Historical types of stratification: table. Historical types of social stratification

In sociological studies, the theory of social stratification does not have a single, integral form. It is based on diverse concepts related to social inequality, class theory, the social masses and elites, which are mutually complementary and do not correspond to each other. The main criteria that determine the historical types of stratification are property relations, rights and duties, the system of subordination, etc.

Basic concepts of stratification theories

Stratification is a "hierarchically organized interaction of groups of people" (Radaev VV, Shkaratan OI, "Social stratification"). The criteria for differentiation with respect to the historical type of stratification are:

• Physico-genetic;
• Slave-owning;
• Caste;
• Class;
• Etatratic;
• Social and professional;
• class;
• Cultural and symbolic;
• Cultural and normative.

In this case, the own criterion for differentiation and the way to distinguish differences will be determined by all historical types of stratification. Slavery, for example, as a historical type, as the main criterion, will allocate the rights of citizenship and property, and as a means of determination - bonded right and military coercion.

In the most generalized form, it is possible to present the following historical types of stratification: Table 1.

It should be noted that historical types of stratification - slavery, castes, classes and classes - do not always have clear boundaries between themselves. So, for example, the concept of caste is used mainly to the Indian stratification system. We do not meet the category of brahmanas in any other social system. The brahmanas (the same priests) were endowed with special rights and privileges, which no other category of citizens had. It was believed that the priest spoke in the name of God. According to the Indian tradition, the brahmanas were created from the mouth of the God of Brahma. From his hands were created warriors, chief among which was the king. In this case, a person belonged to one or another caste from birth and could not change it.

On the other hand, the peasants could act as a separate caste, and as a class. Moreover, they could also be divided into two groups - simple and rich (wealthy).

The concept of social space

The well-known Russian sociologist Pitirim Sorokin (1989-1968), exploring the historical types of stratification (slavery, caste, classes), singles out the "social space" as a key concept. In contrast to the physical, in the social space, the subjects adjacent to each other can simultaneously be located at absolutely different levels. And vice versa: if certain groups of subjects belong to the historical type of stratification, it is not at all necessary that they are territorially located side by side (Sorokin P., "Man, Civilization, Society").

Social space in Sorokin's concept has a multidimensional character, including cultural, religious, professional and other vectors. This space is all the more extensive, the more complex the society and the distinguished historical types of stratification (slavery, castes, etc.) appear. Sorokin also considers the vertical and horizontal levels of separation of social space. The horizontal level includes political associations, professional activities, religious organizations , etc. Vertical - the differentiation of individuals from the point of view of the hierarchical position in the group (leader, deputy, subordinates, parishioners, electorate, etc.).

As forms of social stratification, Sorokin singles out such as political, economic, and professional. Within each of them there is an additional stratification system. In turn, the French sociologist Emil Durkheim (1858-1917) considered the system of division of subjects within the professional group from the point of view of the specifics of their work activity. As a special function of this division is the creation between two or more personalities of a sense of solidarity. At the same time he attributes to it a moral character (Durkheim E., "The function of the division of labor").

Historical types of social stratification and economic system

In turn, the American economist Frank Knight (1885-1972), who considers social stratification within the framework of economic systems, singles out the maintenance / improvement of the social structure, stimulation of social progress among one of the key functions of economic organizations (Knight F., "Economic Organization" ).

Karl Polanyi (1886-1964), an American-Canadian economist of Hungarian origin, writes about the special relationship of the economic sphere and social stratification to the subject: "A person acts not to ensure his personal interests in the sphere of possession of material goods, he seeks to guarantee his social status, Their social rights and benefits. He values material objects only insofar as they serve this purpose "(Polanyi K.," Societies and Economic Systems ").

Class theory in sociological science

Despite a certain affinity of characteristics, it is customary in sociology to differentiate the historical types of stratification. Classes, for example, should be separated from the concept of social strata. The social layer implies social differentiation within a hierarchically organized society (Radaev VV, Shkaratan OI, "Social stratification"). In turn, the social class is a group of people free in political and legal relations.

The most famous example of class theory is the concept of Karl Marx, based on the doctrine of a socio-economic formation. The change of formations leads to the appearance of new classes, a new system of interaction between productive forces and production relations. In the western sociological school, there are a number of theories that define the class as a multidimensional category, which in turn leads to the danger of blurring the boundary between the concepts of "class" and "stratum" (Zhvitiashvili AS, "Interpretation of the concept of" class "in modern Western Sociology ").

From the standpoint of other sociological approaches, the historical types of stratification also imply a division into the higher (elite), middle and lower classes. Also possible variations of this division.

The concept of an elite class

In sociology the concept of the elite is perceived rather ambiguously. For example, in the stratification theory of Randall Collins (1941), a group of individuals who are very many in command, with very few people being considered, stands out as an elite (Collins R. "Stratification through the prism of the theory of conflict"). Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923), in turn, divides society into the elite (the higher stratum) and the non-elite. The elite class also consists of 2 groups: the ruling and non-ruling elite.

To representatives of the highest class, Collins includes heads of government, army leaders, influential businessmen, and so on. The worldview characteristics of these categories are determined, first of all, by the duration of finding the given class in power: "To feel readiness for submission becomes the meaning of life, and insubordination is viewed in this environment as unthinkable" (Collins, R., "Stratification through the Prism of the Theory of Conflict"). It is belonging to a given class that determines the degree of power that an individual has as his representative. At the same time, power can be not only political, but also economic, religious and ideological. In turn, these forms can be linked together.

Specificity of the middle class

This category is usually referred to as the so-called circle of performers. Specificity of the middle class is such that its representatives simultaneously occupy a dominant position over certain subjects and subordinate to others. The middle class also has its own internal stratification: the upper middle class (performers dealing only with other performers, as well as large, formally independent businessmen and professionals dependent on good relations with customers, partners, suppliers, etc.) and the lower middle class Administrators, managers - those who are on the lowest border in the system of power relations).

AN Sevastyanov characterizes the middle class as anti-revolutionary. According to the researcher, this fact is explained by the fact that the middle class has something to lose - unlike the revolutionary class. What the middle class seeks to acquire can also be obtained without a revolution. In this regard, representatives of this category are indifferent to the issues of the reorganization of society.

Working class category

The historical types of social stratification of society from the position of classes in a separate category distinguish the class of workers (the lower class in the hierarchy of society). Its representatives are not included in the organizational communication system. They are aimed at the immediate present, and the dependent position forms in them a certain aggression in the perception and evaluation of the social system.

The lower class is characterized by an individualistic attitude towards itself and its own interests, the lack of stable social ties and contacts. This category consists of temporary laborers, permanent unemployed, beggars, etc.

Domestic approach in the theory of stratification

In Russian sociological science, there are also different views on the historical types of stratification. Estates and their differentiation in society is the basis of social and philosophical thinking in pre-revolutionary Russia, which subsequently provoked controversy in the Soviet state until the 1960s.

With the beginning of the Khrushchev thaw, the issue of social stratification falls under the strict ideological control of the state. The basis of the social structure of society is the class of workers and peasants, also a layer of the intelligentsia is a separate category. The idea of "class convergence" and the formation of "social homogeneity" is maintained permanently in the public consciousness. At that time, the topics of bureaucracy and nomenclature in the state were hushed up. The beginning of active research, whose object was the historical types of stratification, are laid in the perestroika period with the development of glasnost. The introduction of market reforms into the economic life of the state revealed serious problems in the social structure of Russian society.

Characteristics of marginalized populations

The category of marginality also occupies a separate place in sociological stratification theories. In the context of sociological science, this concept is understood to mean "an intermediate position between social structural units, or the lowest position in the social hierarchy" (Gansanamzhilova ON, "On the issue of structural marginality in Russian society").

In this concept, it is customary to distinguish two types: marginal-peripheral, marginal-transitive. The latter characterizes the intermediate position of the subject during the transition from one socio-status position to another. This type can be a consequence of the social mobility of the subject, as well as the result of a change in the social system in society with cardinal changes in the lifestyle of the subject, the type of activity, etc. Social ties are not destroyed. A characteristic feature of this type is a certain incompleteness of the transition process (in some cases, it is difficult for a subject to adapt to the conditions of a new social system of society-a kind of "hang-up" occurs).

Signs of peripheral marginality are: the lack of objective belonging of the subject to a certain social community, the destruction of his past social ties. In different sociological theories, this type of population can bear such names as "outsiders", "outcasts", "outcasts" (some authors have "declassed elements"), etc. In the framework of modern stratification theories, one should note studies of status inconsistency - inconsistencies, Mismatch of certain social and status characteristics (level of income, profession, education, etc.). All this leads to an imbalance in the stratification system.

The theory of stratification and the integrated approach

The modern theory of the stratification system of society is in a state of transformation, caused both by a change in the specifics of pre-existing social categories, and by the formation of new classes (primarily due to socio-economic reforms).

In the sociological theory that considers the historical types of stratification of society, the important point is not to reduce to one dominant social category (as in the case of class theory within the framework of Marxist teaching), but to conduct a broad analysis of all possible structures. A separate approach should be given to an integrated approach that considers certain categories of social stratification from the point of view of their interconnection. In this case, the question arises of the hierarchy of these categories and the nature of their influence on each other as elements of the general social system. Solving such a question involves exploring different stratification theories in a comparative analysis that compares the key points of each of the theories.