Page 255 - DSOC202_SOCIAL_STRATIFICATION_ENGLISH

Social Stratification

Notes Peasants, Migrants and Paupers, in the region of south Gujarat takes into consideration the mode of
production as a basic framework for his analysis.
Those who look at stratification from the Weberian point of view accept class, status and power as
basic determinants of stratification or ranking, Andre Beteille’s study, Caste, Class and Power is an
excellent example of studying rural stratification from the Weberian perspective. K.L. Sharma’s
classical work, The Changing Rural Stratification System (1974), is another example of employing
Weberian approach to the inquiry of rural stratification.
A ranked social order is common in most societies. Another way of placing the people is based on
conceptions of difference. Dipankar Gupta writes : “If inequality is the key feature, then, the
stratificatory system can be characterized as hierarchical one. If difference is more important, then,
the various social orders face each other as horizontal and equal blocs. A ranked hierarchy does
not make that much sense here.” “Inequalities of income or rank clearly belong to the hierarchical
order of stratification.” On the contrary, for example, linguistic differences cannot be placed in a
hierarchical order. But, generally speaking, differences between men and women are not seen as
horizontal, rather they are perceived as “ranked” vertically. Social stratification, therefore, includes
both “inequality” and “difference”, and the two impinge upon each other.
Dipankar Gupta explains that “social stratification is not just about categorizing people into diverse
strata”. “Social stratification provides an analytical basis for comprehending both social order and
social mobility.” Thus, social stratification tells about the principles of social statics and social
dynamics. We get an understanding of social reality as static ranked order and of its flux. What is
needed is to know about social order and social mobility. Natural differences become “social”
when they are seen as sociological categories. “Hierarchy” is generally a static rank order, whereas
“difference” implies “dynamics” in the static social order. Social stratification includes both
hierarchy and difference. Social mobility can occur in a hierarchical society, like India, which is
characterized by the rigidity of caste system. Class-based societies are generally considered more
prone to mobility. Open and closed systems of social stratification are viewed in terms of avenues
and possibilities for social mobility.

12.1 Open System of Social Stratification
An open system of stratification is characterized by mobility of an aspiring individual. Opposite
to this, a closed system discourages mobility within its rank order. For upward mobility, in both
systems, efforts are made by people. In other words, the members who wish to move up challenge
the persisting system of social stratification and announce their claims on new positions or those
of who have held privileged status and honour in the society. In the open system, by way of
mobility, more difference and differentiation occur, and they are justified by the claimants. Gupta
observes : “In an open system of stratification it is possible to move up by simply obeying the
internal order or rank differentiation.”
If a person acquires qualifications of higher positions in his/her lifetime, he/she can move up
from the presently held lower position in an organization/office/industry.
Mobility is an accepted characteristic of an open system of stratification. Generally, horizontal
mobility occurs in such a system, which does not pose a threat to the ideological/structural basis
of the system. The system remains as such, but the individuals move up or down horizontally.
Mobility is always accomplished individually, rather collectively or on the basis of whole family.
“In an open system of stratification a single variable must be the hierarchy, so that quantitative
differences in this variable can be measured in a rank order.” From zero to hundred, for example,
can be measured in a continuous way. Such a mobility or gradations do not result into categorical
distinctions within the stratification system. A variety of factors, such as occupation, education,
schooling, housing, source of income, may be there in a continuous hierarchy, which are quantifiable
and measurable. L. Warner et al. constructed a composite index and stratified the American

250 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY