Social Stratification Of A Modern Day Society

Social Stratification can be defined as “the study of whole societies, in comparative perspective, in an attempt to understand processes of social stability and change.” (Scott, Marshall, 2009:735). Nolan and Lenski (2004) stated that social organizations are a basic component of society; consequently, implying that societies are composed of different social classes that are defined by different roles, norms, ranks and values. Moreover, this assignment will Karl Marx’s theory of stratification and asses its usefulness in society today. Firstly, by briefly looking through Marx’s theory, secondly by looking at other theories of stratification:

Individuals within a society are grouped into certain rankings that is based on their wealth, income, race and education known as the social stratification. Sociologist use this to determine the social standings of individuals within a society. Social stratification can also appear in much smaller groups. These groups such as the work place, schools, and businesses can “take the form of a distribution of power and authority down the ranks”. (Cole, 2017) The Caste system is also another form of stratification that one does not get a choice in. They are born into it and regardless of their talents will hold positions that are given to them their whole life. Social mobility is the ability for individuals to move about their social standings.

Economic stratification is the different rankings in social class are separated in different economic ways. These differences can vary from clothing, cars, perfumes, cigarette brands, etc. There are many ways you can tell what a person stratification is just by the way they look or the things they have. Usually these ranking go from lower class to middle class then the upper class. Each of these classes have very different ways of living and what they do to maintain a certain status.

The impact on minorities due to inequality
Introduction 
During the course of this class I have learned about social problems within the society in which we live and around the world. It is disturbing to learn that poverty, social inequality, race and cultural discrimination, gender stratification, environmental damage, population growth, and urbanization are among the social problems and controversial issues that still exist in the United States.

Social stratification involves various inequalities within a gender, race, class. When considering the role of gender, race, and class in the social stratification system, it affects the organization system which is known for disparity based on the families’ income statutes, lack of resources, organization activity, and systematic inadequate government law. In the following essay I will focus how social stratification inequality effect families and individuals in the United States based on a gender, race, and class. Society has lived over decades experiencing different types of inequality. For example, gender inequality has been around since our ancestors. Informing society and continuous advocating about inequality is vital for positives changes

Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) were sociologists who both existed throughout similar time periods of the 19th and early 20th centuries, resulting in both Marx, and Durkheim to be concerned about similar effects and impacts among society (Appelrouth and Edles: 20, 77). Marx’s main focus was on class distinctions among the bourgeoisie and proletariat, forces and relations of production, capital, surplus value, alienation, labour theory of value, exploitation and class consciousness (Appelrouth and Edles: 20). Whereas Durkheim’s main focus was on social facts, social solidarity – mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity, anomie, collective conscience, ritual, symbol, and collective representations

Where Marx saw the modern industrial world as a necessary step to freedom, Durkheim saw it as a development with specific social phenomenon which he refers to as “social facts” that needed to be studied scientifically as explained in The Division of Labor in Society. These social facts were outside the individual and were capable of exercising power over the individual and influencing behaviour.

There was once a time when the societies of the world were nothing more than a ruling class and a class that was ruled. In these feudal societies classes were set. There was little chance for a member of the ruling bourgeoisie class to cross over to the oppressed proletariat class or from the proletariat class to the bourgeoisie class. Every individual within each class had the routine for each day set out for him or her. There was little change in the lives of individuals of these societies. There was monotony in their work and their work did little more for them than keeping them alive. In those societies,

America is known as the land of the free and home of the brave. When thinking of this you think about all the opportunities presented to people and all the freedom. An idea of America is that we’re a meritocracy, which means anyone can be able to to become anything they want as long as they work hard playing by the rules. Along with that many people believe that diversity will bring together the country and unite us all but that’s not the case. America is not a meritocracy.

Tremendous economic and technological growth marked by the industrial revolution that was beginning to take shape at in the 19th century. With this change also brought a process of greater specialization in the workforce, also known as the division of labor. Both Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim, under this context of burgeoning market economy, sought to understand modern society and the underlying relations that lead to their formation and progress. In this essay, I will argue that while both Marx and Durkheim acknowledge the role of economic growth as a main driver of human society in their theories, they differ on the type of social relations that developed in tandem, relations that formed the basis of the division of labor. Marx (1978, p. 212) views the division of labor as a result of the capitalism driven by profit, while Durkheim (1984, p. 1) sees it as a necessary condition for social progress. Next, I will also explore differences both writers posit as the consequences for this process, relating to both Marx’s theory of labor alienation and Durkheim’s idea of organic solidarity.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Max Weber (1864-1920) are two remarkable founding fathers of Sociology. Both of them spent huge effort to study the rise of capitalist society. Marx created conflict theory paradigm called Marxism while Weber inspired the symbolic interactionism, both paradigm are still influential nowaday. This paper would try to discuss the differences and similarities of their understanding of the historical development of capitalist society; their view on social stratification on capitalist society and their understanding on the operation and future prediction of the capitalist society in three

Even without being consciously aware of it, the use of some sort of scale when interacting with others is quintessential. This is because it represents a basic need of defining the self through the means of the others; knowing one’s place in society, as well as the positions of fellow individuals, ensures an orderly functioning of said system. For the sake of this essay, the definition of social stratification as a society’s categorization of its people into rankings of socioeconomic tiers based on factors like wealth, income, race, education, and power (Pearce, 2015), will be used.

Social stratification can be simply defined by stating that it is a system in which a society ranks categories of people in a hierarchy (Macionis, page 224). The concept of social stratification is based on four central principles, which are social stratification is a trait of society, not simply a reflection of individual differences, it carries over from one generation to the next, while it is universal, it is also variable, and social stratification involves not only inequality but beliefs as well (Macionis, pages 224-225). The first principle, that social stratification is a trait of society, not simply a reflection of individual differences, basically says that children born into wealthy families are more likely to be of good health, do well in school, succeed in a career, and live a long life (Macionis, pages 224-225). An example of this first principle can be seen in the what happened to the Titanic. The first-class passengers survived not because they were better swimmers than the second- and third-class passengers, but because of their privileged position (Macionis, page 224-225). The second principle states that the concept of social stratification is one that carries over from one generation to the next (Macionis, page 225). This concept is essentially stating that the social standing of a person is partially determined by their parents. Most people’s social standing remains constant throughout their lives (Macionis, page 225). While social stratification is

This paper will be discussing “Some Principles of Stratification” by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore, “Classes in Capitalism and Pre- Capitalism” by Karl Marx, and “Who Rules America?” by G. William Domhoff. Davis and Moore examine stratification, social class, and positional rank and their effects on individuals and society. Marx examines inequality in society, the relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed or the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, and methods of production and their effects on society. Domhoff examines the roles of corporate communities and the upper class and how they impact America.

Social stratification defines any structure of inequality that persists in a society across generations. Social strata are groups of people — who belong to the same social class or have the same social level. Social strata are organised in a vertical hierarchy. In the early societies people shared a common social standing. In the hunting and gathering societies there was little stratification: men hunted for meat while women gathered edible plants. The general welfare of the society depended on the mutual sharing of goods between all members and no group emerged as better off than the others.