why is social stratification important essay

Concept of Social Stratification Essay

Introduction, categories of stratification, applying to life, intersectionality, accessibility.

Social stratification can be considered to be the root of all discussions and debates regarding social inequalities. Even though there have been constant calls for equality, modern society remains highly stratified with gaps ever-widening. Social class is perhaps one of the most prevalent forms of inequalities, especially in capitalist societies where resources are owned and controlled by a few. The lower and middle classes dominate much of the global population. This essay defines the various forms of stratification and addresses the issues of intersectionality and accessibility.

Social class can be described as a classification of people possessing similar socioeconomic status. According to Manstead (2018), social class shares compatibility with the term ‘subjective social rank,’ where material resources classify people as lower, middle or working, and upper class. Therefore, socioeconomic status is gained by the wealth that people accumulate for themselves. Race entails a group of people sharing similar distinctive physical characteristics. Most commonly, the color of people is used to define their race. However, several other traits can be used to define race, including hair texture. The definitions of race in such countries as the United States may be changing with time. Currently, racial lines include white, Asian, black or African American, Native Hawaiian, and American Indian or Alaska natives.

Gender is another form of social stratification, which majorly revolves around masculinity and femininity. However, contemporary society is seeking for further inclusion of such categories as common and neuter to include people who do not classify as either male or female. The idea is that biological differences are used to distinguish between people. Lastly, age entailed the number of years or the length of time that people have lived. Basic categorizations include infants, children, adolescents, and adults, even though alternatives may be used. No universal rule exists to dictate how age is classified as the context may differ. The rationale is that several terminologies can be used to describe a particular age group to which a person belongs. Examples include teenagers, which denotes people between thirteen and nineteen.

Few categories may apply to my life, even though most are a matter of self-perception. However, one of the most visible aspects of my life is that I have been born and raised in a working family. The rationale is that both parents are employed and have been so for all their adult life. In this case, I can only consider myself to be similar to them because my path will most likely be similar to them. Upon graduation, my sole focus will be on finding and building a career. However, situations may change, considering that I am an ambitious person. Even though I might choose to pursue a different path from my parents, the same classification may hold until my socioeconomic status has changed.

However, age, gender, and race may also apply to me but I tend to ignore them in light of recent social developments. In other words, association with race has become a controversial subject due to the overwhelming opposition to racism. Personally, racial abuses are a vice, and modern society would be better if all races were to be held in the same regard. Regarding age, I can consider myself a young person approaching adulthood. I do not have any reservations regarding age as opposed to the other forms of classification. Neutrality is perhaps the best approach because it raises few concerns when subjects of inequality, discrimination, and racism are broached.

Intersectionality is a concept that has come to dominate the current literature on such subjects as gender and feminism. Debates on intersectionality often offer a critical analysis of how men, women, and children from different families experience or suffer privilege and marginalization (Few-Demo & Allen, 2020). The concept of intersectionality was developed by Black critical thinkers and other activists to conceptualize the disadvantages suffered by Black women, including oppressive experiences. Today, intersectionality has had a massive influence on multiple scholarly fields where a diversion has been made from the initial radical origins (Gkiouleka et al., 2018). Therefore, intersectionality has become an analytical tool of social stratification, whose purpose is to challenge the notion of single and fixed social hierarchies. Sensitivity to alternative classifications has become a pressing concern for many people.

There are a few examples of intersectionality in my life, especially in the life of a student. Today, most societies are racially and ethnically diverse, which is felt across all contexts of social life. In school, the subject of sensitivity is becoming more common, especially when society fights against all forms of discrimination. Therefore, I have always avoided identifying myself racially, especially when I am in the company of other people. Most importantly, I have always avoided any discussions that may cause any form of division among people close to me. However, my own experience of intersectionality is the refusal to classify other people along any lines of stratification.

The question of accessibility should be considered as another category of stratification. The term accessibility can be used in the context of resources and other necessities of life. For example, accessibility in education can be used to imply that all students access education regardless of their classification, which includes disability status (Zhang et al., 2020). Privileges and marginalization have all been determined by the accessibility to resources. Therefore, accessibility should easily be integrated into the discussions of social stratification.

However, the question of redundancy may arise, especially if the term accessibility is solely tied to resources. The argument is social class and socioeconomic status are better suited to describe access to resources. Even in the educational context, access to the best schools is determined by the economic wellbeing of the people. The term accessibility may need further expansion before it can be included without causing these redundancies. At the moment, privileges are for those with easy access to economic resources while marginalization faces those with limited access.

Social stratification is becoming a contentious subject, especially because it is tied to such vices as racism, inequality, and discrimination. The main forms of stratification have been discussed, including class, gender, race, and age. As many people, including scholars, acknowledge the need for sensitivity, the subject of intersectionality is becoming more popular where people are encouraged to accept alternative forms of social hierarchies. Real-life examples of both intersectional and social stratification have been offered. The most important aspect is that reservations have been made for certain forms due to sensitivity and experiences of intersectionality. Lastly, doubts have been raised regarding the inclusion of accessibility, especially because such concerns as material or economic resources remain unaddressed.

Few-Demo, A., & Allen, K. (2020). gender, feminist, and intersectional perspectives on families: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82 (1), 326-345. Web.

Gkiouleka, A., Huijts, T., Beckfield, J., & Bambra, C. (2018). Understanding the micro and macro politics of health: Inequalities, intersectionality & institutions – A research agenda . Social Science & Medicine, 200 , 92-98. Web.

Manstead, A. (2018). The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57 , 267-291. Web.

Zhang, X., Tlili, A., Nascimbeni, F., Burgos, D., Huang, R., Chang, T.,… Khribi, M. (2020). Accessibility within open educational resources and practices for disabled learners: A systematic literature review. Smart Learning Environments, 7 (1), 1-19. Web.

• The Social Responsibility of Enterprises
• On Internet Addiction in Swift's Satirical Style
• Intersectionality and a Young Girl’s Unequal Experiences
• Intersectionality in the Family Context
• Theories of Identity: Intersectionality
• The Sandwich Generation: Caring for Children and Parents
• Obesity Risk Factors: Impact of Family Background
• Approach to the Client of a Social Worker: Case Study
• Homelessness and Housing in Oneida County and City of Utica
• Researching of Rape Counseling
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, December 13). Concept of Social Stratification. https://ivypanda.com/essays/concept-of-social-stratification/

"Concept of Social Stratification." IvyPanda , 13 Dec. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/concept-of-social-stratification/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Concept of Social Stratification'. 13 December.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Concept of Social Stratification." December 13, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/concept-of-social-stratification/.

1. IvyPanda . "Concept of Social Stratification." December 13, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/concept-of-social-stratification/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Concept of Social Stratification." December 13, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/concept-of-social-stratification/.

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

9.1 What Is Social Stratification?

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you should be able to:

• Differentiate between open and closed stratification systems
• Distinguish between caste and class systems
• Explain why meritocracy is considered 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 based on factors like wealth, income, education, family background, and power.

Geologists also use the word “stratification” to describe the distinct vertical layers found in rock. Typically, society’s layers, made of people, represent the uneven distribution of society’s resources. Society views the people with more resources as the top layer of the social structure of stratification. Other groups of people, with fewer and fewer resources, represent the lower layers. An individual’s place within this stratification is called socioeconomic status (SES) .

Most people and institutions in the United States indicate that they value equality, a belief that everyone has an equal chance at success. In other words, hard work and talent—not inherited wealth, prejudicial treatment, institutional racism, or societal values—determine social mobility. This emphasis on choice, motivation, and self-effort perpetuates the American belief that people control their own social standing.

However, sociologists recognize social stratification as a society-wide system that makes inequalities apparent. While inequalities exist between individuals, sociologists are interested in larger social patterns. Sociologists look to see if individuals with similar backgrounds, group memberships, identities, and location in the country share the same social stratification. No individual, rich or poor, can be blamed for social inequalities, but instead all participate in a system where some rise and others fall. Most Americans believe the rising and falling is based on individual choices. But sociologists see how the structure of society affects a person's social standing and therefore is created and supported by society.

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, prestige is valued, and people who have them are revered more than those who don’t. In some cultures, the elderly are esteemed, while in others, the elderly are disparaged or overlooked. Societies’ cultural beliefs often reinforce stratification.

One key determinant of social standing is our parents. Parents tend to pass their social position on to their children. People inherit not only social standing but also the cultural norms, values, and beliefs that accompany a certain lifestyle. They share these with a network of friends and family members that provide resources and support. This is one of the reasons first-generation college students do not fare as well as other students. They lack access to the resources and support commonly provided to those whose parents have gone to college.

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, the same attitude is not applied to professional athletes, executives, or those working in corporate world. Cultural attitudes and beliefs like these support and perpetuate social and economic inequalities.

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. Closed systems include estate, slavery, and caste systems. Open systems are based on achievement and allow for movement and interaction between layers and classes. How different systems operate reflect, emphasize, and foster specific cultural values, shaping individual beliefs. In this section, we’ll review class and caste stratification systems, plus discuss the ideal system of meritocracy.

The Caste System

Caste systems are closed stratification systems where people can do little or nothing to change the social standing of their birth. The caste system determines all aspects of an individual’s life: occupations, marriage partners, and housing. Individual talents, interests, or potential do not provide opportunities to improve a person's social position.

In the Hindu caste tradition, people expect to work in an occupation and to enter into a marriage based on their caste. Accepting this social standing is considered a moral duty and people are socialized to accept their social standing. 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. This belief system is an ideology. Every culture has an ideology that supports its system of stratification.

The caste system in India has been officially dismantled, but is still deeply embedded in Indian society, particularly in rural areas. 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 shifting the cultural expectations of the caste system.

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 based on factors like wealth, income, education, family background, and occupation. Unlike caste systems, class systems are open. People may move to a different level (vertical movement) of education or employment status than their parents. Though family and other societal models help guide a person toward a career, personal choice and opportunity play a role.

They can also socialize with and marry members of other classes. People have the option to form an exogamous marriage , a union of spouses from different social categories. Exogamous marriages often focus on values such as love and compatibility. Though social conformities still exist that encourage people to choose partners within their own class, called an endogamous marriage , people are not as pressured to choose marriage partners based solely on their social location.

Meritocracy

Meritocracy is a hypothetical system in which social stratification is determined by personal effort and merit. The concept of meritocracy is an ideal because no society has ever existed where social standing was based entirely on merit. Rather, multiple factors influence social standing, including processes like socialization and the realities of inequality within economic systems. 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.

The differences between an open and closed system are explored further in the example below.

Status Consistency

Sociologists use the term status consistency to describe the consistency, or lack thereof, of an individual’s rank across the factors that determine social stratification within a lifetime. Caste systems correlate with high status consistency, due to the inability to move out of a class, whereas the more flexible class system demonstrates lower status consistency.

To illustrate, let’s consider Serena. Serena earned her high school diploma but did not go to college. Completing high school but not college is a trait more common to the lower-middle class. After high school, she began landscaping, which, as manual labor, tracks with lower-middle class or even lower class. However, over time, Serena started her own company. She hired employees. She won larger contracts. Serena became a business owner and earned more money. Those traits represent the upper-middle class. Inconsistencies between Serena’s educational level, her occupation, and income show Serena’s flexibility in her social status, giving her low status consistency. In a class system, hard work, new opportunities, coupled with a lower education status still allow a person movement into middle or upper class, whereas in a caste system, that would not be possible. In a class system, low status consistency correlates with having more choices and opportunities.

Social Policy and Debate

Leaving royalty behind.

Meghan Markle, who married a member of the British royal family, for years endured unceasing negative media attention, invasion of privacy, and racially abusive comments. She and her husband–Prince Harry, grandson to Queen Elizabeth–undertook a series of legal actions to push back against overly aggressive media outlets. But because of the continued harassment and disagreements with others in the royal family, Meghan and Harry decided to step down from their royal obligations and begin a disassociation from the British monarchy. In doing so, they gave up honorary positions, titles, and financial support. For Meghan, who had been born in the U.S. and had earned her wealth through a successful career, these changes may not be so jarring. Prince Harry, however, had been "His Royal Highness" since he was born; by nature of his ancestry he was entitled to vast sums of money, property, and cultural-political positions such as Honorary Air Commandant, Commodore-in-Chief, and President of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust. Harry would also lose the military rank he had earned through almost ten years of military service, including two combat deployments to Afghanistan. Would Megxit work for him? What gave him those honors in the first place?

Britain’s monarchy arose during the Middle Ages. Its social hierarchy placed royalty at the top and commoners on the bottom. This was generally a closed system, with people born into positions of nobility. Wealth was passed from generation to generation through primogeniture , a law stating that all property would be inherited by the firstborn son. If the family had no son, the land went to the next closest male relation. Women could not inherit property, and their social standing was primarily determined through marriage.

The arrival of the Industrial Revolution changed Britain’s social structure. Commoners moved to cities, got jobs, and made better livings. Gradually, people found new opportunities to increase their wealth and power. Today, the government is a constitutional monarchy with the prime minister and other ministers elected to their positions, and with the royal family’s role being largely ceremonial. The long-ago differences between nobility and commoners have blurred, and the modern class system in Britain is similar to that of the United States (McKee 1996).

Today, the royal family still commands wealth, power, and a great deal of attention. After the death of Queen Elizabeth II in September 2022, Prince Charles ascended the throne. When he retires or passes away, the position will go to Prince William, Prince Harry's older brother.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, meanwhile, moved to Los Angeles and signed a voiceover deal with Disney while also joining Netflix in a series production. They founded an organization focusing on non-profit activities and media ventures. Living in LA and working to some extent in entertainment, they will likely be considered a different type of royalty.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Tonja R. Conerly, Kathleen Holmes, Asha Lal Tamang
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Introduction to Sociology 3e
• Publication date: Jun 3, 2021
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/9-1-what-is-social-stratification

© Aug 5, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

Physical Address

304 North Cardinal St. Dorchester Center, MA 02124

The Functionalist Theory of Social Stratification: A Comprehensive Analysis

• Nicole Jose
• September 18, 2024

Introduction to the Functionalist Perspective

The functionalist theory offers a unique lens through which to view social stratification. Developed primarily during the 1940s and 1950s, this perspective argues that all societies exhibit some form of social hierarchy, which is both inevitable and beneficial. According to the functionalist theory sociology, disparities in income, wealth, class, and power are essential for maintaining societal stability. The functionalist perspective suggests that differences in income across various occupations are tied to their functional importance and the limited availability of individuals with the talents necessary to fulfill these roles. In this context, inequalities in status and income are deemed not only desirable but necessary.

Functionalism and Occupational Stratification

One of the core ideas in functionalist sociology is the belief that certain roles are more functionally important to society than others. Owners of capitalist firms, managers, administrators, and other professionals are well-rewarded because their work contributes significantly to societal stability. This is a key example of functionalism in sociology, where the functionalist perspective sociology posits that the stability and smooth operation of society depend on a clear hierarchy.

During the 1950s and 1960s, functionalist theories were highly influential. However, these theories faced significant criticism, especially from Marxist and Weberian perspectives, which argued that the functionalist approach underestimated the impact of social conflict and overemphasized the positive contributions of social institutions.

The Role of Social Consensus in Functionalist Theory

Functionalist theory sociology is built upon the assumption that all social institutions contribute to societal stability. This perspective emphasizes consensus over conflict, assuming that a social agreement on norms and values helps reinforce existing social systems . The functionalist perspective downplays the importance of social conflict and individual agency, focusing instead on how institutions, such as education and family, contribute to the common good. The functionalism sociology definition underscores the importance of socialization in transmitting shared norms, further supporting societal stability.

Criticisms of the Functionalist Perspective

While functionalism sociology presents a positive view of social stratification, critics argue that it overemphasizes societal harmony. Conflict theorists claim that functionalism theory in sociology fails to recognize how inequalities primarily serve the interests of the privileged minority, often at the expense of the majority. The functionalism examples given by functionalists—such as the idea that social stratification ensures the most qualified individuals fill the most important roles—are seen as overly optimistic by critics.

Functionalism and Social Stratification

The functionalist theory of social stratification was first articulated by Davis and Moore in 1945. According to their analysis, social stratification exists in all societies and serves to allocate individuals to roles that suit their talents and abilities. A functionalist perspective example is how income disparities arise due to differences in the functional importance of occupations. For example, jobs requiring scarce skills or extensive training, like national politicians or business leaders, are rewarded more highly. These roles are deemed crucial because they contribute to societal stability, a key idea within functionalism theory.

Structural Functionalism and Power Dynamics

Structural functionalism examples highlight how societal structures, such as the economy and political institutions, function to maintain order. According to functionalism sociology examples, disparities in power and income are seen as necessary for a well-ordered society. Power is viewed not as a tool for exploitation, but as a mechanism for making complex decisions that benefit society as a whole.

In this context, examples of functionalism include the high salaries earned by business leaders, who coordinate production and provide employment, and skilled non-manual workers, whose roles are considered crucial for societal efficiency. Although some occupations may not be as highly rewarded, such as coal miners or electricians, functionalists argue that the abundance of labor in these roles explains their relatively lower compensation.

The Desirability and Inevitability of Social Stratification

From a functional perspective, income inequality is seen as functional for society because it provides financial incentives that encourage individuals to pursue long periods of training and take on the challenges associated with the most functionally important occupations. Examples of functionalism also suggest that income inequality promotes meritocracy and social mobility, offering talented individuals the opportunity to rise within the occupational hierarchy.

However, critics of functionalism sociology argue that these income disparities may not always be justified. For example, some wealthy individuals derive income from assets managed by others, with little personal contribution. Critics also note that income inequality often leads to social conflict, which is downplayed in functionalist perspective sociology.

Neo-Functionalism and Modern Interpretations

In recent years, neo-functionalists have revisited some of the ideas within functionalism. They acknowledge the limitations of the original functionalist theory but argue that there is still value in examining how the incomes of highly paid professionals may reflect their functional importance. Despite this, modern sociologists have pointed out that the functionalist perspective does not adequately account for the role of power and privilege in maintaining social inequality .

The functionalist theory sociology offers a framework for understanding why social stratification exists and how it functions to maintain societal stability. By focusing on the functional importance of different occupations, functionalists justify income and status inequalities as both desirable and inevitable. However, critics have challenged the theory for oversimplifying the complexities of power dynamics and failing to account for the detrimental effects of inequality on social harmony. While the functional perspective has been influential, it remains a subject of debate in modern sociology, with neo-functionalists and critics continuing to evaluate its relevance in today’s world.

This analysis showcases how functionalism sociology examples and functionalism theory in sociology continue to inform discussions of social stratification, even as alternative perspectives, such as Marxism, provide critical counterpoints to the functionalist perspective.

Last Articles