Social Stratification

       Stratification is a situation in which there is a persistent difference in access to social goods
       by different groups within a society. By 'goods' here, I mean things, but also prestige, status,
       opportunities, careers, appointments, credit, and options.        It is possible to look at stratification as inequality, and most of the research and thinking done about
       this has been motivated by a desire to understand, so that these social inequalities might be undone.  It is also possible to examine stratification from a functional point of view - How is ist that these persistent inequalities help society to function. From this point of view, one can look at classical Greek society and note that the labor of slaves made possible the deliberation of the philosophers, the leisure time of the sculptor to make those beautiful statues. It was the work of the Greek slaves that built the Parthenon. Greek civilization and slavery are socially the same. Greek society was stratified - there were masters and slaves- as a complex society it worked, it functioned, it was successful (it persisted over time, human progress emerged from that society).

Foundational Theories

       Marx was among the first to deeply examine how the division of society into functionally
       different groups created the dynamic within which that society persisted. Using concepts gotten from his philosophy teacher, Hegel, Marx modelled an explanation for social formation and social change.

Class

At some point in human history CLASSES of society emerged. Exactly when Class-based societies arose is not certain. Even now there are societies of people who seem to get on without there being any dvision of their society according to class (Australian aboriginals, maybe Maasai pastoralist of east Africa). A Class is a social group that accomplished a social purpose, different than another Class. Those two classes are interdependent, but not equal - their work is different, their status is different, their social powers are different, and the interests of their members is different. Marx posited that these different interests - contradictory interests- would over time result in conflict, and out of this conflict a new order would emerge. In Hegelian terms, there is first a Thesis, then an Antithesis from which could emerge a Synthesis (or nothing could emerge -confusion, disorder, dysfunction, chaos).        Marx understood Social Classes and their relationships to one another to be the driving force of historical change. Class societies changed, and here was the engine of change Durkheim looked at such matters and emphasized the interdependence and functionality of the different classes. He saw stability in society (society doesn't change, the patterns of relationships seemed to him to be durable. He wrote of the division of labor, and the division of society into different groups to be the note of advanced human societies. Weber considered class theory to be lacking in nuance and explanatory power for any but the most rigid and closed societies. Weber also that individuals might understand themselves to be in more than one 'class'. Belief and commitment, free association, as well as class fluidity requires more complicated models to gain a deeper understanding of society and social change.
 

       Caste System

       A social system based on caste is a special case. A caste system is based on heredity - you
       belong to the group that your parents belonged to. The particular aspect of caste are that they
       are closed- individuals are assigned their class at birth and never leave their caste. In a social
       system based on this kind of closed system, your caste determines your destiny (at least your
       social destiny - work you will do, wealth you will/not enjoy, people that you will not be able
       to marry (outside your caste).

       American society during the founding of the nation grappled with this caste system - should
       we have an aristocracy? No. Should we have a slave caste? Yes (at least until 1863).

       In our country at this time we do not have a caste system in place, but their is a worry that our
       class system is almost as rigid as a class system: their is very little fluidity in our social
       stratification. Horatio Alger stories notwithstanding, most people born poor in America, are
       likely to die poor. And the vast majority of those born into wealth remain wealthy. But these
       are relative terms and so we need to be careful of what we are saying - A fact of the matter is
       that poor Americans are much richer now than poor Americans were in 1910 or 1920.
 

       Class as description vs Class as explanation

Sometimes class is used as a concept that simply descibes what an individual or group has or doesn't have. This is better called SES, social and economic indicator. These indicators,
statistical presentations, can be revealing, and certainly can uncover important elements of the dimensions of inequality in a society. They are oftern used to establish policy, redress social grievances.

The early thinkers (and also more recent sociologists) looked at class divisions, division of labor, gender differences as dynamic conditions within which society operates, produces and reproduces itself, and also changes over time.