RS 1201; Rural Sociology
Chapter 3
Social Differentiation and Stratification
************************************************************
Chapter Content
Meaning and nature of social differentiation
Causes of social differentiation
Meaning and determinants of social stratification
Characteristics of social stratification
Function of social stratification
Forms of social stratification
Theory of social stratification
Social differentiation
Social differentiation refers to the distinction between individuals or social groups based on various
factors such as biological and socio-economic differences based on which the individual or group is
allocated to different roles and status in the society. Social differentiation results in inequality,
stratification and even certain ideologies and power differentials.
In sociology, different types of differentiations are introduced. Some of these types are stratificatory
differentiation, functional differentiation, segmentary differentiation, etc. Various sociologists such
as Durkheim, Simmel, Luhmann have been interested in the study of social differentiation. The key
connection between social differentiation and social stratification is that social differentiation can
lead to social stratification. For example, the difference between males and females results in an
unequal treatment for the two sexes. This stratification in society is a consequence of differentiation.
Nature of social differentiation
Everywhere individuals and societies differ. In no society people are absolutely equal in all respects.
Differentiation is the keynote of human society. Society rests on the principle of difference.
Differences are inherent in the very nature of the society. In all societies there is social differentiation
of the population by age, sex, occupation and personal characteristics. There are the major factors of
social differentiation.
Men and women, teenagers and adults, children and old men, masters and servants, managers and
attendants, rulers and ruled, teachers and the taught, rich and the poor, liter-ate and the illiterate,
engineers and doctors, teachers and advocates, shopkeepers and hotel-owners are not always
adjudged as equal.
There are no equalitarian societies in the world. Societies are marked by differentiation. Societies
may only differ in the degree of differentiation and nature of stratification. Some type of
differentiation or specialisation of Rolfe is found in practically every society. It is clearly related to
the rise and operation of social classes. In the economic order, differentiation is found in the different
roles of entrepreneur, manager, and skilled and unskilled labourers.
It is evident in the professions’, in the political order as witnessed in the varying roles of public
administra-tors, legislators, and judges; in education as between teachers and administrators; and in
religion, as in the distinct roles of prophet, seer and priest. In reality, some form of specialisation of
the role is found in every association of men.
Causes of differentiation
Talcott Parsons mentions three causal factors of social differentiation:
1. Possession
2. Qualities, and
3. Performance.
These three are, however, interrelated.
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 23
Chapter-3
1. Possession
Possession refers to mainly material possessions, such as money, wealth, property, and all the other
valuable, utilitarian material objects. People do not have equal access to these possessions. The
unequal distribution of these material possessions has contributed to inequality and differentiation.
2. Qualities
Qualities refer to the intrinsic capacities or abilities of people to undertake or to do a task. These
qualities are also not equally distributed. For example, physical strength, intelligence, ‘beauty’,
courage, loyalty to a cause, moral courage, industriousness, selflessness, sacrifice and other internal
qualities are not equally distributed. People are ranked differently depending upon the degree of
possession of these qualities.
3. Performance
Performance refers to the execution of a task in a given time under a given situation. Performances
are always judged first according to their products or results. Secondly, they are judged according to
the manner and style of the performing. Performances are always subject to regulatory norms. When
the norms are violated, performances are often disvalued, regardless of their results.
Possessions, qualities and performances are closely related. Material possessions like wealth may
help a man to develop his qualities which may better his performance. Similarly qualities may help
a man to make possessions or to acquire material possessions. We should note that a person’s
qualities, possessions and performances are usually judged in relation to his age and with references
to a particular social role. Not only persons but also groups are ranked according to the merit of their
imputed qualities and performances. The term ‘prestige’ is used to refer to the approval, respect,
admiration, or deference a person or group is able to command by virtue of his or its imputed qualities
or performances. The term ‘ranking’ is generally used to refer to the degree of prestige.
The term ‘stratification’ denotes the process or condition in which layers [strata] of persons or groups
are ranked differently. Any one stratum contains many persons or groups of roughly the same rank.
Standards of evaluation vary from one social system to another and from one situation to another
within the same social system.
What is social Stratification
For tens of thousands of years, humans lived in small hunting and gathering societies. Although
members of these bands might single out one person as swifter, stronger, or more skillful in collecting
food, everyone had roughly the same social standing. As societies became more complex a major
change came about. Societies began to elevate specific categories of people above others, giving
some parts of the population more wealth, power, and prestige than others. Social stratification, a
system by which a society ranks categories of people in a hierarchy, is based on four important
principles:
1. Social stratification is a trait of society, not simply a reflection of individual differences.
Many of us think of social standing in terms of personal talent and effort, and as a result, we often
exaggerate the extent to which we control our own fate. Did a higher percentage of the first-class
passengers on the Titanic survive because they were better swimmers than second- and third-class
passengers? No. They did better because of their privileged position on the ship, which gave them
first access to the lifeboats. Similarly, children born into wealthy families are more likely than
children born into poverty to enjoy good health, do well in school, succeed in a career, and live a
long life. Neither the rich nor the poor created social stratification, yet this system shapes the lives of
us all.
2. Social stratification carries over from generation to generation.
We have only to look at how parents pass their social position on to their children to see that
stratification is a trait of societies rather than individuals. Some people, especially in high-income
societies, do experience social mobility, a change in position within the social hierarchy. Social
mobility may be upward or downward. We celebrate the achievements of rare individuals such as
Gisele Bundchen (from Brazil) and rapper Jay-Z (United States), neither of whom ever finished high
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 24
Social Differentiation and Stratification
school but both of whom nevertheless managed to rise to fame and fortune. Some people move
downward in the social hierarchy because of business failures, illness, divorce, or economic recession
and rising unemployment. More often people move horizontally; they switch from one job to another
at about the same social level. The social standing of most people remains much the same over their
lifetime.
3. Social stratification is universal but variable.
Social stratification is found everywhere. Yet what is unequal and how unequal it is varies from one
society to another. In some societies, inequality is mostly a matter of prestige; in others, wealth or
power is the key element of difference. In addition, some societies contain more inequality than
others.
4. Social stratification involves not just inequality but beliefs as well.
Any system of inequality not only gives some people more than others but also defines these
arrangements as fair. Just as the details of inequality vary, the explanations of why people should be
unequal differ from society to society.
Social Differentiation and Stratification
As it is clear from the above, all societies exhibit some system of hierarchy whereby its members are
placed in positions that are higher or lower, superior or inferior, in relation to each other. The two
concepts – ‘social differentiation’ and ‘social stratification’ – are made use of to refer to such
classification or gradation and placement of people in society.
In differentiation society bases status on a certain kind of trait which may be (i) physical or biological
such as skin-colour, physical appearance, age, sex, (ii) social and cultural such as differences in
etiquettes, manners, values, ideals, ideologies, etc. Thus, differentiation serves as a sorting process
according to which the people are graded on the basis of roles and status.
Stratification tends to perpetuate these differences in status. Hence, through this process people are
fixed in the structure of the society. In some cases, [as it is in the case of caste] status may become
hereditary. Differentiation may be considered the first stage preceding stratification in society, sorted
and classified into groups. It does not, however, mean that all differentiation leads to stratification in
society.
Determinants of social stratification
1. Wealth
The presence of wealth is the element of stratification in the societies of the world. Wealth has two
ingredients:
a. Ownership of land
b. Sources of income (pay or profit).
The people who own economic resources of getting wealth, they have a superior status in the society.
The concept of wealth is different in different societies. In agrarian society, land is important sources
of wealth whereas industrial societies have sources of income. That is why, in the industrial societies
some servants and some traders without any ownership have big wealth and have an important place
in the society.
2. Power and authority
Power is that capability that makes others subordinate to a person. .The power can be legitimate
authority or a traditional authority. In modern societies, political status is also a source of power and
authority which is called political power. Especially in democratic system of govt, it has great
importance. In all societies, the division of power is unequal, giving rise to social stratification. The
more the legal, traditional or political power an individual or a group has in a society, the more the
determination of the social stratification. Just as DIO or Deputy ‘or Member of National Assembly
or leader of a political or religious party have great social position in the Pakistani society and have
higher status in the social stratification.
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 25
Chapter-3
3. Occupation
Occupation attachment especially, in agrarian and traditional societies, plays a very important role in
the stratification. A period extending over centuries in the social life has determined the social status
through social interaction as to which of the profession is superior and which is inferior and societies
determine their stratification on the basis of profession without considering the personal status of
individuals.
Dom Hoff says: “In traditional societies occupation determines the stratification whereas in modern
industrial societies professions are of no low status and there are not looked upon with hatred and
because of this, profession does not become a cause of any distinction treatment." In Indian and
Pakistani society, even today occupation is considered an important factor, in stratification.
Blacksmiths, carpenters and pottery-makers are considered in village societies lower than
agriculturists and in an urban society a motor mechanic is considered lower than a food inspector.
4. Caste
Caste system is a closed and heredity system, having importance in certain societies for stratification
because an individual’s honour, prestige and social relation depend on his caste. In the Sub-continent,
the caste system of Hindus is thought as a determining factor in the stratification but in modern
industrial society and in the post industrial society, caste is not considered, but in American society,
colour and race has the same importance which is in the Sub-continent society of Hindus between
Brahmin and Shoodur. In Bangladesh, some castes are traditionally thought superior and inferior to
stratification which is above.
5. Prestige and popularity
An eminent deed of an individual of a society becomes a cause of his honour and an increase of his
regard in most of the population; This gives a superior status in the stratification whereas ignoring or
unpopularity decreases the status in the society. In Pakistani society, cricket, hockey, squash, martyrs
of armed forces and atomic scientists because of their eminent performance get a popularity, honour
and love ‘in the heads of the people whereas people accepting bribe, politicians, dacoits and drug
traffickers are considered hateful and inferior in the eyes of the people.
Characteristics of Social Stratification
According to M.M. Tumin the main attributes of stratification are follows.
1. It is Social in nature
Stratification is social in the sense, it does not represent biologically caused inequalities. It is true
that such factors as strength, intelligence, age and sex can often serve as the basis of strata are
distinguished. But such differences by themselves are not sufficient to explain why some statuses
receive more power, property and prestige than others. Biological traits do not determine social
superiority and inferiority until they are socially recognized and give importance. For example the
manager of an industry attains a dominant position not by his strength nor by his age but by having
the socially defined traits. His education, training skills, experiences, personality, character etc. are
found to be more important than his biological qualities.
Further as Tumin has pointed out, the stratification system
i) is governed by social norms and sanctions,
ii) norms are affected by socialization,
iii) is likely to be unstable because it may be disturbed by different factors and
iv) is intimately connected with the other system of society such as practical family, religious,
economic, education and other institutions.
2. It is Ancient
The stratification system is quite old. According to historical and archaeological records,
stratification was present even in the small wandering bands. Age and sex were the main criteria of
stratification then, women and children last was probably the dominant rule of order. Difference
between the rich and poor, powerful and humble, freemen and slaves was there in almost all the
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 26
Social Differentiation and Stratification
ancient civilizations. Ever since the time of Plato and Kautilya social philosophers have been deeply
concerned with economic, social and political inequalities.
3. It is Universal
The stratification system is a worldwide phenomenon. Difference between the rich and the poor or
the 'haves' and the 'have not’s is evident everywhere. Even in the non-literate society’s stratification
if very much present. As Sorokin has said, all permanently organized groups are stratified.
4. It is in Diverse Forms
The stratification system has never been uniform in all the societies. The ancient Roman society was
stratified into two strata-the partricians and the plebians. The ancient Aryan society into four Varnas
the Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and the Sudras, the ancient Greek society into freemen and
slaves, the ancient Chinese society into the mandarins, merchants, farmers and the soldiers and so
on. Class, caste and estate seem to be the general forms of stratification to be found in the modern
world. But stratification system seems to be much more complex in the civilized societies.
5. It is Consequential
The stratification system has its own consequences. The most important, most desired, and often the
scarcest things in human life are distributed unequally because of stratification. The system leads to
main kinds of consequences.
i) Life chances and
ii) Life-style refers to such things as infant mortality, longevity, physical and mental illness,
childlessness, marital conflict, separation and divorce.
Life-styles include such matters as the mode of housing residential area, one’s education means or
recreation relationship between the parents and children, the kind of books, magazines and TV shows
to which one is exposed ones mode of conveyance and so on. Life chances are involuntary while life-
styles reflect differences in preferences tastes and values.
Functions of Social Stratification
The glimpse of the cultures of the world reveals that no society is ‘classless’, that is, unstratified. All
the known established societies of the world are stratified in one way or the other.
According to Wilbert Moore and Kingsley Davis, stratification system came to be evolved in all
the societies due to the functional necessity. As they have pointed out the main functional necessity
of the system is: “the requirement faced by any society of placing and motivating individuals in the
social structure….Social inequality is thus an unconsciously evolved device by which societies
ensure that the most important positions are conscientiously filled by the most qualified persons”.
As analysed by H.M. Johnson certain things here can be noted about the “functional necessity” of
class stratification system.
1. Encourages hard work
One of the main functions of class stratification is to induce people to work hard to live up to values.
Those who best fulfill the values of a particular society are normally rewarded with greater prestige
and social acceptance by others. It is known that occupations are ranked high if their functions are
highly important and the required personnel are very scarce. Hard work, prolonged training and heavy
burden of responsibility are associated with such occupational positions. People undertaking such
works are rewarded with money, prestige comforts, etc. Still we cannot say that all those positions
which are regarded as important are adequately compensated for.
2. Ensures circulation of elites
To some extent class stratification helps to ensure what is often called “the circulation of the elite”.
When a high degree of prestige comforts and other rewards are offered for certain positions, there
will be some competition for them. This process of competition helps to ensure that the more efficient
people are able to rise to the top, where their ability can best be used.
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 27
Chapter-3
3. Serves an economic function
The competitive aspect has a kind of economic function in that it helps to ensure the rational use of
available talent. It is also functionally necessary to offer differential rewards if the positions at the
top are largely ascribed as it is in the case of caste system. Even in caste system the people at the top
can lose their prestige if they fail to maintain certain standards. Hence differential rewards provide
the incentives for the upper classes to work at maintaining their positions.
4. Prevents waste of resources
The stratification system prevents the waste of scarce resources. The men in the elite class actually
possess scarce and socially valued abilities and qualities, whether these are inherited or acquired.
Because of their possession of these qualities their enjoyment of some privileges such as extra
comfort and immunity from doing menial work, are functionally justified. It becomes functionally
beneficial for the society to make use of their talents without being wasted. For Example, it would
be a waste to pour the resources of society into the training of doctors and engineers, and then making
them to work as peons and attendants. When once certain individuals are chosen and are trained for
certain difficult positions it would be dysfunctional to waste their time and energy on tasks for which
there is enough manpower.
5. Stabilises and reinforces the attitudes and skills
Members of a class normally try to limit their relations to their own class. More intimate relationships
are mostly found between fellow class- members. Even this tendency has its own function. It tends
to stabilise and reinforce the attitudes and skills that may be the basis of upper-class position. Those
who have similar values and interests tend to associate comfortably with one another. Their frequent
association itself confirms their common values and interests.
6. Helps to pursue different professions or jobs
The values, attitudes and qualities of different classes do differ. This difference is also functional for
society to some extent. Because society needs manual as well as nonmanual workers. Many jobs are
not attractive to highly trained or ‘refined’ people for they are socialised to aspire for certain other
jobs. Because of the early influence of family and socialisation the individuals imbibe in them certain
values, attitudes and qualities relevant to the social class to which they belong. This will influence
their selection of jobs.
7. Social Control
Further, to the extent that ‘lower class’ cultural characteristics are essential to society, the classes are,
of course, functional. In fact, certain amount of mutual antagonism between social classes is also
functional. To some extent, upper-class and lower-class groups can act as negative reference groups
for each other. Thus they act as a means of social control also.
8. Controlling effect on the ‘shady’ world
Class stratification has another social control function. Even in the ‘shady’ world of gamblers and in
the underworld of lower criminals, black- marketers, racketeers, smugglers, etc., the legitimate class
structure has got respectability. They know that money is not a substitute for prestige but only a
compensation for renouncing it. Hence instead of continuing in a profitable shady career, such people
want to gain respectability for their money and for their children. They try to enter ligitimate fields
and become philanthropists and patrons of the arts. Thus the legitimate class structure continues to
attract the shady classes and the underworld. This attraction exerts a social control function.
Forms of Social Stratification
There are four basic forms of social stratification:
(1) Slavery,
(2) Caste,
(3) Estate, and
(4) Class.
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 28
Social Differentiation and Stratification
(1) Slavery
Slavery is an extreme form of inequality in which some individuals are literally owned by others as
their property. The legal conditions of slave ownership have varied considerably in different
societies. There are different variants of slavery. Bonded labour is one such form of slavery in India.
In all parts of world slavery, as a form of stratification has become extinct.
(2) Caste
Caste system is extremely elaborate and varies in its structure from area to area so much so that it
does not really constitute one ‘system’ at all, but a loosely connected diversity of varying beliefs and
cultural practices, though certain principles are shared by all the castes. This form of stratification as
we shall see later on, has assumed wider structural and cultural dimensions.
(3) Estate
Estates are the feudal clusters with varying obligations and rights towards each other. Estates have
developed both in Europe, United States and Asia. In our country jagirdars and jamindars were the
traditional estate holders. With the abolition of jamindari and jagirdari systems these groups of
people do not legally exist. However, the former estate holders in rural society even today hold much
power. They are big peasants and occupy positions of power in PRIs and legislatures. At operational
level they constitute a considerable rank in both rural and urban stratification.
(4) Class
Classes are not established by legal or religious provisions. Nor membership to class is based on
inherited position as specified either legally or by custom. Class systems are typically more fluid than
the other types of stratification and the boundaries between classes are never clear-cut. There are no
formal restrictions on inter-marriage between people from different classes. Some of the
characteristics of class include individual’s achievement, social mobility, economic status and class
consciousness.
Thus, class is a large-scale grouping of people who share common economic resources, which
strongly influence the types of lifestyle they are able to lead. Ownership of wealth, together with
occupation, is the chief basis of class differences
Types of social classes
Sociologists have given three-fold classification of classes which consists of - upper class, middle
class and lower class. Sorokin has spoken of three major types of class stratification -they are
economic, political and occupational classes. Lloyd Warner shows how class distinctions contribute
to social stability. Veblen analyzed the consumption pattern of the rich class by the concept of
conspicuous consumption. Warner has classified classes into six types- upper-upper class, upper-
middle class, upper-lower class, lower-upper class, the lower middle class and lower class. Anthony
Giddens's three class model is the upper, middle and lower (working) class.
Four common social classes informally recognized in many societies are
1. Upper class
2. Middle class
3. Working class
4. Lower class
1. Upper class
Comprising only 1 to 3 percent of the population, the upper class holds more than 25 percent of the
nation's wealth. This class divides into two groups: lower-upper and upper-upper. The lower-upper
class includes those with “new money,” or money made from investments, business ventures, and so
forth. The upper-upper class includes those aristocratic and “high-society” families with “old money”
who have been rich for generations. These extremely wealthy people live off the income from their
inherited riches. The upper-upper class is more prestigious than the lower-upper class.
Wherever their money comes from, both segments of the upper class are exceptionally rich. Both
groups have more money than they could possibly spend, which leaves them with much leisure time
for cultivating a variety of interests. They live in exclusive neighborhoods, gather at expensive social
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 29
Chapter-3
clubs, and send their children to the finest schools. As might be expected, they also exercise a great
deal of influence and power both nationally and globally.
2. Middle class
The middle class are the “sandwich” class. These white collar workers have more money than
those below them on the “social ladder,” but less than those above them. They divide into two levels
according to wealth, education, and prestige. The lower middle class is often made up of less educated
people with lower incomes, such as managers, small business owners, teachers, and secretaries. The
upper middle class is often made up of highly educated business and professional people with high
incomes, such as doctors, lawyers, stockbrokers, and CEOs.
3. Working class
The working class are those minimally educated people who engage in “manual labor” with little or
no prestige. Unskilled workers in the class— dishwashers, cashiers, maids, and waitresses— usually
are underpaid and have no opportunity for career advancement. They are often called the working
poor. Skilled workers in this class— carpenters, plumbers, and electricians—are often called blue
collar workers. They may make more money than workers in the middle class— secretaries, teachers,
and computer technicians; however, their jobs are usually more physically taxing, and in some cases
quite dangerous.
4. Lower class
The lower class is typified by poverty, homelessness, and unemployment. People of this class, few
of whom have finished high school, suffer from lack of medical care, adequate housing and food,
decent clothing, safety, and vocational training. The media often stigmatize the lower class as “the
underclass,” inaccurately characterizing poor people as welfare mothers who abuse the system by
having more and more babies, welfare fathers who are able to work but do not, drug abusers,
criminals, and societal “trash.”
Marxian analysis of class
Marx defined a social class as all those people who share a common relationship to the means of
economic production. Those who own and control the means of production (slave owners, feudal landowners
or owners of property such as factories and capital) are the dominant class. They exercise power
because of their ownership of the means of production. In an industrial society the means of
production include the factories; and the machinery and raw materials used for manufacturing good. Marx
called them the class of ‘Bourgeoisie’ or capitalists or owners of property.
All those who work for dominant class are — slaves, peasants, or industrial labourers. They constitute
the subordinate classs. Marx called this class — the proletariat or the labour class or working class
or poor class. Members of the proletariat own only their labour which they hire out of the owners of
industry in return of wages.
The relationship between these two classes is not only one of dominance and surbordination but also
of 'exploitation'. The workers produce more wealth in the form of food, manufactured produccts and
services than is neceessary to meet their basic needs. It means they produce ‘surplus wealth’. But they
do not enjoy the use of surplus they have created. On the contrary, those who own the means of
production are able to grab this surplus wealth as ‘profit’ for their own use. The capitalists are a non-
producing class. They do not actually produce anything. Still much of the wealth produced by the
proletariats is taken away by the capitalists. According to Marx, this kind of exploitation has been the
main source of conflict between the two classes throughout history
Marx believed that the economic base of society influences the general character of all other aspects
of culture and social structure, such as law, religion, education, and government,. The dominant class is
able to control all of those institutions and to ensure that they protect its own interests. “The laws,
therefore, protect the rich, not poor. The established religion supports the social order as it is, not as
it might be. Education teaches the virtues of the existing system, not its vices. Government upholds the
status quo rather than undermines it."—Ian Robertson.
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 30
Social Differentiation and Stratification
Marx was of the opinion that as a result of the exploitation of workers by the capitalists the gap between
the two goes on widening. Thus the rich become richer- and the poor become poorer.This results in an
imbalance in the production and distribution. Goods will be produced and flooded in the market in
abundant quantity and there will be only a handful of people to purchase them. Majority of the people
in society who mostly belong to the working class cannot purchase the goods due to their poor
purchasing capacity. Marx calls this situation ‘the anarchic character of production'. Hence
capitalism suffers from its own inernal contradictions. “The seed of destruction of capitalism is
ripening in the very womb capitalism”- Marx said. He has foretold that capitalism would end in
failure. “The propency of capitalism is a propency of doom”- Marx stated emphatically.
Marx believed that the members of the proletariat would eventually realise that they were being
exploited and oppressed. They would then join together to overthrow the bourgeoisie either by force
or by voting their own representatives into the government. As a champion of the cause of the workers
being Marx called upon the workers to hasten the process of the destruction of the capitalist system
Marx and engles made a fervent appeal to the working class in their Manifesto of the communist
party of 1948 in the following way: “Let the rulling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The
proletarians have nothing to lose but their Chain. They have a world to win working men of all
countries unite”. Marx has even predicted that a historic revolution would mark the end of capitalism
countrte and lead to a classless society. After their successful revolution the workers would set up a
communist society which means that the force of production would be communally owned, that is
owned by all members of society. Goods produced would be equally shared and everyone would
work for him and for the benefit of society as a whole.
Criticism
Marx’s views on class are part of his more general theory of the history of society. Some sociologists
agree that they are more appropriate to 19th century Europe and have little relevance today.
Marxian definition of class and its interpretation can be misleading in many marginale cases. When
Marx wrote, industry was owned and controlled primarily by individual capitalists. But this is no
longer the case today. Most industry is now run by large corporations, which are owned by thousands
of stockholders but controlled by salarie managers. As a result the ownership and control of the
means of production have been largely separated. Executives, technicians, scientists, and other
professionals may control the means of production, but they do not own it. They are on the payroll
like any other workers. Marx's definition in this way does not help very much in determining their
social class.
Further, Marxian definition a social class does not answer a few of the questions such as—“What is
the social class of a dropout, who does not own or control the means of production but does not work
either ? What is the social class of an improverished member of the European aristocracy, who enjoys
high social prestige because of ancestry rather than any relationship to the means of production?
What is the class of a wealthy black surgeon who suffers racial prejudices (Ina discrimination almost
everyday of his or her life? ......” (Ian Robertson). The Marxian explanation does not handle these
ambiguous cases very satisfactorily.
Max Weber’s View of Stratification
Unlike Karl Marx, Max Weber ([1913–1922] 1947) insisted that no single characteristic (such as
class) totally defines a person’s position within the stratification system. Instead, writing in 1916, he
identified three distinct components of stratification: class, status, and power.
Weber used the term class to refer to a group of people who have a similar level of wealth and income.
For example, certain workers in the United States try to support their families through minimum-
wage jobs. According to Weber’s definition, these wage earners constitute a class because they share
the same economic position and fate. Although Weber agreed with Marx on the importance of this
economic dimension of stratification, he argued that the actions of individuals and groups cannot be
understood solely in economic terms.
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 31
Chapter-3
Weber used the term status group to refer to people who have the same prestige or lifestyle. An
individual gains status through membership in a desirable group, such as the medical profession. But
status is not the same as economic class standing. In our culture, a successful pickpocket may belong
to the same income class as a college professor. Yet the thief is widely regarded as holding low status,
whereas the professor holds high status.
For Weber, the third major component of stratification has a political dimension. Power is the ability
to exercise one’s will over others. In the United States, power stems from membership in particularly
influential groups, such as corporate boards of directors, government bodies, and interest groups.
Conflict theorists generally agree that two major sources of power—big business and government—
are closely interrelated. For instance, many of the heads of major corporations also hold powerful
positions in the government or military. The Social Policy section at the end of this chapter examines
the executive compensation that the powerful heads of corporations in the United States enjoy.
To summarize, in Weber’s view, each of us has not one rank in society but three. Our position in a
stratification system reflects some combination of class, status, and power. Each factor influences
the other two, and in fact the rankings on these three dimensions often tend to coincide. John F.
Kennedy came from an extremely wealthy family, attended exclusive preparatory schools, graduated
from Harvard University, and went on to become president of the United States. Like Kennedy, many
people from affluent backgrounds achieve impressive status and power.
References
1. Browne, Ken. 1998, An Introduction to Sociology, Polity Press, London.
2. John J. Macionis, 2017, Sociology, Pearson Education Limited, England.
3. Rao, S. and Chand, S. 2014, Sociology: Primary Principes, S. Chand and Company Ltd., New
Delhi.
4. Richard T. Schaefer, 2013, Sociology: A brief Introduction, McGraw-Hill, New York.
B. Sc. Ag. (Hons.), Level-1, Semester-2, RS1201; Rural Sociology 32
