainly generated through a sizable
executive income rather than ownership of assets. This class is
highly educated and many of its members have postgraduate
degrees and can afford to send their children to institutions of
higher learning.
Middle class This class consists of those who work hard for a moderate
salary like small-time entrepreneurs, teachers, nurses, and the
like. They enjoy some job security but are still somewhat
affected by inflation and tax. By doubling their efforts, they are
able to improve their lot and achieve a higher status in society.
Working class This class consists of workers who perform routine tasks which
require supervision such as factory workers, clerks, labourers,
and the like. They are usually not highly educated and so are
unable to achieve a higher social status. Their livelihood is very
much influenced by current economic conditions and they may
suffer unemployment in the event of an economic recession.
Underclass This class consists of those who struggle daily with poverty
because they cannot hold regular jobs which promise a stable
salary. Sometimes, they are effectively excluded from
respectable society due to unemployment or social problems
such as drug abuse or juvenile delinquency. They are usually
not very well educated (if at all), and illiteracy is not
uncommon among them.
ACTIVITY 8.2
(a) Based on the table above, can you determine your own social
class? Do you have any dreams or hopes of improving your
standard of living?
(b) Explain the link between social mobility and education. Why is
it that people like you are still interested in furthering their
studies at the highest level?
(ii) Caste System
In the ccaste system, social mobility is virtually non-existent. Membership in
a caste system is fixed upon birth and cannot be negotiated for as long as
the person lives. The caste system segregates its members according to a
rigid social hierarchy. This means that different castes cannot socialise with
each other or intermarry.
Unlike individuals from a class system, members of a caste system will be
indoctrinated to believe that their fates have been fixed since birth.
Therefore, it is futile to strive in order to improve oneÊs lot, because the
caste system does not allow people to jump caste. This is what is meant by
ascribed status, that is, status that is inherited by an individual from one
generation to the next.
The most famous caste system in the world is the Hindu caste system in
traditional India. Indian society may be categorised into different varnas:
brahmin, kksatria, vvaisya, and ssudra. Each varna is believed to represent
different degrees of purity and holiness. The ppariah group is totally
excluded from the caste system because they are considered too dirty.
Each vvarna is associated with a certain role or work as shown in Table 8.2:
Table 8.2: Varnas in a Caste System
Brahmin This varna consists of priests and scholars. They are considered
the purest and holiest group in the caste system and perform
roles that require intelligence and wisdom.
Ksatria This varna consists of administrators and warriors. They are
responsible for the governance and defence of the state. This
group excels in politics and warfare.
TOPIC 8 SOCIAL STRATIFICATION •
107
Vaisya This varna consists of farmers, traders, and artisans. They are
concentrated in the following sectors: business, agriculture, and
animal husbandry. They ensure the smooth running of the
economy in society.
Sudra This varna is made up of labourers. They perform tasks for the
top three varnas, yet they are still considered part of the caste
system.
Pariah This group is not even recognised as part of the caste system.
They are considered unclean and for that reason they are only
allowed to perform trivial and degrading work like cleaning
latrines. For this, they have been dubbed the untouchables.
Does this mean that social mobility is totally non-existent in Indian society?
The answer is yes and no. Socially, one is tied to his caste of origin for
the rest of his life. Spiritually speaking, however, it is possible for an
individual to jump caste. This is because Hinduism teaches its adherents
the concept of rreincarnation which states that upon someone;s death, he
will be reincarnated in a form that befits his deeds (good or bad) in his past
life (kkarma). Therefore, if a Hindu violates an ethical code which is central
to his caste, his reincarnation will be severely jeopardised.
Hindus are expected to display good and moral behaviour in their daily
conduct. If they transgress moral boundaries, there is every possibility that
they will be reincarnated in an inferior caste, or worse, in the form of an
animal! For example, a Hindu who steals from his neighbours may be
reincarnated as a snake as punishment for his sins (please refer to Figure
8.6). Perhaps there is no such thing as social mobility in Hindu society, but
there is such a thing as spiritual mobility!
Figure 8.6: Reincarnation in the Hindu caste system
SELF-CHECK 8.2
Differentiate between:
Rank societies and stratified societies
Class system and caste system
8.3 THEORIES OF STRATIFICATION
You have been informed that social stratification can be seen in terms of the
unequal distribution of wealth, power, and prestige in society. The question is:
why are social inequalities universally found in all societies all over the world?
We will now discuss two theories that explain social stratification:
(i) Functionalism
(ii) Conflict theory
8.3.1 Functionalism
Functionalism assumes that social stratification contributes to social well-being.
In other words, stratification ensures the smooth running and survival and
society. According to Kingsley Davis (please refer to Figure 8.7) and Wilbert
Moore (please refer to Figure 8.8), in order to ensure the continuance of society,
there has to be a system whereby tasks and roles are assigned to those who are
truly qualified to peform them. For those who are willing and able to shoulder
the burden, they deserve to be handsomely rewarded for their sacrifices.
Figure 8.7: Kingsley Davis
Source: www2.asanet.org
For example, if society provides a system whereby a pilot receives the same pay as a
janitor, surely nobody will take the trouble and risk to train and work as a pilot. By ensuring that
rewards are commensurate with the difficulty of the task, society will be able to attract the best
people to perform the most challenging work. Social inequalities are functional because it serves
as a mechanism that distributes rewards fairly and motivates workers to compete with each
other to be the best.
ACTIVITY 8.3
Do you agree with the ideas propagated by functionalism? Read
more extensively and try to find views that are critical of the
functionalist stand.
8.3.2 Conflict Theory
Contrary to functionalism, conflict theory assumes that society tends more
towards opposition and conflict. According to this theory, stratification
happens because the upper classes are in a position to oppress the lower
classes with their wealth, power, and prestige. Conflict theory is heavily
influenced by Karl Marx (please refer to Figure 8.9) who believed that history
depicts an ongoing class struggle between the bbourgeoisie who owns the
means of production and the pproletariat who offer their services for wages.
The bourgeoisie is influential in shaping the minds of the proletariat because they
control social institutions like schools, factories, government, and the mass media.
They use their power to convince the proletariat that social inequalities are
inevitable. Supposedly, anybody can become rich by working diligently. When the
proletariat accepts the status quo, this means that they are trapped in a state of
false class consciousness woven from the lies and false promises of the capitalists.
Figure 8.8: Wilbert Moore
Source: www2.asanet.org
Figure 8.9: Karl Marx
Source: myphd.eu
For as long as the proletariat swallows the capitalist ideology, social inequalities
will continue to remain. However, Marx predicts that the proletariat will
eventually realise the extent of their oppression at the hands of the bourgeoisie.
Collectively, they will rise and revolt, and finally replace the capitalist system
with communism. It is believed that this will eliminate all social classes, and
ultimately, all traces of social inequality will disappear. Is this really possible?
Karl Marx used to think so, at any rate.
SELF-CHECK 8.3
Explain social stratification according to the following perspectives:
. Functionalism
. Conflict theory
. Max Weber lists three criteria that can be used to measure social inequalities:
(i) Wealth
(ii) Power
(iii) Status and prestige
. Based on those three criteria (wealth, power, and status/prestige), three types
of society can be differentiated:
(i) Egalitarian societies
(ii) Rank societies
(iii) Stratified societies
. Social stratification may be explained using functionalist theory which sees
social inequalities as something that encourages individuals to compete with
each other to be the best, or according to conflict theory which sees the higher
classes oppressing the lower classes to safeguard their interests.
Achieved Status Pariah
Ascribed Status Power
Bourgeoisie Prestige
Brahmin Proletariat
Capitalist Class Rank Society
Caste System Reincarnation
Class System Social Mobility
Conflict Theory Social Stratification
Egalitarian Society Status
False Class Consciousness Stratified Society
Functionalism Sudra
Karma Upper Middle Class
Ksatria Vaisya
Lower Class Varna
Means of Production Wealth
Middle Class Working Class
Ferraro, G. (2006). Cultural anthropology: An applied perspective (6th ed.).
Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.
Kottak, C. P. (2006). Anthropology: The exploration of human diversity
(11th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill Higher Education.
Scupin, R. & DeCorse, C. R. (2004). Anthropology: A global perspective(5th ed.).
New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
By the end of this topic, you should be able to:
1. Explain the factors which influence social inequalities;
2. Describe various types of societies according to its degree of social stratification; and
3. Compare theories of stratification (functionalism and conflict theory).
INTRODUCTION
John is conducting a study on the sultanate system in Malaysia. He has gone to
the National Library to get materials related to his topic. He discovered that the
sultan's role is inherited from generation to generation. For example, according
to the newspaper clipping that he is reading, after the demise of Sultan
Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah, his son Tengku Idris Shah was crowned as the
ninth sultan of Selangor with the title Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah on 22nd
November, 2001. This leads John to think: Apparently not just anybody can
become a sultan in Malaysia. Even if my friend Ahmad wanted to become the
Sultan of Selangor, this surely would never happen!
John then reflected Barack Obama's recent appointment as America's first Black
president. This is in stark contrast to the sultanate system where such a thing
would not have been possible. Obama was able through sheer determination and
belief to scale the social ladder and finally become the most powerful man in the
United States (please refer to Figure 8.1). Americans believe firmly in the idea of
anybody being able to achieve great success through hard work and effort. This
leads John to think: Apparently just about any American can become the
President. In fact, I could become the next President if I really wanted to!
Rajah 8.1: Sultan versus Barack Obama
Social stratification determines our social position in society. Sometimes we are
tied to a particular social status because of hereditary factors, for example, it may
be our destiny to be born into royalty. But there are also cases where we can
work hard to change our destiny, especially in a society with very high social
mobility. How far does social stratification influence our roles in society? This
topic attempts to explore this question by discussing the bases of social
inequality, describing various societies with different stratification systems, and
explaining social stratification from the functionalist and conflict perspectives.
ACTIVITY 8.1
Observe patterns of social stratification in the following situations
and discuss them with your friends:
The office where you work
Your extended family in your hometown
Your tutorial class
8.1 SOCIAL INEQUALITIES
How do we measure social inequalities? According to Max Weber, there are three
basic criteria that can be used to measure the degree of social inequality:
(i) Wealth
(ii) Power
(iii) Status and prestige
8.1.1 Wealth
Firstly, we can be measured or differentiated based on our wealth. Culturally
speaking, wealth takes on various forms in different societies. For example,
among the peasantry, wealth is measured in terms of cattle and land. However,
urbanites may not quite see it the same way. To them, a big pay cheque and a
fancy car would be indicators of wealth (please refer to Figure 8.2).
Figure 8.2: Wealth
Source: www.irfanahmed.org
8.1.2 Power
Weber defines ppower as the ability to achieve success despite obstacles and
resistance. Maybe you are thinking at this point: what then is the difference
between wealth and power? Isn't wealth equivalent to power? However,
powerful people are not necessarily wealthy. I am sure that you are familiar with
the following adage: knowledge is power. This exemplifies the idea that power is
not always synonymous with wealth. For example, you respect your lecturer not
because he is rich, but because of the wealth of knowledge that he has.
8.1.3 Status and Prestige
Status is a manifestation of social inequality. It refers to the degree of respect that
is given to an individual by society due to sociocultural factors.
Prestige is a subset of social status. Prestige is measured based on the ownership
of wealth, while status is given to those who has distinguished themselves in
non-material fields of endeavour, for example, academics or religion. A
millionaire who sports a Rolex, drives a Ferrari, and lives in a country villa is
highly prestigious. On the other hand, people with considerably less material
possessions may command very high status in society because of their excellent
reputation in their respective areas of work, from teachers, priests, professors,
government servants, to judges.
The meaning of status depends on which part of the world you happen to find
yourself in. In Eastern societies, status is proportional to one's age; the older one
is, the more respect one commands. In Western societies, however, one tends to
lose status when one retires and becomes a senior citizen.
SELF-CHECK 8.1
Explain the following criteria used to measure social inequality:
Wealth
Power
Status and prestige
8.2 TYPES OF SOCIETY
According to Morton Fried, anthropologists have distinguished three types of
society based on how they are stratified. These societies include:
Egalitarian societies
Rank societies
Stratified societies
8.2.1 Egalitarian Societies
In an egalitarian society, all individuals would enjoy more or less the same
degree of wealth, power, and status. Everyone is considered equal. As such,
social inequalities are practically nonexistent in egalitarian societies.
Although some individuals may be respected and acknowledged because
of their talents and abilities (for example, hunting), these individuals
do not have more wealth or power
Figure 8.3: The Hadza compared to their neighbours.
Source: www.survival-international.org
Moreover, no matter how much respect an individual commands, he does not have
any power to influence the lives of others. Those with lower status are not denied
their rights to hold any position that they wish to shoulder. For example, the Hadza
in Tanzania is an example of an egalitarian society (please refer to Figure 8.3).
8.2.2 Rank Societies
In rrank societies, the distribution of wealth and power is equal, but unlike
egalitarian societies, some individuals may command more prestige, status, and
rank. In these societies, not just anybody may hold high status positions. Usually,
these positions will be inherited by those from the aristocracy. One is not
appointed to be a leader based on ability, skill, or wisdom; one becomes a leader
by virtue of one's ancestry.
Although the leaders of rank societies may enjoy higher status and certain privileges, they are not
necessarily richer than others. Their standard of living is not that different from that enjoyed by a commoner.
These leaders will customarily receive gifts from others, but these gifts are not usually kept for long.
Any wealth that they may have will be redistributed for the good of society. The Nootka in British
Columbia is an example of a rank society (please refer to Figure 8.4). Nootka men with high status will be
more ornately dressed compared to those of lower status. Unlike Westerners, the more wealth is given
away, the more status a Nootka gains!
Figure 8.4: The Nootka
Source: www.canadianheritage.org
8.2.3 Stratified Societies
Unlike rank societies where inequalities exist only in terms of status, in sstratified
societies inequalities exist in all forms (wealth, power, and status). These
inequalities can be seen from a political, economic, and social angle.
Individuals and groups in stratified societies can be differentiated in terms of
status, wealth, lifestyle, political power, and standard of living. Inequalities in life
chances are often passed down from one generation to another.
According to anthropologists, there are two types of stratified society based on
their level of social mobility:
(i) Class system
(ii) Caste system
(i) Class System
In the cclass system, ssocial mobility is very much alive, meaning that there is
plenty of movement up and down the social ladder. In other words, an
individual can work hard to change his lot, acquiring wealth, power, and
prestige along the way.
In modern society, an individual born in poverty may still claw his way up
the social ladder by working extremely hard (or through sheer dumb luck!)
and ending up with mountains of millions. On the other hand, it is not
impossible for a millionaire's son to end his life begging for scraps in
suburban streets (please refer to Figure 8.5).
Figure 8.5: Social mobility in a class system
Source: frgdr.com
Source: ocri.wordpress.com
This is what is meant by aachieved status, that is, the status achieved by an
individual based on his own merit and qualifications. What is implied here
is that individuals belonging to a class system believe that they can steer a
course for themselves in life, working hard towards achieving their greatest
dreams.
The class system usually consists of the following classes: ccapitalist class,
upper middle class, mworking class, and u
middle class, wunderclass. Table 8.1
explains these classes in greater detail:
Table 8.1: Social classes in a class system
Capitalist class This class consists of wealthy and influential families
(Rockefeller, Carnegie), chief executive officers (CEOs), and
owners of large and lucrative businesses. Their wealth is highly
dependent on assets like shares, bonds, securities, and
properties. Because they control the means of production in
society, they provide jobs for society and determine the fates of
the other social classes.
Upper middle class This class consists of professionals (doctors, lawyers), business
owners, and those who run the corporations owned by the
capitalists. Their wealth is mainly generated through a sizable
executive income rather than ownership of assets. This class is
highly educated and many of its members have postgraduate
degrees and can afford to send their children to institutions of
higher learning.
Middle class This class consists of those who work hard for a moderate
salary like small-time entrepreneurs, teachers, nurses, and the
like. They enjoy some job security but are still somewhat
affected by inflation and tax. By doubling their efforts, they are
able to improve their lot and achieve a higher status in society.
Working class This class consists of workers who perform routine tasks which
require supervision such as factory workers, clerks, labourers,
and the like. They are usually not highly educated and so are
unable to achieve a higher social status. Their livelihood is very
much influenced by current economic conditions and they may
suffer unemployment in the event of an economic recession.
Underclass This class consists of those who struggle daily with poverty
because they cannot hold regular jobs which promise a stable
salary. Sometimes, they are effectively excluded from
respectable society due to unemployment or social problems
such as drug abuse or juvenile delinquency. They are usually
not very well educated (if at all), and illiteracy is not
uncommon among them.
ACTIVITY 8.2
(a) Based on the table above, can you determine your own social
class? Do you have any dreams or hopes of improving your
standard of living?
(b) Explain the link between social mobility and education. Why is
it that people like you are still interested in furthering their
studies at the highest level?
(ii) Caste System
In the ccaste system, social mobility is virtually non-existent. Membership in
a caste system is fixed upon birth and cannot be negotiated for as long as
the person lives. The caste system segregates its members according to a
rigid social hierarchy. This means that different castes cannot socialise with
each other or intermarry.
Unlike individuals from a class system, members of a caste system will be
indoctrinated to believe that their fates have been fixed since birth.
Therefore, it is futile to strive in order to improve oneÊs lot, because the
caste system does not allow people to jump caste. This is what is meant by
ascribed status, that is, status that is inherited by an individual from one
generation to the next.
The most famous caste system in the world is the Hindu caste system in
traditional India. Indian society may be categorised into different varnas:
brahmin, kksatria, vvaisya, and ssudra. Each varna is believed to represent
different degrees of purity and holiness. The ppariah group is totally
excluded from the caste system because they are considered too dirty.
Each vvarna is associated with a certain role or work as shown in Table 8.2:
Table 8.2: Varnas in a Caste System
Brahmin This varna consists of priests and scholars. They are considered
the purest and holiest group in the caste system and perform
roles that require intelligence and wisdom.
Ksatria This varna consists of administrators and warriors. They are
responsible for the governance and defence of the state. This
group excels in politics and warfare.
TOPIC 8 SOCIAL STRATIFICATION •
107
Vaisya This varna consists of farmers, traders, and artisans. They are
concentrated in the following sectors: business, agriculture, and
animal husbandry. They ensure the smooth running of the
economy in society.
Sudra This varna is made up of labourers. They perform tasks for the
top three varnas, yet they are still considered part of the caste
system.
Pariah This group is not even recognised as part of the caste system.
They are considered unclean and for that reason they are only
allowed to perform trivial and degrading work like cleaning
latrines. For this, they have been dubbed the untouchables.
Does this mean that social mobility is totally non-existent in Indian society?
The answer is yes and no. Socially, one is tied to his caste of origin for
the rest of his life. Spiritually speaking, however, it is possible for an
individual to jump caste. This is because Hinduism teaches its adherents
the concept of rreincarnation which states that upon someone;s death, he
will be reincarnated in a form that befits his deeds (good or bad) in his past
life (kkarma). Therefore, if a Hindu violates an ethical code which is central
to his caste, his reincarnation will be severely jeopardised.
Hindus are expected to display good and moral behaviour in their daily
conduct. If they transgress moral boundaries, there is every possibility that
they will be reincarnated in an inferior caste, or worse, in the form of an
animal! For example, a Hindu who steals from his neighbours may be
reincarnated as a snake as punishment for his sins (please refer to Figure
8.6). Perhaps there is no such thing as social mobility in Hindu society, but
there is such a thing as spiritual mobility!
Figure 8.6: Reincarnation in the Hindu caste system
SELF-CHECK 8.2
Differentiate between:
Rank societies and stratified societies
Class system and caste system
8.3 THEORIES OF STRATIFICATION
You have been informed that social stratification can be seen in terms of the
unequal distribution of wealth, power, and prestige in society. The question is:
why are social inequalities universally found in all societies all over the world?
We will now discuss two theories that explain social stratification:
(i) Functionalism
(ii) Conflict theory
8.3.1 Functionalism
Functionalism assumes that social stratification contributes to social well-being.
In other words, stratification ensures the smooth running and survival and
society. According to Kingsley Davis (please refer to Figure 8.7) and Wilbert
Moore (please refer to Figure 8.8), in order to ensure the continuance of society,
there has to be a system whereby tasks and roles are assigned to those who are
truly qualified to peform them. For those who are willing and able to shoulder
the burden, they deserve to be handsomely rewarded for their sacrifices.
Figure 8.7: Kingsley Davis
Source: www2.asanet.org
For example, if society provides a system whereby a pilot receives the same pay as a
janitor, surely nobody will take the trouble and risk to train and work as a pilot. By ensuring that
rewards are commensurate with the difficulty of the task, society will be able to attract the best
people to perform the most challenging work. Social inequalities are functional because it serves
as a mechanism that distributes rewards fairly and motivates workers to compete with each
other to be the best.
ACTIVITY 8.3
Do you agree with the ideas propagated by functionalism? Read
more extensively and try to find views that are critical of the
functionalist stand.
8.3.2 Conflict Theory
Contrary to functionalism, conflict theory assumes that society tends more
towards opposition and conflict. According to this theory, stratification
happens because the upper classes are in a position to oppress the lower
classes with their wealth, power, and prestige. Conflict theory is heavily
influenced by Karl Marx (please refer to Figure 8.9) who believed that history
depicts an ongoing class struggle between the bbourgeoisie who owns the
means of production and the pproletariat who offer their services for wages.
The bourgeoisie is influential in shaping the minds of the proletariat because they
control social institutions like schools, factories, government, and the mass media.
They use their power to convince the proletariat that social inequalities are
inevitable. Supposedly, anybody can become rich by working diligently. When the
proletariat accepts the status quo, this means that they are trapped in a state of
false class consciousness woven from the lies and false promises of the capitalists.
Figure 8.8: Wilbert Moore
Source: www2.asanet.org
Figure 8.9: Karl Marx
Source: myphd.eu
For as long as the proletariat swallows the capitalist ideology, social inequalities
will continue to remain. However, Marx predicts that the proletariat will
eventually realise the extent of their oppression at the hands of the bourgeoisie.
Collectively, they will rise and revolt, and finally replace the capitalist system
with communism. It is believed that this will eliminate all social classes, and
ultimately, all traces of social inequality will disappear. Is this really possible?
Karl Marx used to think so, at any rate.
SELF-CHECK 8.3
Explain social stratification according to the following perspectives:
. Functionalism
. Conflict theory
. Max Weber lists three criteria that can be used to measure social inequalities:
(i) Wealth
(ii) Power
(iii) Status and prestige
. Based on those three criteria (wealth, power, and status/prestige), three types
of society can be differentiated:
(i) Egalitarian societies
(ii) Rank societies
(iii) Stratified societies
. Social stratification may be explained using functionalist theory which sees
social inequalities as something that encourages individuals to compete with
each other to be the best, or according to conflict theory which sees the higher
classes oppressing the lower classes to safeguard their interests.
Achieved Status Pariah
Ascribed Status Power
Bourgeoisie Prestige
Brahmin Proletariat
Capitalist Class Rank Society
Caste System Reincarnation
Class System Social Mobility
Conflict Theory Social Stratification
Egalitarian Society Status
False Class Consciousness Stratified Society
Functionalism Sudra
Karma Upper Middle Class
Ksatria Vaisya
Lower Class Varna
Means of Production Wealth
Middle Class Working Class
Ferraro, G. (2006). Cultural anthropology: An applied perspective (6th ed.).
Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.
Kottak, C. P. (2006). Anthropology: The exploration of human diversity
(11th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill Higher Education.
Scupin, R. & DeCorse, C. R. (2004). Anthropology: A global perspective(5th ed.).
New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment