differentiation of social life. Social differentiation, social stratification, theories and schools, types

the stratification of society into various, often warring groups on national, property, socio-cultural, religious, political and other grounds that can lead to rivalry and conflicts.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

DIFFERENTIATION SOCIAL

differences between macro- and microgroups, as well as individuals, distinguished for many reasons. Attitude to D.s. constitutes the specifics of different ideologies, political. currents and cultures At one extreme is the attitude towards D.s. as an independent value, a source of social diversity; many social environments, levels gives a person the opportunity to choose, encourages him to be active and at the same time provides complementarity or a constructive contradiction of different ways of life. Hence the dynamism and multivariance of societies. development. In this context, particular attention is paid to individual differences. Recognition of the self-worth of each individual, its uniqueness, and hence the right to their own self-affirmation, to autonomy in a group, community, ethical. sense means high mutual tolerance, wide space for personal sovereignty. In the political In a sense, this means the developed freedom of vertical and horizontal mobility, the special status of a minority, as well as the individual's acceptance of responsibility for his own destiny, for the risk of his own choice. At the opposite pole - the attitude towards D.s. as a vice about-va, a source of injustice and mass conflicts. Called D.s. property and status inequality inevitably leads to exploitation, the class struggle of the oppressed against the oppressors. Therefore, D.s. needs to be overcome, and about-in - in the alignment of any social. differences. The individual in this orientation acts as an element of the whole, his value is determined by his contribution to the whole (organization, common labor). Between both poles, intermediate variants of attitude towards D.s. Grounds for D.s. can refer both to objective signs (economic, professional, educational, demographic, etc.), and to signs of mass and individual consciousness. These grounds do not always coincide. So, certain groups of consciousness - macro- and microgroups - cover different professional, age and other groups (for example, by ideology, cultural predilections). Analysis of D.s. very important for social management. processes. Especially in the transition periods of development about-va. Such an analysis has great importance, for example, to determine the social. bases of reforms, i.e. search of that category of the population, on which this or that reform can be based. Let's say commercialization National economy requires the allocation of the so-called. social-active element of the society as a structural entity, which is the carrier of the innovative principle in the society. In process of development about-va one bases for D.s. may grow (for example, property, ideologies, etc.), while others are able to disappear (class), social. the value of the third is smoothed out (sex), and the variability of the fourth may increase (religious). See also Concepts of social differentiation. Lit .: Prigogine A.I. Perestroika: transitional processes and mechanisms. M., 1990. A.M. Prigogine

Social differentiation is the division of society into groups occupying different social positions. It is customary to distinguish between economic, political and professional differentiation. Economic differentiation is expressed in the difference in incomes, living standards, in the existence of rich, poor and middle strata of the population. The division of society into rulers and ruled, political leaders and the masses is a manifestation of political differentiation. Professional differentiation can be attributed to the allocation in society of various groups according to the nature of their activities, occupations.

social stratification is a system of social inequality, consisting of a set of interconnected and hierarchically organized social strata (strata). This is the process and result of the differentiation of society into various social strata, distinguished by their social status.

The concept of stratification makes it possible to measure the characteristics of people, strata, communities in order to compare them, compare their position in different countries and within one country and determine the degree of social differences between them. For social stratification, the main indicators are social status, prestige, assessment and self-assessment of social status.

Theories:

Types:

Traditionally, four main historical types of stratification systems are distinguished - slavery, castes, estates and classes. The first three characterize closed societies, and the last type - open ones. A closed society is a society where social movements from the lower strata to the higher strata are either completely prohibited or significantly limited.

Accordingly, a society is called open where movement from one stratum to another is not officially restricted in any way.

Slavery- economic, social and legal form of enslavement of people,

bordering on complete lack of rights and an extreme degree of inequality.

Caste- This is a social group (stratum), membership in which a person owes solely to his birth.

estate- a social group that has fixed custom or legal law and inherited rights and obligations.

Class- this is a large social group of people who do not own the means of production, occupying a certain place in the system of social division of labor and characterized by a specific way of generating income.

Table with basic and non-basic types

Social differentiation is an intra-group process that determines the position and status of members of a given community. The social differentiation of society is an attribute inherent in all types of societies. Already in primitive cultures, where there were no differences between people in terms of wealth, there were differences due to the personal qualities of individuals - physical strength, experience, gender. A person could occupy a higher position due to successful hunting and fruit gathering. Individual differences continue to play an important role in modern societies.

According to functionalist theory, in any society, some activities are considered more important than others. This leads to differentiation of both individuals and professional groups. Occupation of activities of different significance for society underlies existing inequalities and, consequently, causes unequal access to such social benefits as money, power, prestige.

Systems of social differentiation differ in the degree of their stability. In relatively stable societies, social differentiation is more or less clearly defined, transparent, and reflects the well-known algorithm of its functioning. In a changing society, social differentiation is diffuse, difficult to predict, the algorithms for its functioning are hidden or not defined.

The behavior of an individual is largely determined by the factor of social inequality, which in society is ranked, stratified according to different systems, grounds or indicators:

social background;

Ethnic background;

Level of education;

Positions;

professional affiliation;

income and wealth;

Lifestyle.

Question 15. Social inequality and social justice. (Interesting).

Social stratification is always associated with social inequality, i.e. unequal access to such social benefits as money, power, prestige, education, etc. Social inequality finds its expression in the inequality of living conditions, in the inequality of opportunities in achieving desired goals and in the inequality of results. In various societies, certain aspects of inequality were regarded as unfair, and therefore requiring elimination or mitigation.

The concept of justice arises in the process of social interaction, the exchange of activities and their results. In the very general view the concept of justice is associated with an understanding of the measure, scale, criteria for correlating the actions of some people with the actions of others. Justice implies retribution: crime must be punished, good deeds rewarded, honors must be deserved, rights correspond to duties.

The concept of justice is close to the concept of equality, since inequality or equality social groups can be regarded as fair and as unfair. And yet, unlike the concept of justice, the concept of equality focuses on the coincidence, sameness, similarity, interchangeability of goals, values, positions, prestige, and the availability of benefits of various social groups. The concrete meaning of the concepts of justice and equality is always changeable and depends on historical circumstances.

In closed societies, where social control is aimed at maintaining the existing social order, where a person is attached to his social stratum and does not have the opportunity to move to other strata, social inequality persists and is constantly reproduced. The ruling social groups of such societies regarded social inequality as the embodiment of a just social order, and therefore any deviation from the established social order must be resolutely suppressed.

However, those who did not agree with this principle of the world order associated the idea of ​​social justice with the destruction of social barriers and the establishment of complete social equality. Complete equality was understood as an equalizing equality, embodied in the principle of "one and the same for everyone." The stronger social inequality, the more egalitarian moods are manifested among its opponents, especially in the sphere of distribution of goods. Attempts to realize full equality in practice have always led to the emergence of a new system of social inequality.

In open societies, social inequality persists, especially at the level of income. A person from a wealthy family has the opportunity to get an education in prestigious educational institutions and move up the social ladder faster than a person from the lower classes. Nevertheless, the mechanism of social mobility that exists in an open society contributes to the mitigation of social inequality, although it does not eliminate it. Social justice is understood as an opportunity to take a prestigious place in the social hierarchy in accordance with personal merits, abilities, diligence, talents, knowledge, and education.

The principle of social justice is interpreted as the principle of "fair inequality", which is expressed in the requirements "equal pay for equal labor"or" freedom for the strong - protection for the weak ". It is from the point of view of social justice that the question is decided in what people are equal and in what they are not. Acting as a measure of the distribution of social benefits, justice serves as the basis for social protection the interests of children, the elderly, the disabled and other social groups who experience difficulties in raising their social status.

In an open society, the demand for equality, understood as the complete equalization of each person with all others in any of the parameters of life, threatens the very existence of a person who can never be identical to everyone else. The motto of an open society is not "equal to all!", but "everyone has the right to achieve a higher status, to have their merits and merits recognized by those around them!". In an open society, social equality means the creation in society of such conditions that would contribute to the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities for every person, every social group. Then this principle is supported by the requirement of legal equality, i.e. equality of all citizens before the law, as well as the requirement of moral equality, i.e. equality of all before moral standards.

Is it possible to overcome social inequality? The answer to this question is related to the understanding of the reasons for the stratification of society. K. Marx believed that the reason for the division of society into classes is private property, which acts as a source of exploitation by the possessing classes of the have-nots. Therefore, it is true that the destruction of private property will lead to the elimination of social inequality. If the Marxist program of the abolition of private property is implemented, social stratification itself must go into oblivion along with social inequality. All people will occupy exactly the same position, and society itself will become one-dimensional, "flat". Relations between social groups in such a society would have to be built on the principle of coordination rather than subordination.

Supporters of the universality of stratification are convinced that the existing system of inequality stimulates people's efforts to achieve a higher status. In addition, giving preference to certain groups, society gains confidence that necessary work will be done well. At the same time, it is important to create mechanisms of social control (norms, laws, rules) that regulate social inequality and do not allow such social tension to arise, which will have destructive consequences for society. In this case, justice acts as a means of mitigating social inequality, harmonizing the interests of social groups, regulating relations between groups and members within them. Thus, social justice, on the one hand, is a factor in the stabilization of the social system, and on the other hand, it is a force that unites people in the fight against inequality.

Question 16. general characteristics social institutions. And question 17. Classification of social institutions. And question 18. Economic institutions and economic relations. And question 19. The family as a social institution, its functions.

A social institution is an organized system of connections and social norms that combines significant social values ​​and procedures that meet the basic needs of society.

The following complexes of institutions in society can be distinguished: 1. economic institutions that perform the functions of production and distribution of goods and services; 2. political institutions that regulate the functions of power and access to it; 3. institutions of kinship related to the family, marriage and the upbringing of children; 4. cultural institutions associated with religion, education, science, etc.

Institutionalization is the process by which social practices become quite regular and long-term.

The activity of the institute is determined by:

· a set of specific social norms and regulations governing the relevant types of behavior;

· its integration into the socio-political, ideological and value structure of society, which makes it possible to legitimize the formal legal basis of the social institution;

availability of material resources and conditions that ensure the performance of functions.

Explicit Functions of Social Institutions

Fixation and reproduction function public relations. Each institution has a system of rules and norms of behavior that fixes, standardizes the behavior of its members and makes this behavior predictable.

The regulatory function is that the functioning of social institutions ensures the regulation of relationships between members of society by developing patterns of behavior.

integrative function. This function includes the processes of cohesion, interdependence and mutual responsibility of members of social groups, occurring under the influence of institutionalized norms, rules, sanctions and systems of roles.

broadcasting function. Society could not develop if it were not possible to transfer social experience.

communicative function. Information produced in an institution should be disseminated both within the institution for the purpose of managing and monitoring compliance with regulations, and in interactions between institutions.

latent functions. Along with the direct results of the actions of social institutions, there are other results that are outside the immediate goals of a person, not planned in advance. These results can be of great importance to society. Thus, the church seeks to consolidate its influence to the greatest extent through ideology, the introduction of faith, and often achieves success in this. However, regardless of the goals of the church, people appear who leave production activities for the sake of religion. Fanatics begin to persecute non-believers, and there may be the possibility of major social conflicts on religious grounds. The family seeks to socialize the child to the accepted norms of family life, however, it sometimes happens that family education leads to a conflict between the individual and the cultural group and serves to protect the interests of certain social strata.

It is possible not to read (The existence of latent functions of the institute was most convexly shown by T. Veblen, who wrote that it would be naive to say that people eat black caviar because they want to satisfy their hunger, and they buy a luxurious Cadillac because they want to buy a good car. It is obvious that these things are not acquired for the sake of satisfying obvious urgent needs. T. Veblen concludes from this that the production of consumer goods performs a hidden, latent function - it satisfies the needs of people to increase their own prestige. Such an understanding of the actions of the institution as the production of consumer goods in radically changes the opinion about its activities, tasks and conditions of functioning.

Thus, it is obvious that only by studying the latent functions of institutions can we determine the true picture of social life. For example, very often sociologists are faced with a phenomenon that is incomprehensible at first glance, when an institution continues to successfully exist, even if it not only does not fulfill its functions, but also interferes with their implementation. Such an institution obviously has hidden functions by which it satisfies the needs of certain social groups. A similar phenomenon can be observed especially often among political institutions, in which latent functions are developed to the greatest extent.

Latent functions, therefore, are the subject that should primarily interest the student of social structures. The difficulty in recognizing them is compensated by the creation of a reliable picture of social connections and features of social objects, as well as the ability to control their development and to manage the social processes taking place in them.)

Economic institutions. The economy as a subsystem of society is itself a social institution, but in this important area public life one can also name a number of social institutions through which the economic life of society is organized: the market, property, money, entrepreneurship, labor, the stock exchange, etc. A feature of the economic institutions of society is their huge impact on all spheres of human life. The economy as a social institution is not only responsible for the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods and services necessary for the life of people, it also affects social relations, the activity of social groups and the social stratification of society. In fact, the position of various social groups in society is determined by the system of economic relations, although other social institutions also play a role in the configuration of the social structure of society.

a family is a small social group, which is characterized by certain intra-group processes and phenomena.

The main functions of the family:

1. Reproductive
2. Household
3. Economic
4. Spiritual
5. Communicative
6. Leisure (recreational)

(Even by E. Durkheim, it was statistically shown that single, widowed or divorced people are more likely to commit suicide than married people, and married but not having children more often than having children. The percentage of suicides is lower, the more united the family is. About 30% of intentional homicides are murders by one family member of another family member.)

In relation to modern society in sociology, three main classes are usually distinguished - the highest, the middle and the lowest. At the same time, the distribution of the population by these levels occurs on the basis of multiple criteria, where property, prestige, power, and education are among the basic factors. The significance of each of the bases of stratification, as a rule, is determined by the values ​​and norms prevailing in society, social institutions and ideological attitudes (for example, if freedom is highly valued in modern Western society, then, accordingly, what it provides, i.e. e. material independence, high income, etc.).

However, in reality there can be much more layers than these three, which are conditionally distinguished as the main ones. Each of them, in turn, can be stratified into many subclasses and subgroups.

Indicative in this regard is the stratification model of the American sociologist W. Warner, widely known in sociological science since the 1930s, in which he identifies six main strata, or classes, in relation to American society:

• 1. The upper upper class - rich people with noble origins, major politicians. These are "aristocrats by blood", with a special way of life, impeccable taste and behavior.
• 2. The lower upper class - people of high income - owners of big capital (the new rich), military leaders, professors, as well as outstanding athletes, movie or pop stars who receive large fees.
• 3. The upper middle class - highly educated people engaged in scientific or prestigious work: prominent lawyers, doctors, actors or television commentators, university professors. They are called "golden collars".
• 4. The lower middle class - the so-called "white collars" - is the largest stratum of an industrialized society: office workers, medium-paid professionals, managers, teachers, middle-level teachers and even highly skilled workers.
• 5. The upper lower class - mainly the so-called "blue collar" - medium and low-skilled workers employed in mass production, at local factories. They live in relative prosperity, but are poorly educated, have passive leisure and primitive entertainment, use profanity and often drink excessively.
• 6. The lower lower class - the unemployed or those who are interrupted by casual, temporary work, the lumpenized sections of the population: the inhabitants of slums, basements, attics.

Returning to the three levels of the position of the population in society identified by most sociologists, it should be noted that their characteristics in the bulk coincide. Thus, the upper class (or elite) is always small in number and concentrates material, financial and political resources in its hands. The opposite position is occupied by the lower layer. If the bulk of the population is in this position, this means that in such a society there is a high level of social inequality.

In countries with a developed market economy (for example, the countries of Western Europe, the USA, Japan), the model of the social structure of society, according to experts, looks like a rhombus (“lemon”, “egg”): with a developed central part (middle layers), relatively small poles of the upper class (elite) and groups of the poorest strata. Approximately 60-80% of the population belongs to the middle class (Fig. 2.).

Rice. 2.

Rice. 3.

The social structure of many Eastern European countries is characterized by the figure of a pyramid pressed to the ground, where the majority of the population (80%) is “pressed” down, the rich make up its top (3-5%), and the middle class is extremely small (about 15%).

A similar picture is emerging in the countries of the former USSR zone. As the analysis of the largest CIS economies of the post-Soviet space - Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan - showed, the vast majority of the population in these countries belongs to the category of the most needy and low-income strata, and medium- and high-income citizens either constitute a minority or are statistically absent (such a conclusion sociologists and statisticians do on the basis of the analysis of national reports on incomes and living wages) (Fig. 3.).

A similar pyramidal model is seen by specialists in relation to developing countries, for example, the Latin American model of social structure resembles the Eiffel Tower, where the wide base is represented by the poorest layers, the elongated middle part - by the middle layers and the top - by the elite.

As the experience of developed countries shows, inequality in the distribution of income decreases over time.

According to the hypothesis of the American sociologist G. Lenski, the level of social inequality decreases due to social development. The eras of slavery and feudalism were characterized by deep inequality. Lenski saw a lesser degree of inequality in relation to an industrial society, which he explained by a lower concentration of power among managers, the presence of democratic governments, the struggle for influence between trade unions and entrepreneurs, a high level of social mobility and a developed social security system that raises the living standards of the poor to certain, quite acceptable standards.

How is social inequality measured? In world practice, there are various units for measuring social inequality: Gini inequality coefficient, Theil index, decile income inequality coefficient and others. Among them, it is widely used decile income inequality ratio(or income differentiation coefficient), which characterizes the degree of stratification of society and shows the ratio of the average income level of the richest 10% of citizens to the average income level of the poorest 10%. The higher the value of the DCND, the higher the level of inequality in society.

For 2010, the value of DKND was: in the Scandinavian countries -1:3-5, in the European Union - 1:5-8, in Japan and North Africa - 1:6, in the USA - 1:10-15, in Latin America - 1:30, in Africa -1:50.

In Russia, according to the data given in the journal Voprosy statistiki for 2002, since 1991 in the Russian Federation, DKND has regularly increased to 19 and even to 25 (with a norm of up to 10!). Today, according to the official data of the State Statistics Committee, the DNPC in Russia is 1:14-15, and, according to a number of sociologists, it is 1:30-40. For comparison: in the USSR, this indicator was in the range from 3.5 to 4.5; in tsarist Russia, according to approximate estimates, DKND reached 25-30.

The rule, when DC reaches 10, then conditions for social unrest are created in the country, does not apply in the USA - there this level of differentiation is considered normal in accordance with the prevailing liberal values ​​among most Americans.

Who is considered poor? In world, including Russian, scientific practice, the definition of poverty is characterized by its ambiguity. It is understood as a certain level of income, and low monetary income, and the absence of other economic resources, and the inability to maintain perceived as "normal" lifestyle standards. In the most general sense poverty is a characteristic of the economic situation of an individual or social group, in which they are unable to satisfy a certain range of their minimum needs for existence. At the same time, poverty is a relative concept and depends on common standard standard of living in this society.

In the West, poverty is most often measured on the basis of the subsistence minimum, which sets the poverty line - the level of average per capita income. In this case, the poverty line is set through the ability to meet basic material needs, for which it is necessary to choose the minimum amount of necessary goods, and then determine their cost.

In the European Union, on the one hand, those citizens are considered poor whose income (including social benefits) is less than 60% of the salary in the country of residence. On the other hand, poverty in Europe is defined not by the level of income, but by the availability of material goods. Eurostat (European Statistical Agency) distinguishes 9 types of material goods: the ability to eat meat (poultry, fish) at least every other day, the presence of a car, washing machine, TV, phone, the possibility of at least a week's vacation away from home, the ability to pay unforeseen expenses (t .e. the availability of savings), the ability to maintain the required temperature in your home, etc. If at least 3 of these material goods are absent, then the family should be considered poor.

In the US, the poverty standard is calculated from the subsistence minimum multiplied by a factor of 2.5, and is approx. 1 thousand $ per month. At the same time, the subsistence minimum is the cost of a set of material goods and services that provide the minimum allowable level of personal consumption.

On this basis, two main concepts have developed and are used in world practice in the approach to determining the level of poverty: the concept of absolute poverty as the absence of income necessary to meet the minimum living needs of an individual or family, and the concept of relative poverty as the ratio of the incomes of the lowest strata of society to all the rest. . With this approach, in some countries, those whose income does not exceed 50% (40% or 60%) of the average income in the country are considered poor. However, neither concept is applied in its pure form in practice.

By international standards poverty is not calculated from the subsistence level, but from the so-called median income (if we take the entire population and distribute it by income level, then where the 50 and 51 percent will pass, and the median network). If people have an income below this level, then they cannot maintain the standard of living that is considered generally accepted.

Another way to define poverty is to analyze the share of family income spent on food. The poorer the individual, the greater part of the income is spent on food, and vice versa. The rich pay only 5-7% of their income for food.

This principle is based on Engel's law, derived back in Ser. XIX century, according to which, the lower the income, the greater the share of the expenditure should be intended for food. With the growth of family income, absolute expenditures on food increase, but in relation to all family expenditures they decrease, and the share of expenditures on clothing, heating and lighting changes insignificantly, and the share of expenditures on satisfying cultural needs rises sharply.

Later, other laws of consumption were found: Schwabe's law (1868) - the poorer the family, the higher the share of housing costs; Wright's law (1875) - the higher the income, the higher the level of savings and their share in spending.

There is a practice of measuring poverty by the standard of living - if it is low, then it is considered that its representatives belong to the poor. However, it is rather problematic to measure poverty by the standard of living, since it does not always coincide with income.

For example, you can take two people, one of whom earns 14,000 rubles, and the other - 7,000. One has more income, but his mother is sick and the child is finishing school. The second has a working wife and no children, which are a lot of unaccounted for expenses.

There are other characteristics of poverty as well, such as accelerated deterioration. This is when incomes seem to grow (for example, a pension increases, an additional allowance is paid), but at the same time their growth does not ensure the restoration of existing property left over from ancient times. The result is a situation where there is a little more money, but life is getting worse.

In other cases, it is believed that the poor and the rich differ in the degree to which they satisfy their needs for cultural and household goods, especially more expensive ones that are not purchased very often.

In households with an income 3 times more than a certain basic level, there are 1.5 times more items of the group of cultural and household purposes. According to budget surveys, low-income groups have 1.5 times fewer refrigerators, 3 times fewer tape recorders, 9 times fewer cameras, and 12 fewer vacuum cleaners than high-income groups. The level of per capita consumer spending of low-income households amounted to approximately 30% of their value in high-income households [Dobrenko V.I., Kravchenko A.I. Sociology, T. 2.).

Despite the complexity of defining poverty, it should be remembered that this will have its own specifics depending on a particular society, on the standards of life adopted there, and on the range of needs, the satisfaction of which is recognized as socially necessary.

Modern concepts of social stratification.

Certain differences in the social status of people took place in the early stages of the development of the human community, but this was based not on social, but natural (natural) differentiation- natural physical-genetic and demographic differences between people. The social status of a person was determined by gender, age, the presence of certain physical and personal qualities.

However, the decisive moments that determine the actual structure of society are factors associated not with natural physical, genetic and demographic differences between people, but with the phenomena of social differentiation.

Social differentiation– product more high level development of civilization. This complex phenomenon is no longer generated by natural (natural), but by social factors of life and, above all, by the objective need of society for the division of labor.

Differentiation of activities is manifested in the form of social differences between groups of people according to the nature of their labor activity and functions, and consequently, by lifestyle, interests and needs.

Social differentiation is often referred to as "horizontal differentiation". The parameters that describe horizontal differentiation are called "nominal parameters", in contrast to the "rank parameters" used to characterize people in a hierarchical way. Hierarchy (from the Greek hierarchia - literally sacred power) is a form of building complex social systems based on subordination and subordination, when social groups are, as it were, “higher” or “lower” on the social ladder.

Nominal differences are established in society in the process of natural differences between people and as an element of the social division of labor. Based on these differences between people in society, it is impossible to determine which of them occupies a “higher” and who is “lower” place in the social structure (example: you cannot put a man above a woman just because he is a man, just like people of different nationalities).

Horizontal differentiation cannot give a complete picture of the social structuring of society. In full, the social structure of society can be described only in two planes - horizontal and vertical.

Vertical structuring arises as a result of the unequal distribution of the results of the social division of labor among people. Where the structural differentiation of groups takes on a hierarchical character, determined on the basis of rank parameters, one speaks of social stratification.

Based on the above remarks, we can say that social stratification means a form of differentiation of society that takes the form of a social hierarchy - the vertical differentiation of the population into groups and strata unequal in their social status. It is a hierarchically organized structure of social inequality.

American sociologist P. Blau developed a system of parameters that describe the position of an individual in society in the vertical and horizontal planes.

Nominal parameters: gender, race, ethnicity, religion, place of residence, area of ​​activity, political orientation, language.

Rank parameters: education, income, wealth, prestige, power, origin, age, administrative position, intelligence.

With the help of nominal parameters, the adjacent positions of individuals are studied; on the basis of rank parameters, a hierarchical or status structure is described.

At the present stage of research in the field of social stratification, a number of new paradigms have emerged. For decades after the Second World War, the main conceptual model of Western sociology was class theory. K. Marx and its modifications. This was due to the existence of a number of societies that built their organization on the basis of Marxist ideas. The failure of the socialist experiment on a global scale led to the loss of popularity of neo-Marxism in sociology and the massive turn of researchers to other ideas, such as theories M. Foucault and N. Luman.

N. Luhmann considers the very concept of social inequality as the result of an outdated discursive model of sociological thinking. In his opinion, social differences in modern Western society are not decreasing, but increasing, and there is no reason to expect that inequality will ever be eliminated. The negative meaning of the concept of inequality stems from the evaluative-discursive nature of the concept of social stratification. According to N. Luhmann, one should change the paradigm and consider society not as stratified, but as differentiated, that is, use the concept of functional differentiation instead of the concept of stratification. Differentiation- a value-neutral concept, meaning only that in society there are internal divisions, boundaries that it itself produces and maintains.

In addition, the class concept of stratification began to be increasingly criticized due to the emergence of other aspects of inequality - gender, racial, ethnic. Marxist theory considered all these aspects as derivatives of class inequality, arguing that with its elimination they would disappear by themselves. However, for example, feminists have shown that social inequality of the sexes existed long before the emergence of classes and persisted in Soviet society. Sociologists who study these aspects of inequality argue that they cannot be reduced to classes: they exist as autonomous forms of social relations.

Recognition of the fact that different types social inequality cannot be explained with the help of a unified monistic theory, leads to the realization of the complexity of the real phenomenon of inequality and the establishment of a new paradigm in sociology - the postmodern paradigm.

American sociologist L. Warner proposed his hypothesis of social stratification. As the defining features of the group, he singled out four parameters: income, prestige of the profession, education, ethnicity. Based on these characteristics, he divided the ruling elite into six groups: the highest, the highest intermediate, the middle-highest, the middle-intermediate, the intermediate-highest, the intermediate-intermediate.

Another American sociologist B. Barber conducted a stratification according to six indicators: 1) prestige, profession, power and might; 2) income level; 3) level of education; 4) degree of religiosity; 5) the situation of relatives; 6) ethnicity.

French sociologist A. Touraine considers that all these criteria are already outdated and proposes to define groups on access to information. The dominant position, in his opinion, is occupied by those people who have access to the greatest amount of information.

Postmodern sociology in contrast to previous concepts, he argues that social reality is complex and pluralistic. It considers society as a set of separate social groups that have their own lifestyles, their own culture and behaviors, and new social movements– as a real reflection of the changes taking place in these groups. In addition, she suggests that any unified theory of social inequality is more a kind of modern myth, something like a “great narrative”, than a real description of a complex and multifaceted social reality that is not subject to causal explanation. Therefore, in its context, social analysis takes a more modest form, refraining from too broad generalizations and focusing on specific fragments of social reality. Conceptual constructs based on the most general categories such as "classes" or "sex" give way to concepts like "difference", "divergence" and "fragmentation". For example, representatives of poststructuralism D. Harway and D. Riley It is believed that the use of the category “women” indicates a simplified binary understanding of gender stratification and veils its real complexity. Note that the concept of fragmentation is not new. The recognition of the fact that classes have internal divisions goes back to the era of K. Marx and M. Weber. However, interest in studying the nature of fragmentation has now intensified, as it has become clear that it takes a variety of forms. There are four types of fragmentation:

1) internal fragmentation - intraclass divisions;

2) extrinsic fragmentation that arises from the interplay of different dynamics of difference, for example, when the gender practices of men and women differ according to their age, ethnicity and class;

3) fragmentation that grows out of processes of social change, for example, caused by the feminization of modern labor relations, when there is a polarization between young women who have education and career prospects, and older women with less high qualifications who do not have such prospects and are still engaged in low-paid simple labor;

4) fragmentation, which entails the growth of individualism, tearing a person out of the usual group and family environment, prompting him to greater mobility and a sharp change in lifestyle compared to his parents.

Fragmentation involves interactions between different dimensions of inequality. Many individuals exist, as it were, at the intersection of social dynamics - class, gender, ethnic, age, regional, etc. At the same time, they say that such individuals are multi-positional, which opens up scope for many ways of social identification. That is why, he claims F. Bradley, it is impossible to develop such an abstract general theory of inequality.

Another interesting concept related to the phenomenon of fragmentation is based on the concept of "hybridity". Under hybridity here we mean an intermediate state between different social loci. To understand what this is, let's look at an example that gives D. Harway. A social hybrid is a kind of cyborg, devoid of gender differences due to the fact that it is a half-mechanism-semi-organism. The concept of social hybridity can be very fruitful in the study of classes. It seems to challenge the tradition of class analysis, which consists in firmly anchoring individuals in social structures. In reality in modern society only a few feel their absolute identification with some particular class. Changes in the economy, rising unemployment and the expansion of the mass education system led to a high degree of social mobility. People very often change their class localization and end their lives not belonging to the class to which they belonged from birth. All such situations can be considered as manifestations of social hybridity.