This document provides an overview of key concepts related to social stratification and mobility. It defines different types of mobility, such as horizontal, vertical, intergenerational, and intragenerational. It also discusses different systems of stratification that have existed throughout history, such as slavery, caste systems, feudalism, and social classes. Ideologies that support stratification are examined, as well as structural-functionalist, social conflict, and symbolic interactionist perspectives on social inequality.

1. Principles of Sociology 10
Social Stratification

2. Basic Concepts
• social mobility = the ability to move from one social
position to another.
• Four Types of Mobility:
horizontal = moving from one social position to another of
the same rank.
vertical = moving from a social position upward or
downward to another position of a different rank.
intergenerational = changes in the social position of family
members from one generation to the next.
intragenerational = movement within one’s own lifetime.

3. Basic Concepts
• open system = in theory, barriers to mobility
are reduced and competition is encouraged.
– Achieved status.
– Social mobility is possible.
• closed system = little or no possibility of
mobility.
– Ascribed status.
– Little or no social mobility.

4. Systems of Stratification
• Slavery:
 People are actually owned by others as property.
 In ancient history, even slaves had the potential for social
mobility.
 More recent forms of slavery came to be based on concepts
of inherent inferiority = “slave” was more or less a
permanent status with no social mobility.
 Today, the U.N. has banned all forms of slavery – though
some groups in the world are still violating this ban.
 Human trafficking continues to be a major problem around the world.

5. Various forms of slavery were
practiced in the ancient world, from
Egypt to the Roman Empire …

7. Slavery today …

8. Systems of Stratification
• Caste System:
 Inherited (ascribed) ranks that are fixed, typically dictated
by some type of belief or cultural tradition.
 In India, there have traditionally been 4 basic castes as well
as an out-caste category: “the untouchables.”
 In this system, the caste you were born into determined where you could
live, where you could work, who you could and could not associate with,
who you could marry, etc.
 This system was protested early on by Buddhism and Jainism, and officially
made illegal in 1950 largely due to the efforts of Ghandi.
Other examples: Japan had a traditional caste system; Jim
Crow; Apartheid in South Africa.

11. Systems of Stratification
• Caste System:
– Caste in South Africa:
 Apartheid = a system emerging from British colonialism in which whites
dominated all non-whites.
 Four castes: whites, “Coloreds,” Asians (Indians), and Africans.
 Strict segregation and inequality was maintained through an elaborate set of
laws governing each group.
 This system was justified by the idea that the dominating whites were
“culturally superior” to the “primitive” non-whites.
 Late 1980s-1994: Apartheid is dismantled and finally officially ended, with
Nelson Mandela elected to lead the new Black government.
 Nevertheless, there are still remaining issues of segregation and
institutionalized residues of Apartheid that need to be worked out.

13. Systems of Stratification
• Feudalism:
 Versions of this system can be found in the past history of
Japan and in the Middle Ages in Europe [See Charts Next].
 This was a closed system in which one was born either into
nobility (= you owned land) or as a peasant (= you owned
nothing).
Peasants were forced to work the land as serfs in exchange
for food and protection.
Eventually this system ended as other classes – priests,
knights, and especially merchants – emerged.

15. Systems of Stratification
• Social Classes:
 class system = a type of stratification “based on
both birth and individual achievement” (245).
Class is a social ranking based primarily on
economic position and lifestyle.
Class systems are theoretically open systems,
though perhaps not as open as some might
imagine.

16. Two Terms Related to Class Systems
• meritocracy = some stratification in industrial
societies that is earned (based on merit).
– Includes a person’s knowledge, abilities, and effort.
– This type of system describes an ideal in the U.S. today,
but a pure form of this has never existed.
• status consistency = how uniform a person’s status
is across different dimensions of social inequality.
– In class systems, it is harder to define social position,
because status inconsistencies emerge (EX: Your
instructor enjoys high prestige as a college professor,
but – believe me – the income does not match!).

17. Doctors and lawyers have high status consistency
in the U.S. class system because their incomes
often match the prestige of their occupations and
educational achievement.

18. In contrast, members of the clergy and college
professors often have low status consistency, since
their high prestige and educational achievement
does not match their incomes.

19. Ideology & Stratification
• To keep the people from rebelling against the powerful, elite
powers must somehow promote the idea that their arrangement
is how things should be.
• Most of the people must adopt a belief system that facilitates
loyalty to the system and can be transferred to future
generations through the socialization process.
• When the majority of people willingly accept the social system
despite inequality, the system is said to have achieved legitimacy
and this is accomplished through the process of legitimation.
• In this way, cultural beliefs often serve to justify stratified
systems.

20. Ideology & Stratification
• ideology = beliefs and values that justify a society’s structure
of power and privilege.
• An ideology functions as an explanation for the system and a
justification of its outcomes.
• Ideologies can serve the elite or those who oppose them.
• dominant ideology = an ideology that explains and justifies
the current system.
• The explanation and justification of the ideology is both for
the powerful and the disadvantaged.

21. Examples of How Ideas Support Stratification
• Ancient Babylon
– IDEA: only kings and priests were “in the image of the gods.”
– RESULT: the majority of the population served the kings and the
priests.
• Slavery in the Southern U.S.
– IDEA: African-Americans were “cursed” by God (through Noah) to
“serve” as slaves.
– RESULT: it was okay for a Christian society to enslave Africans.
• Women in the U.S.
– IDEA: “a woman’s place is in the home.”
– RESULT: for many generations, women could not vote, attend
universities, or hold professional jobs.

22. Theories: Structural-Functionalist
• The Davis–Moore Thesis:
– The greater the importance of a position, the more
rewards a society attaches to it.
– Egalitarian societies offer little incentive for people
to try their best.
– Social positions considered more important (EX:
doctors and lawyers) must reward enough to draw
talented people.
– In this way, stratification is functional and
necessary.

23. EXAMPLE: The Davis-Moore Thesis
If both of these jobs payed the same income, hardly anyone would be
willing to do what is necessary to become a doctor – nearly everyone
would choose to be a garbage collector.
Thus, a society must reward different occupations with different incomes
in order to motivate people to do the harder jobs.
Compare doctors and garbage collectors. Doctors have been deemed especially
valuable to society, and they are required to attend many years of school at great
cost, and must regularly maintain their medical license. In additions, malpractice
insurance is high and doctors are often at constant risk of losing their licenses.
In contrast, garbage collectors need no specialized education, and perform a
relatively simple task.

24. Theories: Social-Conflict
• Marx:
– Social class was the main factor in social inequality, which
results from the unequal distribution of wealth.
– The capitalist system reproduces the class structure from
one generation to the next.
– In every period of history, whoever controls the means of
production is at the top and maintains their position on the
backs of everyone else.
– Marx’s theory is covered in detail back in Chapter 4
(review).

25. Evaluating Marx: Descriptions
• Marx’s descriptions = much truth.
• It is this aspect of Marx that has kept
Marxism alive for well over 100 years.
• Marx & Engels accurately observed
some important features of the
capitalist system.
• Some today have successfully used reworked versions of
Marx’s concepts in theories of inequality.

26. Evaluating Marx: Prescriptions
• Marx’s prescriptions = some truth.
• The course of action prescribed by
Marx to “fix” the system has been
appropriated by various groups with
mixed results.
• However, Marx’s intense desire to
witness his predicted revolution led
from the scientific task of observation to attempts to bring about
the revolution himself.
• This situation has led to the contemporary distinctions between
sociological Marxist theory and political Marxism.

27. Evaluating Marx: Predictions
• Marx’s predictions = shortsighted.
 Marx really did not recognize the future significance
of the emerging middle class.
 Nor did Marx envision the rise and significance of
political lobbyists in a democratic system.
 Marx underestimated the ability of those in power to adapt and
compromise with the working class just enough to preserve the status quo.
 Marx did not foresee the role of managers and corporations.
 Marx’s Missing Miracle: By wedding what amounts to a pseudo-religious
eschatological scenario to atheism, Marx was left with no mechanism
capable of producing a “classless society.”

28. Marx’s “Missing Miracle”
• Although Marx was an atheist, he had a religious
upbringing, and some have recognized that Marx’s
philosophy contains unmistakable religious elements.
• Marx was a careful student of historical revolutions,
and knew they never ended like the one he predicted!
• Yet, Marx’s scenario is basically like that of western
religions: a perfect state (“Eden”), a “fall,” a final
conflict, and then a “paradise” [See NEXT SLIDE].
• By wedding what amounts to a pseudo-religious
eschatological scenario to atheism, Marx was left with
no mechanism capable of producing a “classless
society.”

29. Evaluating Marx: Religious Parallels
Western Religion Marx
In the beginning … Eden “Primitive Communism”
Something is now
wrong
Spiritual “fall” = original
sin
Economic “fall” = class
conflict
Humanity Needs salvation Needs class consciousness
The End Final Conflict:
“Armageddon”
The Revolution
Catalyst/Means God intervenes (MARX’S MISSING
MIRACLE)
Result Perfect Society Perfect Society

30. The Problem (according to Marx): “the
unequal distribution of wealth”
Thus, the Solution: the equal distribution of
wealth
The main issue here is that “distribution” requires
the action of a distributor. After any revolution,
whoever becomes the distributor will have the
power = a new elite.
This was one of Weber’s critiques of Marx, and
this is exactly what his happened in history with
every “communist” experiment.

31. Theories: Social-Conflict
• Weber:
– Weber saw society as being more complex.
– Weber’s multi-dimensional model of stratification:
• class = groups based on economic position.
– owners vs. workers
– financers vs. borrowers
– sellers vs. consumers
• status = groups sharing prestige and culture.
• power = political parties.

32. Theories: Social-Conflict
• Weber (cont’d):
– The three social spheres described by Weber are the
main interest groups, and are all interconnected.
– Social conflict may occur within each sphere or
between the three spheres.
– Following Weber’s emphasis on multiple dimensions
of stratification, contemporary sociologists typically
use multiple measures like socioeconomic status
(SES), a measure of social class based on income,
education, and occupation.

33. Summarizing the Structural-Functionalism vs.
Social-Conflict debate on social inequality:
• Both agree: power, wealth, and prestige are unequally distributed
in society.
• STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONALISM: this results from the need to
provide incentives for those with necessary skills to fill the most
important social positions by rewarding them with more.
• SOCIAL-CONFLICT: this results from those with the wealth and
power using their power and privilege to keep others from
getting more of society’s wealth.

34. Theories: Symbolic Interactionism
• Symbolic interactionists are more interested in the
micro-level analysis of social class and inequality.
– Differences in social class position can affect interaction.
– People interact primarily with others of similar social
standing.
• Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929):
– conspicuous consumption = outrageous purchases that
make statements about social position.
– conspicuous leisure = engaging in various activities far
beyond what the vast majority could ever afford, just to
demonstrate status.

35. Stratification & Technology Globally
• Lenski:
– Lenski seeks to combine Structural-Functionalist
and Social-Conflict perspectives by explaining
inequality in terms of both need and power.
– Lenski expands on Weber and emphasizes a
society’s level of development [review Chapter 4] in
terms of social evolution.
– Inequality is linked to subsistence technology, the
ways in which a society is able to satisfy its most
basic needs.