What Is Social Stratification?
Learning Objectives
By the end of this topic, you should be able to:
Differentiate between open and closed stratification systems
Distinguish between caste and class systems
Understand meritocracy as an ideal system of stratification
Sociologists use the term social stratification to describe the system of social standing. Social
stratification refers to a society’s categorization of its people into rankings of socioeconomic tiers
based on factors like wealth, income, race, education, and power.
Social stratification is a term that refers to all forms of inequality, not merely that of class.
Inequalities based on gender, ethnicity, age, and political power are also crucial dimensions of
social stratification which sociologists have explored just as fully as class. These forms of social
inequality are also often closely related, such that, for example, ethnic minorities are more likely
to be found among the poor. Most of the time, we do not experience the world as members of a
particular 'class', 'ethnic minority' or any other category of social stratification. We tend to see
ourselves as individuals with particular jobs, as members of families, as students who will make
it - or not -and so on. And even though we might experience our 'gender' in a more immediate,
everyday sense through our interaction as men and women with others, we may not see that
interaction as carrying any sort of patterned inequality.
You may remember the word “stratification” from geology class. The distinct vertical layers found
in rock, called stratification, are a good way to visualize social structure. Society’s layers are made
of people, and society’s resources are distributed unevenly throughout the layers. The people
who have more resources represent the top layer of the social structure of stratification. Other
groups of people, with progressively fewer and fewer resources, represent the lower layers of
our society.
Strata in rock illustrate social stratification. People are sorted, or layered, into social categories.
Many factors determine a person’s social standing, such as income, education, occupation, as
well as age, race, gender, and even physical abilities.
In the developed world, people like to believe everyone has an equal chance at success. However,
sociologists recognize that social stratification is a society-wide system that makes inequalities
apparent. While there are always inequalities between individuals, sociologists are interested in
larger social patterns. Stratification is not about individual inequalities, but about systematic
inequalities based on group membership, classes, and the like. No individual, rich or poor, can be
blamed for social inequalities. The structure of society affects a person’s social standing. Although
individuals may support or fight inequalities, social stratification is created and supported by
society as a whole.
The people who live in these houses most likely share similar levels of income and education.
Neighborhoods often house people of the same social standing. Wealthy families do not typically
live next door to poorer families, though this varies depending on the particular city and country.
Almost all societies are stratified according to wealth, power, prestige, and other resources the
societies value. Societies are often categorized into systems of stratification according to the
degrees of inequality and vertical social mobility that characterize them.
Systems of stratification include slave societies, caste societies, and class societies, with class
societies the most open in terms of vertical social mobility. Classless societies exist in theory,
according to Karl Marx and other thinkers, but have never been achieved in reality. Certain social
democracies in Western Europe have succeeded in limiting their degree of inequality while
preserving political freedom.
Marx Pyramid of Capitalist System
The two major explanations of stratification are the functionalist and conflict views. Functionalist
theory says that stratification is necessary and inevitable because of the need to induce people
with the needed knowledge and skills to decide to pursue the careers that are most important to
society. Conflict theory says stratification exists because of discrimination against, and blocked
opportunities for, the have-nots of society. A set of ideological beliefs supports the existence and
perpetuation of systems of stratification and domination.
Social class is usually measured in terms of socioeconomic status, but some conflict theory
scholars prefer measures more related to Marx’s concept of the ownership of the means of
production. Many typologies of the American class structure exist, but four commonly delineated
classes include the upper class, middle class, working class, and lower class or the poor. Within
the upper class and middle classes are subclasses distinguished by their incomes and lifestyles.
Factors that define stratification vary in different societies. In most societies, stratification is an
economic system, based on wealth, the net value of money and assets a person has, and income,
a person’s wages or investment dividends. While people are regularly categorized based on how
rich or poor they are, other important factors influence social standing. For example, in some
cultures, wisdom and charisma are valued, and people who have them are revered more than
those who don’t. In some cultures, the elderly are esteemed; in others, the elderly are disparaged
or overlooked. Societies’ cultural beliefs often reinforce the inequalities of stratification.
One key determinant of social standing is the social standing of our parents. Parents tend to pass
their social position on to their children. People inherit not only social standing but also the
cultural norms that accompany a certain lifestyle. They share these with a network of friends and
family members. Social standing becomes a comfort zone, a familiar lifestyle, and an identity.
This is one of the reasons first-generation college students do not fare as well as other students.
Other determinants are found in a society’s occupational structure. Teachers, for example, often
have high levels of education but receive relatively low pay. Many believe that teaching is a noble
profession, so teachers should do their jobs for love of their profession and the good of their
students—not for money. Yet no successful executive or entrepreneur would embrace that
attitude in the business world, where profits are valued as a driving force. Cultural attitudes and
beliefs like these support and perpetuate social inequalities.
A lecture ongoing in a UK university
A lecture ongoing in a Kenyan university
Systems of Stratification
Sociologists distinguish between two types of systems of stratification. Closed systems
accommodate little change in social position. They do not allow people to shift levels and do not
permit social relationships between levels. Open systems, which are based on achievement,
allow movement and interaction between layers and classes. Different systems reflect,
emphasize, and foster certain cultural values and shape individual beliefs. Stratification systems
include class systems and caste systems, as well as meritocracy.
The Caste System
India used to have a rigid caste system. The people in the lowest caste suffered from extreme
poverty and were shunned by society. Some aspects of India’s defunct caste system remain
socially relevant. In this photo, an Indian woman of a specific Hindu caste works in construction,
and she demolishes and builds houses.
Caste systems are closed stratification systems in which people can do little or nothing to change
their social standing. A caste system is one in which people are born into their social standing
and will remain in it their whole lives. People are assigned occupations regardless of their talents,
interests, or potential. There are virtually no opportunities to improve a person’s social position.
In the Hindu caste tradition, people were expected to work in the occupation of their caste and
to enter into marriage according to their caste. Accepting this social standing was considered a
moral duty. Cultural values reinforced the system. Caste systems promote beliefs in fate, destiny,
and the will of a higher power, rather than promoting individual freedom as a value. A person
who lived in a caste society was socialized to accept his or her social standing.
Although the caste system in India has been officially dismantled, its residual presence in Indian
society is deeply embedded. In rural areas, aspects of the tradition are more likely to remain,
while urban centers show less evidence of this past. In India’s larger cities, people now have more
opportunities to choose their own career paths and marriage partners. As a global center of
employment, corporations have introduced merit-based hiring and employment to the nation.
The Class System
A class system is based on both social factors and individual achievement. A class consists of a
set of people who share similar status with regard to factors like wealth, income, education, and
occupation. Unlike caste systems, class systems are open. People are free to gain a different level
of education or employment than their parents. They can also socialize with and marry members
of other classes, which allows people to move from one class to another.
In a class system, occupation is not fixed at birth. Though family and other societal models help
guide a person toward a career, personal choice plays a role.
In class systems, people have the option to form exogamous marriages, unions of spouses from
different social categories. Marriage in these circumstances is based on values such as love and
compatibility rather than on social standing or economics. Though social conformities still exist
that encourage people to choose partners within their own class, people are not as pressured to
choose marriage partners based solely on those elements. Marriage to a partner from the same
social background is an endogamous union.
Meritocracy
Meritocracy is an ideal system based on the belief that social stratification is the result of
personal effort—or merit—that determines social standing. High levels of effort will lead to a
high social position, and vice versa. The concept of meritocracy is an ideal—because a society has
never existed where social rank was based purely on merit. Because of the complex structure of
societies, processes like socialization, and the realities of economic systems, social standing is
influenced by multiple factors—not merit alone. Inheritance and pressure to conform to norms,
for instance, disrupt the notion of a pure meritocracy. While a meritocracy has never existed,
sociologists see aspects of meritocracies in modern societies when they study the role of
academic and job performance and the systems in place for evaluating and rewarding
achievement in these areas.
Is education a tool of empowerment or class division. Discuss
