Approaches to Social Stratification | Sociology Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

 Page 1


UNIT 2 APPROACHES TO SOCIAL 
STRATIFICATION 
2.0 Objectives 
2.1 Introduction 
2.2 The Functional Approach 
2.2.1 Davis and Moore 
2.2.2 Tumin's Critique 
2.3 Max Weber's Theory of Social Stratification 
2.3.1 Appraisal of Weber's Theory 
2.4 The Dialectical Approach 
2.4.1 Basic P&~tures 
2.4.2 Bourgeoisie and Prolectariat 
2.4.3 Dialectical Approach: An Appraisal 
2.4.4 Dahrendoff s Critique 
2.4.5 The Indian Scenario 
2.5 The Anthropological Approach 
2.4 Let Us Sum Up 
2.7 Key Words 
2.8 Further Readings 
2.9 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress 
2.0 OBJECTIVES 
On having studied this unit you should be able to: 
discuss the functional approach; 
* 
delineate Webes's theory of Stratification; 
. outline the dialectical theory; and 
sumnlarize the anthropological approach. 
2.1 INTRODUCTION . 
Social stratification implies relations of superiority and inferiority among individuals, 
families and groups. Such relations are governed by a set of norms and values upheld and 
enforced by the state and the society. Talcott Parsons calls 'patteming' or 'ordering' of 
social relations a stratification system of society. A number of variables would be 
involved in 'ordering' of social relations includiigvalue-system, power structure, 
ascription, achievement, confonnity/deviance to norms etc. Parsons considers social 
stratification as ubiquitous and inevitable because it ensures smooth functioning of society 
by way of defining different positions and their allocation to members of a society based on 
certain principles of recruitment and reward. He writes: "social stratification is regarded 
here as the differential ranking of the human individuals who compose a given social 
system an their treatment as superior and inferior to one another in certain socially 
inqortant respects". 
Obviously the Parsonian view is 'systemic' as its main emphasis is on ordering or 
integration of different aspects of society. No society can remain in a situation of conflict 
perpetually, and no society can every remain completely integrated. 'Dynamic equilibrium' 
is the essence of all human societies. Such A view is known as the 'functional' approach to . 
the study of society. Contrary of this approach is the 'dialectical approach' in which 
emphasis is on the understanding for contradictions between the interests of the 'superior' 
19 
Page 2


UNIT 2 APPROACHES TO SOCIAL 
STRATIFICATION 
2.0 Objectives 
2.1 Introduction 
2.2 The Functional Approach 
2.2.1 Davis and Moore 
2.2.2 Tumin's Critique 
2.3 Max Weber's Theory of Social Stratification 
2.3.1 Appraisal of Weber's Theory 
2.4 The Dialectical Approach 
2.4.1 Basic P&~tures 
2.4.2 Bourgeoisie and Prolectariat 
2.4.3 Dialectical Approach: An Appraisal 
2.4.4 Dahrendoff s Critique 
2.4.5 The Indian Scenario 
2.5 The Anthropological Approach 
2.4 Let Us Sum Up 
2.7 Key Words 
2.8 Further Readings 
2.9 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress 
2.0 OBJECTIVES 
On having studied this unit you should be able to: 
discuss the functional approach; 
* 
delineate Webes's theory of Stratification; 
. outline the dialectical theory; and 
sumnlarize the anthropological approach. 
2.1 INTRODUCTION . 
Social stratification implies relations of superiority and inferiority among individuals, 
families and groups. Such relations are governed by a set of norms and values upheld and 
enforced by the state and the society. Talcott Parsons calls 'patteming' or 'ordering' of 
social relations a stratification system of society. A number of variables would be 
involved in 'ordering' of social relations includiigvalue-system, power structure, 
ascription, achievement, confonnity/deviance to norms etc. Parsons considers social 
stratification as ubiquitous and inevitable because it ensures smooth functioning of society 
by way of defining different positions and their allocation to members of a society based on 
certain principles of recruitment and reward. He writes: "social stratification is regarded 
here as the differential ranking of the human individuals who compose a given social 
system an their treatment as superior and inferior to one another in certain socially 
inqortant respects". 
Obviously the Parsonian view is 'systemic' as its main emphasis is on ordering or 
integration of different aspects of society. No society can remain in a situation of conflict 
perpetually, and no society can every remain completely integrated. 'Dynamic equilibrium' 
is the essence of all human societies. Such A view is known as the 'functional' approach to . 
the study of society. Contrary of this approach is the 'dialectical approach' in which 
emphasis is on the understanding for contradictions between the interests of the 'superior' 
19 
Introducing Social Stratification and the inferior' peaple whom Karl Marx designates as 'bourgeoisie' alds proletariat'. The 
dialectical approach also claims itself as historically valid and universally relevant. A 
critique of the functional approach is seen in the anthropological approach too in which 
emphasis is laid on de criteria such as age, sex and kinship as 'biological' as rather than 
'social' even in the context of 'pre-industrial' societies. We propose to discuss there 
approaches alongwiththese variations and ramifications to the understanding of social 
stratification. Further, these approaches have been applied discretely to the understanding 
of caste, class and tribe in India. 
2.2 THE FUNCTIONAL APPROACH 
The word 'fimction' refers to manifest positive consequences of aspects like econonly, 
policy, religion etc. forthe maintenance of the social system. Hence, tl~e functional 
approach explains social stratification as inevitable phenomenon. Fw~ctional differentiation 
is inevitable because an individual cannot fulfill all his needs by himselfherself. A person 
is not equipped for meeting all the requirements, hence persons with different abilities are 
required. Different functions are not required in equal measure. The therefore, different 
persons are rewarded differentially according to the value attached to tllc functions they 
perform. Such a differential pattern of reward gives rise to stratification ald hierarchy. 
2.2.1 Davis and Moore 
The functional theory of social stratification formulated by Kingsley Davis and Willbert E. 
Moore conforms to the above characterization. The salient features of their theory are as 
follows: 
i) Inevitability of social stratification; 
ii) 
Need for differential intent and ability for different functions; 
iii) Differential evaluation of different social positions and duties: 
iv) 
Reward on the basis of differentialvalue attached with different functions. and 
v). Values and rewards mnstitutingthe social differential and stratificatia~i 
Page 3


UNIT 2 APPROACHES TO SOCIAL 
STRATIFICATION 
2.0 Objectives 
2.1 Introduction 
2.2 The Functional Approach 
2.2.1 Davis and Moore 
2.2.2 Tumin's Critique 
2.3 Max Weber's Theory of Social Stratification 
2.3.1 Appraisal of Weber's Theory 
2.4 The Dialectical Approach 
2.4.1 Basic P&~tures 
2.4.2 Bourgeoisie and Prolectariat 
2.4.3 Dialectical Approach: An Appraisal 
2.4.4 Dahrendoff s Critique 
2.4.5 The Indian Scenario 
2.5 The Anthropological Approach 
2.4 Let Us Sum Up 
2.7 Key Words 
2.8 Further Readings 
2.9 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress 
2.0 OBJECTIVES 
On having studied this unit you should be able to: 
discuss the functional approach; 
* 
delineate Webes's theory of Stratification; 
. outline the dialectical theory; and 
sumnlarize the anthropological approach. 
2.1 INTRODUCTION . 
Social stratification implies relations of superiority and inferiority among individuals, 
families and groups. Such relations are governed by a set of norms and values upheld and 
enforced by the state and the society. Talcott Parsons calls 'patteming' or 'ordering' of 
social relations a stratification system of society. A number of variables would be 
involved in 'ordering' of social relations includiigvalue-system, power structure, 
ascription, achievement, confonnity/deviance to norms etc. Parsons considers social 
stratification as ubiquitous and inevitable because it ensures smooth functioning of society 
by way of defining different positions and their allocation to members of a society based on 
certain principles of recruitment and reward. He writes: "social stratification is regarded 
here as the differential ranking of the human individuals who compose a given social 
system an their treatment as superior and inferior to one another in certain socially 
inqortant respects". 
Obviously the Parsonian view is 'systemic' as its main emphasis is on ordering or 
integration of different aspects of society. No society can remain in a situation of conflict 
perpetually, and no society can every remain completely integrated. 'Dynamic equilibrium' 
is the essence of all human societies. Such A view is known as the 'functional' approach to . 
the study of society. Contrary of this approach is the 'dialectical approach' in which 
emphasis is on the understanding for contradictions between the interests of the 'superior' 
19 
Introducing Social Stratification and the inferior' peaple whom Karl Marx designates as 'bourgeoisie' alds proletariat'. The 
dialectical approach also claims itself as historically valid and universally relevant. A 
critique of the functional approach is seen in the anthropological approach too in which 
emphasis is laid on de criteria such as age, sex and kinship as 'biological' as rather than 
'social' even in the context of 'pre-industrial' societies. We propose to discuss there 
approaches alongwiththese variations and ramifications to the understanding of social 
stratification. Further, these approaches have been applied discretely to the understanding 
of caste, class and tribe in India. 
2.2 THE FUNCTIONAL APPROACH 
The word 'fimction' refers to manifest positive consequences of aspects like econonly, 
policy, religion etc. forthe maintenance of the social system. Hence, tl~e functional 
approach explains social stratification as inevitable phenomenon. Fw~ctional differentiation 
is inevitable because an individual cannot fulfill all his needs by himselfherself. A person 
is not equipped for meeting all the requirements, hence persons with different abilities are 
required. Different functions are not required in equal measure. The therefore, different 
persons are rewarded differentially according to the value attached to tllc functions they 
perform. Such a differential pattern of reward gives rise to stratification ald hierarchy. 
2.2.1 Davis and Moore 
The functional theory of social stratification formulated by Kingsley Davis and Willbert E. 
Moore conforms to the above characterization. The salient features of their theory are as 
follows: 
i) Inevitability of social stratification; 
ii) 
Need for differential intent and ability for different functions; 
iii) Differential evaluation of different social positions and duties: 
iv) 
Reward on the basis of differentialvalue attached with different functions. and 
v). Values and rewards mnstitutingthe social differential and stratificatia~i 
Box 2.01 
Logically, though functional theory seems to be a sound proposition, it has received 
a wide range of criticism. Joseph Schumpeter accords significance to the formation, 
nature and basic laws of classes based on the significance of the function performed 
by a class and on the degree to which the class performs the function. Evaluation 
is relative. Performance of an individual as a member of a class is a decisive factor. 
, 
Thus, Schumpeter accords significance to historical conditions in the emergence 
of classes. 
Activity 1 
Discuss the functional theory with other students, at the study centre and pinpoint 
its strength and weaknesses. Write down your observations in your notebook. 
Thus, social stratification is a consequence of inevitability of differentiation of roles and 
Approaches to Social Stratification 
duties. Further, different duties and roles cany differential power and prestige. And the 
differentiation of roles and duties is inevitable for the survival of human society. Hence, 
stratification becomes inevitable in social life. 
2.2.2 Tumin's Critique 
However, a scathing attack on Davis-Moore approach comes from Melvin M. Tumin who 
challenges'social stratification as inherent feature of social organization. He doubts the 
historical validity of the functional importance for the necessarily of social stratification. 
The idea of positions with greater and lesser power and prestige as posited by Davis-Moore 
is a 'tautology and unsound procedure' in Tumin's understanding. Assignments and 
performances are the bases of rewards rather than positions. Distinction between the 'less 
functional' and 'more functional' as drawn by Davis-Moore is also misleading because an 
engineer alone cannot perform a task without equally important contributions of workers 
and other functionaries. 
Division of labour is a necessity, but not social differentiation as envisaged by Davis- 
Moore. The functional approach is also dubbed as a general and vague formulation because 
it does not spell out the range of inequality and the determinants of the rank in concrete 
societies. According to Ralph Dahrendorf stratification lies neither in human nature nor in a 
historically dubious conception of private property. It lies in 'authority structure' of a 
society which is necessary for sustaining norms and sanctions. '.Institutionalized power' 
based on norms and sanctions creates inequality and hierarchy. 
2.3 MAX WEBER'S THEORY OF SOCIAL 
STRATIFICATION 
More concrete formulation of social stratification is presented by Max Weber in his 
analysis of 'class, status and party'. Weber not only clearly distinguishes between 
economic structure, status system and political power, he also finds interconnections 
, 
between these three in the form of the system of social stratification. 'Class' is an economic 
phenomenon, a product of the 'market situation' which implies competition among 
1 
different classes such as buyers and sellers. 'Status' is recognition of 'honour'. People are 
distributed among different classes, so are status groups based on distribution of honour 
~ 
which is identified in tenns of a range of symbols in a given society. Though analytically, 
classes and status groups are independent phenomena, they are significantly related to each 
other depending upon the nature and formation of a given society at a given point of time. 
The wo1;d 'party' implies a house of power, and power is the keynote of Weberian theory 
of stratification. Power may be for the sake of power or it may be economically determined 
i 
power. And the economically determined power is not always identical with the social or 
the legal power. Economic power may be a consequence of power existing on other groups. 
Striving for power is not always for economic well-being. As we have mentioned it may be 
for the sake of power or for social honour. All power does not provide social honour, and 
power is not the only source of social honour. Sometimes even the propertied and the 
Page 4


UNIT 2 APPROACHES TO SOCIAL 
STRATIFICATION 
2.0 Objectives 
2.1 Introduction 
2.2 The Functional Approach 
2.2.1 Davis and Moore 
2.2.2 Tumin's Critique 
2.3 Max Weber's Theory of Social Stratification 
2.3.1 Appraisal of Weber's Theory 
2.4 The Dialectical Approach 
2.4.1 Basic P&~tures 
2.4.2 Bourgeoisie and Prolectariat 
2.4.3 Dialectical Approach: An Appraisal 
2.4.4 Dahrendoff s Critique 
2.4.5 The Indian Scenario 
2.5 The Anthropological Approach 
2.4 Let Us Sum Up 
2.7 Key Words 
2.8 Further Readings 
2.9 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress 
2.0 OBJECTIVES 
On having studied this unit you should be able to: 
discuss the functional approach; 
* 
delineate Webes's theory of Stratification; 
. outline the dialectical theory; and 
sumnlarize the anthropological approach. 
2.1 INTRODUCTION . 
Social stratification implies relations of superiority and inferiority among individuals, 
families and groups. Such relations are governed by a set of norms and values upheld and 
enforced by the state and the society. Talcott Parsons calls 'patteming' or 'ordering' of 
social relations a stratification system of society. A number of variables would be 
involved in 'ordering' of social relations includiigvalue-system, power structure, 
ascription, achievement, confonnity/deviance to norms etc. Parsons considers social 
stratification as ubiquitous and inevitable because it ensures smooth functioning of society 
by way of defining different positions and their allocation to members of a society based on 
certain principles of recruitment and reward. He writes: "social stratification is regarded 
here as the differential ranking of the human individuals who compose a given social 
system an their treatment as superior and inferior to one another in certain socially 
inqortant respects". 
Obviously the Parsonian view is 'systemic' as its main emphasis is on ordering or 
integration of different aspects of society. No society can remain in a situation of conflict 
perpetually, and no society can every remain completely integrated. 'Dynamic equilibrium' 
is the essence of all human societies. Such A view is known as the 'functional' approach to . 
the study of society. Contrary of this approach is the 'dialectical approach' in which 
emphasis is on the understanding for contradictions between the interests of the 'superior' 
19 
Introducing Social Stratification and the inferior' peaple whom Karl Marx designates as 'bourgeoisie' alds proletariat'. The 
dialectical approach also claims itself as historically valid and universally relevant. A 
critique of the functional approach is seen in the anthropological approach too in which 
emphasis is laid on de criteria such as age, sex and kinship as 'biological' as rather than 
'social' even in the context of 'pre-industrial' societies. We propose to discuss there 
approaches alongwiththese variations and ramifications to the understanding of social 
stratification. Further, these approaches have been applied discretely to the understanding 
of caste, class and tribe in India. 
2.2 THE FUNCTIONAL APPROACH 
The word 'fimction' refers to manifest positive consequences of aspects like econonly, 
policy, religion etc. forthe maintenance of the social system. Hence, tl~e functional 
approach explains social stratification as inevitable phenomenon. Fw~ctional differentiation 
is inevitable because an individual cannot fulfill all his needs by himselfherself. A person 
is not equipped for meeting all the requirements, hence persons with different abilities are 
required. Different functions are not required in equal measure. The therefore, different 
persons are rewarded differentially according to the value attached to tllc functions they 
perform. Such a differential pattern of reward gives rise to stratification ald hierarchy. 
2.2.1 Davis and Moore 
The functional theory of social stratification formulated by Kingsley Davis and Willbert E. 
Moore conforms to the above characterization. The salient features of their theory are as 
follows: 
i) Inevitability of social stratification; 
ii) 
Need for differential intent and ability for different functions; 
iii) Differential evaluation of different social positions and duties: 
iv) 
Reward on the basis of differentialvalue attached with different functions. and 
v). Values and rewards mnstitutingthe social differential and stratificatia~i 
Box 2.01 
Logically, though functional theory seems to be a sound proposition, it has received 
a wide range of criticism. Joseph Schumpeter accords significance to the formation, 
nature and basic laws of classes based on the significance of the function performed 
by a class and on the degree to which the class performs the function. Evaluation 
is relative. Performance of an individual as a member of a class is a decisive factor. 
, 
Thus, Schumpeter accords significance to historical conditions in the emergence 
of classes. 
Activity 1 
Discuss the functional theory with other students, at the study centre and pinpoint 
its strength and weaknesses. Write down your observations in your notebook. 
Thus, social stratification is a consequence of inevitability of differentiation of roles and 
Approaches to Social Stratification 
duties. Further, different duties and roles cany differential power and prestige. And the 
differentiation of roles and duties is inevitable for the survival of human society. Hence, 
stratification becomes inevitable in social life. 
2.2.2 Tumin's Critique 
However, a scathing attack on Davis-Moore approach comes from Melvin M. Tumin who 
challenges'social stratification as inherent feature of social organization. He doubts the 
historical validity of the functional importance for the necessarily of social stratification. 
The idea of positions with greater and lesser power and prestige as posited by Davis-Moore 
is a 'tautology and unsound procedure' in Tumin's understanding. Assignments and 
performances are the bases of rewards rather than positions. Distinction between the 'less 
functional' and 'more functional' as drawn by Davis-Moore is also misleading because an 
engineer alone cannot perform a task without equally important contributions of workers 
and other functionaries. 
Division of labour is a necessity, but not social differentiation as envisaged by Davis- 
Moore. The functional approach is also dubbed as a general and vague formulation because 
it does not spell out the range of inequality and the determinants of the rank in concrete 
societies. According to Ralph Dahrendorf stratification lies neither in human nature nor in a 
historically dubious conception of private property. It lies in 'authority structure' of a 
society which is necessary for sustaining norms and sanctions. '.Institutionalized power' 
based on norms and sanctions creates inequality and hierarchy. 
2.3 MAX WEBER'S THEORY OF SOCIAL 
STRATIFICATION 
More concrete formulation of social stratification is presented by Max Weber in his 
analysis of 'class, status and party'. Weber not only clearly distinguishes between 
economic structure, status system and political power, he also finds interconnections 
, 
between these three in the form of the system of social stratification. 'Class' is an economic 
phenomenon, a product of the 'market situation' which implies competition among 
1 
different classes such as buyers and sellers. 'Status' is recognition of 'honour'. People are 
distributed among different classes, so are status groups based on distribution of honour 
~ 
which is identified in tenns of a range of symbols in a given society. Though analytically, 
classes and status groups are independent phenomena, they are significantly related to each 
other depending upon the nature and formation of a given society at a given point of time. 
The wo1;d 'party' implies a house of power, and power is the keynote of Weberian theory 
of stratification. Power may be for the sake of power or it may be economically determined 
i 
power. And the economically determined power is not always identical with the social or 
the legal power. Economic power may be a consequence of power existing on other groups. 
Striving for power is not always for economic well-being. As we have mentioned it may be 
for the sake of power or for social honour. All power does not provide social honour, and 
power is not the only source of social honour. Sometimes even the propertied and the 
Introducing Social Stratification propedyless can belong to the same status group. Thus, status is deternlined b~ social 
honour, and the latter is expressed through different 'styles of life', which are not . 
necessarily influenced by ecoilomic or political standing in society. 
2.3.1 Appraisal of Weber's Theory 
Thus, Weber's theory of 'class, status, and party' corresponds with his idea of three 
'orders' in the society, namely, the economic, the social and Bie political It also implies 
that social stratification is not fundamentally class-based on economically determined. In 
fact, by analysing social stratification from economic, social and political angles Weber 
provides a widerperspective than the eco~lomic determinism of Karl Man about which we 
will discuss below. 
To a considerable extent Weber's theory of social stratification accords adequate attention 
to individual and hisher attitudes and nlotivations ir tennillatioil of class, status and 
power 'Sub.jective component' in status-deternunation is based on psychological grouping 
(a feeling of gro~ip membership), being effected through conlpetitioil it pla) s an important 
part. As such classes are viewed as 'subjective' categories and social strata are 'ob,iective' 
ones. A social class is a group by way of its thinking for a particular system of economic 
organization. The persons who are similarly concerned about their positions and interests, 
and have a cominon outlook, and a distinctive attitude belong to the same status group or 
class. Thus, following the logic of 'subjective' or psychological' dimei~sion of social 
stratification, class is a psychological grouping of people depeildeilt upon class 
consciousness ( a feeling of group membership) irrespective of structural criteria such as 
occupation, income, standard of living, powe-I -ducation, intelligence etc The structural 
criteria are 'objective' in nature, hence, contri~clte to the formation of 'strata' (social and 
ecoilomic groupings and categories of people). Sub-jective identification of class is 
indicative of advanced econon~ic and social development of a given society Only in an 
advanced society a person's class is apart of hisher ego. Similarity of class consciousness 
generally does not emanate from a highly differentiated and economically and socially 
hierarcliised society. Moreover, the distinction between 'stratum' and 'class' seems to be 
uncoilvincing because the objective criteria of stratum pro-~ide psychological expression of 
class. 
Check Your Progress 1 
1) 
Write down Tumin's critique of Functionalism. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
Page 5


UNIT 2 APPROACHES TO SOCIAL 
STRATIFICATION 
2.0 Objectives 
2.1 Introduction 
2.2 The Functional Approach 
2.2.1 Davis and Moore 
2.2.2 Tumin's Critique 
2.3 Max Weber's Theory of Social Stratification 
2.3.1 Appraisal of Weber's Theory 
2.4 The Dialectical Approach 
2.4.1 Basic P&~tures 
2.4.2 Bourgeoisie and Prolectariat 
2.4.3 Dialectical Approach: An Appraisal 
2.4.4 Dahrendoff s Critique 
2.4.5 The Indian Scenario 
2.5 The Anthropological Approach 
2.4 Let Us Sum Up 
2.7 Key Words 
2.8 Further Readings 
2.9 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress 
2.0 OBJECTIVES 
On having studied this unit you should be able to: 
discuss the functional approach; 
* 
delineate Webes's theory of Stratification; 
. outline the dialectical theory; and 
sumnlarize the anthropological approach. 
2.1 INTRODUCTION . 
Social stratification implies relations of superiority and inferiority among individuals, 
families and groups. Such relations are governed by a set of norms and values upheld and 
enforced by the state and the society. Talcott Parsons calls 'patteming' or 'ordering' of 
social relations a stratification system of society. A number of variables would be 
involved in 'ordering' of social relations includiigvalue-system, power structure, 
ascription, achievement, confonnity/deviance to norms etc. Parsons considers social 
stratification as ubiquitous and inevitable because it ensures smooth functioning of society 
by way of defining different positions and their allocation to members of a society based on 
certain principles of recruitment and reward. He writes: "social stratification is regarded 
here as the differential ranking of the human individuals who compose a given social 
system an their treatment as superior and inferior to one another in certain socially 
inqortant respects". 
Obviously the Parsonian view is 'systemic' as its main emphasis is on ordering or 
integration of different aspects of society. No society can remain in a situation of conflict 
perpetually, and no society can every remain completely integrated. 'Dynamic equilibrium' 
is the essence of all human societies. Such A view is known as the 'functional' approach to . 
the study of society. Contrary of this approach is the 'dialectical approach' in which 
emphasis is on the understanding for contradictions between the interests of the 'superior' 
19 
Introducing Social Stratification and the inferior' peaple whom Karl Marx designates as 'bourgeoisie' alds proletariat'. The 
dialectical approach also claims itself as historically valid and universally relevant. A 
critique of the functional approach is seen in the anthropological approach too in which 
emphasis is laid on de criteria such as age, sex and kinship as 'biological' as rather than 
'social' even in the context of 'pre-industrial' societies. We propose to discuss there 
approaches alongwiththese variations and ramifications to the understanding of social 
stratification. Further, these approaches have been applied discretely to the understanding 
of caste, class and tribe in India. 
2.2 THE FUNCTIONAL APPROACH 
The word 'fimction' refers to manifest positive consequences of aspects like econonly, 
policy, religion etc. forthe maintenance of the social system. Hence, tl~e functional 
approach explains social stratification as inevitable phenomenon. Fw~ctional differentiation 
is inevitable because an individual cannot fulfill all his needs by himselfherself. A person 
is not equipped for meeting all the requirements, hence persons with different abilities are 
required. Different functions are not required in equal measure. The therefore, different 
persons are rewarded differentially according to the value attached to tllc functions they 
perform. Such a differential pattern of reward gives rise to stratification ald hierarchy. 
2.2.1 Davis and Moore 
The functional theory of social stratification formulated by Kingsley Davis and Willbert E. 
Moore conforms to the above characterization. The salient features of their theory are as 
follows: 
i) Inevitability of social stratification; 
ii) 
Need for differential intent and ability for different functions; 
iii) Differential evaluation of different social positions and duties: 
iv) 
Reward on the basis of differentialvalue attached with different functions. and 
v). Values and rewards mnstitutingthe social differential and stratificatia~i 
Box 2.01 
Logically, though functional theory seems to be a sound proposition, it has received 
a wide range of criticism. Joseph Schumpeter accords significance to the formation, 
nature and basic laws of classes based on the significance of the function performed 
by a class and on the degree to which the class performs the function. Evaluation 
is relative. Performance of an individual as a member of a class is a decisive factor. 
, 
Thus, Schumpeter accords significance to historical conditions in the emergence 
of classes. 
Activity 1 
Discuss the functional theory with other students, at the study centre and pinpoint 
its strength and weaknesses. Write down your observations in your notebook. 
Thus, social stratification is a consequence of inevitability of differentiation of roles and 
Approaches to Social Stratification 
duties. Further, different duties and roles cany differential power and prestige. And the 
differentiation of roles and duties is inevitable for the survival of human society. Hence, 
stratification becomes inevitable in social life. 
2.2.2 Tumin's Critique 
However, a scathing attack on Davis-Moore approach comes from Melvin M. Tumin who 
challenges'social stratification as inherent feature of social organization. He doubts the 
historical validity of the functional importance for the necessarily of social stratification. 
The idea of positions with greater and lesser power and prestige as posited by Davis-Moore 
is a 'tautology and unsound procedure' in Tumin's understanding. Assignments and 
performances are the bases of rewards rather than positions. Distinction between the 'less 
functional' and 'more functional' as drawn by Davis-Moore is also misleading because an 
engineer alone cannot perform a task without equally important contributions of workers 
and other functionaries. 
Division of labour is a necessity, but not social differentiation as envisaged by Davis- 
Moore. The functional approach is also dubbed as a general and vague formulation because 
it does not spell out the range of inequality and the determinants of the rank in concrete 
societies. According to Ralph Dahrendorf stratification lies neither in human nature nor in a 
historically dubious conception of private property. It lies in 'authority structure' of a 
society which is necessary for sustaining norms and sanctions. '.Institutionalized power' 
based on norms and sanctions creates inequality and hierarchy. 
2.3 MAX WEBER'S THEORY OF SOCIAL 
STRATIFICATION 
More concrete formulation of social stratification is presented by Max Weber in his 
analysis of 'class, status and party'. Weber not only clearly distinguishes between 
economic structure, status system and political power, he also finds interconnections 
, 
between these three in the form of the system of social stratification. 'Class' is an economic 
phenomenon, a product of the 'market situation' which implies competition among 
1 
different classes such as buyers and sellers. 'Status' is recognition of 'honour'. People are 
distributed among different classes, so are status groups based on distribution of honour 
~ 
which is identified in tenns of a range of symbols in a given society. Though analytically, 
classes and status groups are independent phenomena, they are significantly related to each 
other depending upon the nature and formation of a given society at a given point of time. 
The wo1;d 'party' implies a house of power, and power is the keynote of Weberian theory 
of stratification. Power may be for the sake of power or it may be economically determined 
i 
power. And the economically determined power is not always identical with the social or 
the legal power. Economic power may be a consequence of power existing on other groups. 
Striving for power is not always for economic well-being. As we have mentioned it may be 
for the sake of power or for social honour. All power does not provide social honour, and 
power is not the only source of social honour. Sometimes even the propertied and the 
Introducing Social Stratification propedyless can belong to the same status group. Thus, status is deternlined b~ social 
honour, and the latter is expressed through different 'styles of life', which are not . 
necessarily influenced by ecoilomic or political standing in society. 
2.3.1 Appraisal of Weber's Theory 
Thus, Weber's theory of 'class, status, and party' corresponds with his idea of three 
'orders' in the society, namely, the economic, the social and Bie political It also implies 
that social stratification is not fundamentally class-based on economically determined. In 
fact, by analysing social stratification from economic, social and political angles Weber 
provides a widerperspective than the eco~lomic determinism of Karl Man about which we 
will discuss below. 
To a considerable extent Weber's theory of social stratification accords adequate attention 
to individual and hisher attitudes and nlotivations ir tennillatioil of class, status and 
power 'Sub.jective component' in status-deternunation is based on psychological grouping 
(a feeling of gro~ip membership), being effected through conlpetitioil it pla) s an important 
part. As such classes are viewed as 'subjective' categories and social strata are 'ob,iective' 
ones. A social class is a group by way of its thinking for a particular system of economic 
organization. The persons who are similarly concerned about their positions and interests, 
and have a cominon outlook, and a distinctive attitude belong to the same status group or 
class. Thus, following the logic of 'subjective' or psychological' dimei~sion of social 
stratification, class is a psychological grouping of people depeildeilt upon class 
consciousness ( a feeling of group membership) irrespective of structural criteria such as 
occupation, income, standard of living, powe-I -ducation, intelligence etc The structural 
criteria are 'objective' in nature, hence, contri~clte to the formation of 'strata' (social and 
ecoilomic groupings and categories of people). Sub-jective identification of class is 
indicative of advanced econon~ic and social development of a given society Only in an 
advanced society a person's class is apart of hisher ego. Similarity of class consciousness 
generally does not emanate from a highly differentiated and economically and socially 
hierarcliised society. Moreover, the distinction between 'stratum' and 'class' seems to be 
uncoilvincing because the objective criteria of stratum pro-~ide psychological expression of 
class. 
Check Your Progress 1 
1) 
Write down Tumin's critique of Functionalism. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
2) 
Put down the core of Weber's position in social stratification. Use about five lines for 
Approaches to Social StraCification 
your answer. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................. 
............................................................ 
2.4 THE DIALECTICAL APPROACH 
Karl Marx is the foremost architect of the dialectical approach to the study of society and 
history. His theory is not restricted to economic understanding and analysis only, it is a 
wide structural theory of society. However, despite such a grand theorization Marx 
accords preeminence to class over status and power, which Weber largely does not accept. 
'Base' is economic structure, and 'superstructure' includes polity, religion, culture etc. To 
clarify further, according to Marx stratification is determined by the system of relations of 
production, and 'status' is determined by a person's position in the very system in terms of 
ownership and non-ownership of the means of production. The owners are named as 
'bourgeoisie' aid the non-owners are called as 'proletariat' by Man. These are in fact 
social categories rather thanbare economic entities Production is by 'social individuals', 
hence production relations imply a 'social context' rather than a mere economic situatioh. 
Extrapolating this understanding relations between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are 
'social', and the two could be seen in term of 'domination' and 'subjection', or as 
effective superiority-inferiority relationsups. The basic features of the dialectical approach 
2.4.1 Basic Features 
i) 
Economic interests are the basis of all other types of relationshir,social, cultural, 
political, etc. 
ii) 
There are two main classes: (a) owners of the means of production (bourgeoisie), and 
(b) wage-earners (proletariat). Marx refers to these classes also as Haves and Have- 
. 
iii) Tlie interests of these two classes clash with each other, as the bourgeoisie exploit the 
proletaria,, hence a class struggle. 
iv) The bourgeoisie gets more than its due share, hence appropriate surplus, and this 
accelerates class struggle, which finally leads to revolution and radical transformation 
of the stratification system of society. 
Classes to Marx are basic features of society; they are the product of the processes of the 
productive system which is in effect a system of power relations. To own means of 
production tantamount to domination and power and to render services, and to supply the 
human labour amounts to subordination and dependence. In this sense, class is a socia! 
redity, a real group of people with a developed consciousness of its existence, its position, 
goals and capabilities. ~iass is like a looking glass of society by which one can see its 
social fabric and internal dynanlics. 
2.4.2 Bourgeoisie and Proletariat 
Karl Man; and F. Engels considered the bourgeoisie and tlie proletariat as polar opposites 
always involved in clash of interests. The two hostile camps,also united against each other 
Marx harped upon unity of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie to defend their interests 
23