Pitirim Alexandrovich Sorokin was born in the Russian outback - in the village of Turya, Arensky district of the Vologda province on January 21, 1889, in the family of a craftsman Alexander Prokopyevich Sorokin, a master of church restoration work. Already in the senior classes of the Khrenovskaya church teacher's school, he became interested in illegal Socialist-Revolutionary literature, and in 1906 he was arrested for the first time for illegal activities. In 1909, he entered the St. Petersburg Psychoneurological Institute at the Department of Sociology, and in 1910 he transferred to the University at the Faculty of Law, publishing a series of articles in various journals. And in 1914, his first monographic work, Crime and Punishment, Feat and Reward, was published. After graduating from the university, Sorokin was invited to the Department of Criminal Law and Litigation of the University to prepare for a professorship. In January 1917 he received the title of Privatdozent of St. Petersburg University. After the February Revolution, he was the personal secretary of A.F. Kerensky. In 1916, at his suggestion, the Russian Sociological Society named after I. MM. Kovalevsky".
During 917, he wrote a series of articles: "The autonomy of nationalities and the unity of the state", "Forms of government", "Problems of social equality", "Fundamentals of the future world", "Problems of war and the path to peace", "What is a monarchy and what is Republic”, “The Essence of Socialism”, etc. In November 1917 he was elected a deputy of the constituent assembly, and on January 2, 1918 he was arrested by the Bolshevik government for his deputyship.
In 1920 P.A. Sorokin was elected head of the Department of Sociology at Petrograd University and in the same year he published a two-volume monograph "The System of Sociology", and in 1922 he submitted the book "Hunger as a Factor", the set of which was destroyed at the direction of N.I. Bukharin. And in September 1922, among the army of thousands of Russian intelligentsia, he was expelled from the country by the communist government. First in Europe, and then in the USA (Harvard University), he writes his fundamental socio-economic works, which have received worldwide recognition. In 1960, he published his theory of convergence, "The Mutual Rapprochement of the USA and the USSR to a Mixed Socio-Cultural Type", which predicted future events quite accurately. He passed away on February 11, 1968.
Let us briefly consider the main ideas of the theory of stratification by P.A. Sorokin.
SOCIAL STRATIFICATION Concepts and definitions
Social stratification is the differentiation of a given set of people (population) into classes in a hierarchical rank. It finds expression in the existence of higher and lower strata. Its basis and essence lies in the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and obligations, the presence or absence of social values, power and influence among members of a particular community. Specific forms of social stratification are varied and numerous. If the economic status of members of a society is not the same, if there are both haves and have-nots among them, then such a society is characterized by the presence of economic stratification, regardless of whether it is organized on communist or capitalist principles, whether it is constitutionally defined as a "society of equals" or not . No labels, signs, oral statements are able to change or obscure the reality of the fact of economic inequality, which is expressed in the difference in incomes, living standards, in the existence of rich and poor segments of the population1. If within a group there are hierarchically different ranks in terms of authority and prestige, titles and honors, or there are rulers and ruled, then regardless of the terms (monarchs, bureaucrats, masters, bosses) this means that such a group is politically differentiated, that whatever it proclaims in its constitution or declaration. If members of a society are divided into different groups according to the nature of their activities, occupations, however, some professions are considered more prestigious in comparison with others, or in one professional group, workers are divided into leaders of various ranks and subordinates, then such a group is professionally differentiated regardless of whether superiors are elected or appointed, whether their leadership positions are inherited or due to their personal qualities.
The specific aspects of social stratification are numerous. However, all their diversity can be reduced to three main forms: economic, political and professional stratification. As a rule, they are all closely intertwined. People who belong to the highest stratum in one respect usually belong to the same stratum in other respects, and vice versa. Representatives of the highest economic strata simultaneously belong to the highest political and professional strata. The poor, as a rule, are disenfranchised and are in the lower strata of the professional hierarchy. This is the general rule, although there are many exceptions. So, for example, the richest are not always at the top of the political or professional pyramid, nor in all cases are the poor at the lowest places in the political and professional hierarchy. And this means that the interdependence of the three forms of social stratification is far from perfect, because the various layers of each of the forms do not completely coincide with each other. Rather, they coincide with each other, but only partially, that is, to a certain extent.
A family, a church, a sect, a political party, a faction, a business organization, a gang of robbers, a trade union, a learned society - in short, any organizational social group is stratified due to its permanence and organization. Even groups of zealous equalizers consistently fail to create an unstratified group. All this testifies to the danger and inevitability of stratification in any organized group. This remark may seem somewhat strange to many people who, under the influence of grandiloquent phraseology, may believe that at least the societies of the egalitarians themselves are not stratified. This opinion, like many similar ones, is erroneous. Attempts to destroy social feudalism were successful in terms of softening some differences and in changing specific forms of stratification. They have never succeeded in destroying stratification itself. The regularity with which all these attempts failed proves once again the natural character of stratification. Christianity began its history with an attempt to create a society of equals, but very soon it already had a complex hierarchy, and at the end of its path it erected a huge pyramid with numerous ranks and titles, from the almighty pope to the outlaw heretic. The institute of monasticism was organized by St. Francis of Assisi on the principles of absolute equality; seven years have passed and equality has evaporated. Without exception, all the attempts of the most zealous equalizers in the history of mankind have met with the same fate. The failure of Russian communism is just one more example in a long series of similar experiments carried out on a larger or smaller scale, sometimes peacefully, as in many religious sects, and sometimes violently, as in the social revolutions of the past and present. And if, for a moment, some forms of stratification are destroyed, then they reappear in an old or modified form and are often created by the hands of the equalizers themselves.
Real democracies, socialist, communist, syndicalist and other organizations, with their slogan of "equality", are no exception to the rule. This has been shown above for democracies. The internal organization of various socialist and related groups claiming "equality" shows that perhaps no other organization creates such a cumbersome hierarchy and "bossism" as exists in these groups. Socialist leaders treat the masses as a passive tool in their hands, as a series of zeros, intended only to increase the significance of the figure on the left, writes E. Fournier (one of the socialists). If there is some exaggeration in this statement, it is insignificant. At least the best and most competent researchers are unanimous in their conclusions about the enormous development of the oligarchy and stratification within all such groups.
The enormous potential desire for inequality in numerous egalitarians becomes immediately noticeable as soon as they reach for power. In such cases, they often show more cruelty and contempt for the masses than former kings and rulers. This was regularly repeated in the course of victorious revolutions, when egalitarians became dictators. The classic description of such situations by Plato and Aristotle, based on social upheavals in Ancient Greece, can be literally applied to all historical incidents, including the experience of the Bolsheviks.
To summarize: social stratification is a constant characteristic of any organized society. "Varying in form, social stratification existed in all societies that proclaimed the equality of people." Feudalism and oligarchy continue to exist in science and art, politics and management, a gang of criminals and egalitarian democracies - in a word, everywhere.
This, however, does not mean that social stratification is qualitatively and quantitatively the same in all societies and at all times. According to its specific forms, disadvantages and advantages, it is different. Social stratification is characterized by qualitative and quantitative differences. The quantitative aspect of social stratification is manifested in its three forms: economic, political and professional.
P.A. Sorokin introduced the concepts of the height and profile of social stratification and the height and profile of the entire "social building". What is its height? What is the distance from the base to the top of the "social cone"? Are the slopes steep or gentle? All these questions relate to the quantitative analysis of social stratification, so to speak, to the face of the architecture of a social building. Its internal structure, its wholeness, subject qualitative analysis. First, one should examine the height and profile of the social pyramid, and then analyze the internal organization from the point of view of social stratification. The theory of social stratification P.A. Sorokin provides a powerful methodological tool strategic management both for the analysis of the external environment in a strategic perspective, and for the analysis of the internal patterns of development of corporations.
More on the topic Theory of social stratification P.A. Sorokin (1920) as a strategic vision of socio-economic systems:
- General characteristics of the system of social protection of citizens and social standards Main socio-economic factors that determine the system of social protection
FEDERAL AGENCY FOR EDUCATION
State educational institution of higher professional education
IZHEVSK STATE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
FACULTY "Management and Marketing"
Department of Finance and Credit
ABSTRACT ON SOCIOLOGY
Off topic: “The concept of social stratification by P. Sorokin”
Completed by: student of group 2-52-2 Rassamakhna A.S.
Checked: teacher Pecherskikh S.P.
Izhevsk, 2011
Introduction ……………………………………………………………….……3
Social stratification……………………….………………………. 4
Economic stratification ……………………………………..……..5
Political stratification.………………………………………….…….6
Occupational stratification ………………………………….…….8
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………20
References………………………………………………………...21
INTRODUCTION
Social stratification, according to the Big Encyclopedic Dictionary (BES), defines a sociological concept that denotes: the structure of society and its individual layers; a system of signs of social differentiation; branch of sociology.
In modern sociology, there are many concepts of the social structure of society, the range of which expands over time.
In theories of social stratification, based on such characteristics as education, living conditions, occupation, income, psychology, religion, etc., society is divided into "higher", "middle" and "lower" classes and strata.
P.A. Sorokin is a prominent sociologist of the 20th century, who made a huge contribution to the development of both Russian and American sociology. His works contain valuable material that underlies the modern science of society.
P.A. Sorokin is one of the founders of the modern sociological theory of social stratification, which is why a thorough analysis of the main provisions of his theory in the light of his scientific views and historical reality is so important.
The relevance and significance of the topic of this work is explained by the fact that any society is differentiated both horizontally and vertically. Horizontal differentiation is due to the natural-historical distribution of types and spheres of human activity (agriculture, cattle breeding, handicraft; workers in the mining and manufacturing industries and their subdivisions) and the technical division of labor (performers of various types of labor and labor functions).
SOCIAL STRATIFICATION
“Social stratification is the differentiation of a certain set of people (population) into classes in a hierarchical rank”, expressed in the existence of higher and lower strata, uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and obligations, the presence and absence of social values, power and influence among members of that or another community. So or something like this, P. Sorokin thought of social stratification - the man who was the first in the world to give a complete theoretical explanation of this phenomenon, and who confirmed his theory with the help of a huge empirical material.
There are numerous forms of stratification, but it is worth highlighting 3 main ones:
Economic
Political
professional
Of course, they are all closely intertwined and interconnected.
ECONOMIC STRATIFICATION
Economic stratification, according to P. Sorokin, contains two main types of fluctuations: the first refers to the economic rise or fall of the group, the second - to the growth or reduction of stratification within the group. The question of whether a group rises to a higher economic level or falls can be decided in general terms on the basis of fluctuations in per capita national income and wealth measured in monetary units. Based on these data, P. Sorokin believes, it is possible to compare the economic status of different groups.
Any society, moving from a primitive to a more developed state, finds an increase in economic inequality, which is expressed in changes in the height and profile of the economic pyramid of society. At the same time, under normal social conditions, the economic cone of a developed society fluctuates within certain limits. Its shape is relatively constant. In extreme circumstances (for example, a revolution), these limits can be violated, and the profile of economic stratification can become, according to P. Sorokin, either very flat or very convex and high. In both cases, this situation is short-lived. And if the economically "flat society" does not perish, then the "flatness" is quickly replaced by increased economic stratification. If economic inequality becomes too strong and reaches a point of overstrain, then the top of society is destined to collapse or be overthrown. Thus, P. Sorokin postulates, in any society at any time there is a struggle between the forces of stratification and leveling. The former work constantly and steadily, the latter - spontaneously, impulsively, using violent methods. In other words, there are cycles in which increasing economic inequality is replaced by its weakening.
POLITICAL STRATIFICATION
Political stratification, according to P. Sorokin, is also subject to periodic fluctuations under the influence of various factors. Among their huge number, the scientist identifies two main ones, most significantly, in his opinion, influencing political stratification: the size of a political organization; biological (race, gender, age), psychological (intellectual, volitional, emotional) and social (economic, cultural, political) homogeneity or heterogeneity of its members. At the same time, P. Sorokin revealed the following patterns.
1. Under general equal conditions, when the size of a political organization increases, i.e., the number of its members increases, political stratification also increases, and vice versa. For example, a larger population dictates the need to create a more developed and large administrative apparatus, and an increase in managerial personnel leads to its hierarchization and stratification.
2. When the heterogeneity of the members of the organization increases, stratification also increases, and vice versa, since an increase in the heterogeneity of the population leads to an increase in political inequality. For example, the size and heterogeneity of such European political organisms as Switzerland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, Bulgaria, Hungary and some others are small, therefore their political stratification is much less than that of larger political organisms such as the British Empire, Germany , France, Russia.
3. When both of the above factors work in the same direction, then the stratification changes even more, and vice versa. When one or both factors suddenly object (for example, in the case of military conquest or the voluntary amalgamation of several previously independent political organizations), then political stratification is greatly enhanced. With an increase in the role of one factor and a decrease in the role of another, they restrain the mutual influence on the fluctuation of political stratification.
4. The forces of political alignment act simultaneously with the forces of political stratification and cyclically (as in economic stratification). Sometimes in one place the forces of alignment prevail, in another they stratify. At the same time, any strengthening of equalizing factors causes an increase in counteraction from opposing forces. Thus, society in the first period of the social revolution often resembles a flat trapezium in shape, without the upper echelons of power and their hierarchy. However, this situation is extremely unstable, and after a short period of time, an old or new hierarchy of groups is established. Thus, a too flat profile is only a transitional political state of society. If the stratification becomes too high and prominent, its upper layers are sooner or later cut off by revolution, war, the introduction of new laws, etc. By these methods, the political organism returns to a state of equilibrium when the shape of the social cone is either very flat or very high.
5. There is no constant trend of transition from monarchy to republic, from autocracy to democracy, from minority rule to majority rule, and vice versa. Rather, there is a periodicity of political fluctuations, cyclicality in changes in political regimes (different authors point to the existence of such cycles lasting 15-16, 30-33, 100, 125.300, 500.700 and 1200 years). At the same time, the profile of political stratification is more mobile and fluctuates within wider limits, more often and more impulsively than the profile of economic stratification.
PROFESSIONAL STRATIFICATION
The existence of occupational stratification is established from two main groups of facts. It is obvious that certain occupational classes have always constituted the upper social strata, while other occupational groups have always been at the bottom of the social cone. The most important occupational classes do not lie horizontally, that is, on the same social level, but, so to speak, overlap each other. Secondly, the phenomenon of professional stratification is also found within each professional sphere. Whether we take the field of agriculture or industry, trade or management, or any other professions, people employed in these areas are stratified into many ranks and levels: from the upper ranks, which exercise control, to the lower ranks, which are controlled and which are subordinate to their "bosses" in a hierarchy. ", "directors", "authorities", "managers", "bosses", etc. Professional stratification, therefore, manifests itself in these two main forms: 1) in the form of a hierarchy of main professional groups (interprofessional stratification) and 2) in the form of stratification within each professional class (intraprofessional stratification).
The existence of interprofessional stratification manifested itself in different ways in the past and makes itself felt ambiguously now. In the bush society, it was expressed in the existence of lower and higher castes. According to the classical theory of caste hierarchy, caste-professional groups overlap rather than sit side by side on the same level.
There are four castes in India - Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras. Among them, each preceding one surpasses the next one in origin and status. The legitimate occupations of the Brahmins are education, teaching, performing sacrifices, performing worship, charity, inheritance and harvesting in the fields. The occupations of the kshatriyas are the same, with the exception of teaching and performing worship, and, perhaps, collecting donations. They are also assigned managerial functions and military duties. The legitimate occupations of the Vaisyas are the same as those of the Kshatriyas, with the exception of managerial and military duties. They are distinguished by agriculture, livestock breeding and trade. To serve all three castes is prescribed to the sudra. The higher the caste he serves, the higher his social dignity.
The actual number of castes in India is much higher. And therefore the professional hierarchy between them is extremely essential. In ancient Rome, among the eight guilds, the first three played a significant political role and were of paramount importance from a social point of view, and therefore were hierarchically higher than all the others. Their members made up the first two social classes. This stratification of professional corporations continued in a modified form throughout the history of Rome.
Concepts social stratification P.A. Sorokin
Test work >> SociologySociology: " Concepts social stratification P.A. Sorokin" Completed by Vologda 2010 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 1. SOCIAL STRATIFICATION 4 2. BASIC FORMS SOCIAL STRATIFICATION AND RELATIONSHIPS...
Social stratification P. Sorokin
Abstract >> Sociology... "Social stratification P. Sorokin" Ryazan, 2010 Contents Introduction 1. Brief biography of P. Sorokin 2. Basic shapes stratification and... least integrated cultural and social systems. At the heart of the idealistic concepts Sorokin- the idea of priority...
Social structure and social stratification society (2)
Abstract >> SociologyMethodological approaches to analysis social stratification. In sociology, there are many concepts social stratification society. A). Marxist... 1927 P. Sorokin. According to Sorokin, there are two types social mobility vertical and...
Federal Agency for Education of the Russian Federation
Ryazan State Radiotechnical University
in sociology on the topic:
"Social stratification of P. Sorokin"
Ryazan, 2010
Introduction
3. Systems of social stratification
Conclusion
Introduction
Human society at all stages of its development was characterized by inequality. Structured inequalities between different groups of people sociologists call stratification.
For a more precise definition of this concept, we can cite the words of Pitirim Sorokin: “Social stratification is the differentiation of a given set of people (population) into classes in a hierarchical rank. It finds expression in the existence of higher and lower strata. Its basis and essence is in the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, the presence and absence of social values, power and influence among the members of a particular community.Specific forms of social stratification are diverse and numerous.However, all their diversity can be reduced to three main forms: economic, political and professional stratification. As a rule, they are all closely intertwined.
"Social stratification is a constant characteristic of any organized society."
"Social stratification begins with Weber's distinction between more traditional societies based on status (for example, societies based on prescribed categories such as class and caste, slavery, whereby inequality is sanctioned by law) and polarized, but more diffuse societies, based on basically classes (which is typical of the modern West), where personal achievement plays a big role, where economic differentiation is of paramount importance and is more impersonal.
The study of social stratification has a long history dating back to the middle of the 19th century. (works by Karl Marx and John Stuart Mill), which includes a serious contribution of researchers of the early twentieth century. - from V. Pareto (who proposed the theory of "elite circulation") to P. Sorokin.
Pitirim Alexandrovich Sorokin (1889 - 1968), one of the largest representatives of social thought of the 20th century, was one of the founders of the theory of social stratification of society. Social stratification, according to the views of P.A. Sorokin is a constant characteristic of any organized society. Changing in form, social stratification existed, as this most prominent sociologist believed, in all societies that proclaimed the equality of people. Feudalism and oligarchy, according to his views, continue to exist in science and art, politics and management, among criminals and in democracies - everywhere.
For Sorokin, as for many researchers before and after him, the ahistorical dynamism of social stratification is obvious. The outline and height of economic, political or professional stratification are timeless characteristics and normative features of stratification. Their temporal fluctuations do not carry a unidirectional movement either in the direction of increasing social distance, or in the direction of its reduction.
Thus, P.A. Sorokin is one of the founders of the modern sociological theory of social stratification, which is why a thorough analysis of the main provisions of his theory is so important in the light of his scientific views and historical reality, of which he was a participant.
1. Brief biography of P. Sorokin
Sorokin Pitirim Alexandrovich (1889-1968) - American sociologist and culturologist. Born on January 23 (February 4), 1889 in the village of Turya, Yarensky district of the Vologda province of the Russian Empire (Komi Territory), in the family of a rural craftsman. He graduated from the law faculty of St. Petersburg University (1914), and was left at the university to prepare for a professorship (since January 1917 - Privatdozent). In 1906-1918, a member of the Socialist Revolutionary Party (Socialist-Revolutionaries), before the February Revolution, he participated in the Socialist-Revolutionary agitation, was arrested. After the February Revolution, deputy of the 1st All-Russian Congress of Peasants' Deputies, secretary (together with a friend of his youth N.D. Kondratiev) of the head of the Provisional Government A.F. Kerensky, Member of the Pre-Parliament. After the October Revolution in 1917-1918, he participated in anti-Bolshevik organizations; conducts agitation against the new government, is arrested. At the end of 1918, he retired from political activity. In 1919, he became one of the organizers of the department of sociology at St. Petersburg University, professor of sociology at the Agricultural Academy and the Institute of National Economy. In 1920, together with I.P. Pavlov founded the Society for Objective Studies of Human Behavior. In 1921 he worked at the Institute of the Brain, at the Historical and Sociological Institutes. In 1922 he was expelled from Soviet Russia. In 1923 he worked at the Russian University in Prague. In 1924 he moved to the USA. In 1924-1930 professor at the University of Minnesota, from 1930 until the end of his life - professor at Harvard University, where in 1930 he organized the Department of Sociology, and in 1931 - the Department of Sociology.
The main works of P.A. Sorokina: "Remnants of animism among the Zyryans" (1910), "Marriage in the old days: (polyandry and polygamy)" (1913), "Crime and its causes" (1913), "Suicide as a social phenomenon" (1913), "Symbols in social life", "Crime and Punishment, Feat and Reward" (1913), "Social Analytics and Social Mechanics" (1919), "System of Sociology" (1920), "Sociology of Revolution" (1925), "Social Mobility" (1927 ), "Social and Cultural Dynamics" (1937-1941), "Society, Culture and Personality: Their Structure and Dynamics; System of General Sociology" (1947), "Restoration of Humanity" (1948), "Altruistic Love" (1950), "Social philosophies in an age of crisis" (1950), "The meaning of our crisis" (1951), "The ways and power of love" (1954), "Integralism is my philosophy" (1957), "Power and morality" (1959), " Mutual convergence of the United States and the USSR towards a mixed socio-cultural type" (1960), "Long Road. Autobiography" (1963), "Main Trends of Our Time" (1964), "Sociology Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow" (1968).
Scientific interests of P.A. Sorokin covered a truly huge layer of problems in the study of society and culture.
According to P.A. Sorokin, attempts to radically crush social differentiation only led to the belittling of social forms, to the quantitative and qualitative decomposition of sociality.
Sorokin considered historical reality as a hierarchy of variously integrated cultural and social systems. Sorokin's idealistic concept is based on the idea of the priority of a superorganic system of values, meanings, "pure cultural systems", which are carried by individuals and institutions. The historical process, according to Sorokin, is a fluctuation of the types of cultures, each of which has a specific integrity and is based on several main philosophical premises (the idea of the nature of reality, the methods of its cognition).
Sorokin criticized the prevailing empirical trend in the US and developed the doctrine of an "integral" sociology, covering all the sociological aspects of a broadly understood culture. Social reality was considered by P.A. Sorokin in the spirit of social realism, postulating the existence of a supra-individual socio-cultural reality, irreducible to material reality and endowed with a system of meanings. Characterized by an infinite variety that surpasses any of its individual manifestations, sociocultural reality embraces the truths of feelings, rational intellect and suprarational intuition.
All these methods of cognition should be used in the systematic study of sociocultural phenomena, however, Sorokin considered the intuition of a highly gifted person to be the highest method of cognition, with the help of which, in his opinion, all great discoveries were made. Sorokin distinguished systems of sociocultural phenomena of many levels. The highest of them is formed by sociocultural systems, the scope of which extends to many societies (supersystems).
Sorokin identifies three main types of culture: sensual - it is dominated by direct sensory perception of reality; ideational, in which rational thinking prevails; idealistic - the intuitive method of cognition dominates here.
2. The main forms of stratification and the relationship between them
stratification inequality Sorokin fluctuation
The specific aspects of social stratification are numerous. However, all their diversity can be reduced to three main forms: economic, political and professional stratification. As a rule, they are all closely intertwined. People who belong to the highest stratum in one respect usually belong to the same stratum in other respects, and vice versa. Representatives of the highest economic strata simultaneously belong to the highest political and professional strata. The poor, as a rule, are disenfranchised and are in the lower strata of the professional hierarchy. This is the general rule, although there are many exceptions. So, for example, the richest are not always at the top of the political or professional pyramid, nor in all cases are the poor at the lowest places in the political and professional hierarchy. And this means that the interdependence of the three forms of social stratification is far from perfect, because the various layers of each of the forms do not completely coincide with each other. Rather, they coincide with each other, but only partially, that is, to a certain extent. This fact does not allow us to analyze all three main forms of social stratification together. For greater pedantry, it is necessary to analyze each of the forms separately.
Economic stratification
Speaking about the economic status of a certain group, two main types of fluctuations should be distinguished. The first refers to the economic decline or rise of the group; the second - to the growth or reduction of economic stratification within the group itself. The first phenomenon is expressed in the economic enrichment or impoverishment of social groups as a whole; the second is expressed in a change in the economic profile of the group or in an increase or decrease in the height, so to speak, of steepness, of the economic pyramid. Accordingly, there are the following two types of fluctuations in the economic status of a society:
1. Fluctuation of the economic status of the group as a whole:
a) an increase in economic well-being;
b) a decrease in the latter.
2. Fluctuations in the height and profile of economic stratification within society:
a) the rise of the economic pyramid;
b) flattening of the economic pyramid.
The hypotheses of a constant height and profile of economic stratification and its growth in the 19th century are not confirmed. The most correct is the hypothesis of fluctuations in economic stratification from group to group, and within the same group - from one period of time to another. In other words, there are cycles in which increasing economic inequality is replaced by its weakening. Some periodicity is possible in these fluctuations, but for various reasons its existence has not yet been proven by anyone. With the exception of the early stages of economic evolution, marked by an increase in economic stratification, there is no constant direction in fluctuations in the height and form of economic stratification. No strict trend towards a decrease in economic inequality was found; there are no serious grounds for recognizing the existence of an opposite trend. Under normal social conditions, the economic cone of a developed society fluctuates within certain limits. Its shape is relatively constant. Under extreme circumstances, these limits may be violated, and the profile of economic stratification may become either very flat or very convex and high. In both cases, this situation is short-lived. And if the "economically flat" society does not perish, then the "flatness" is quickly replaced by increased economic stratification. If economic inequality becomes too strong and reaches a point of overstrain, then the top of society is destined to collapse or be overthrown.
Thus, in any society at any time there is a struggle between the forces of stratification and the forces of equalization. The former work constantly and steadily, the latter - spontaneously, impulsively, using violent methods.
Political stratification
So, as already noted, the universality and constancy of political stratification does not mean at all that it has always and everywhere been identical. Now the following problems should be discussed: a) does the profile and height of political stratification change from group to group, from one period of time to another; b) whether there are established limits for these fluctuations; c) frequency of oscillations; d) whether there is an eternally constant direction of these changes. In revealing all these questions, we must be extremely careful not to fall under the spell of eloquent eloquence. The problem is very complex. And it should be approached gradually, step by step. Changes top of the political stratification. Let's simplify the situation: for starters, let's take only the upper part of the political pyramid, which consists of free members of society. Let's leave for a while without attention all those layers that are below this level (servants, slaves, serfs, etc.). At the same time we will not consider: By whom? How? For what period? For what reasons? Different layers of the political pyramid are involved. Now the subject of our interest is the height and profile of the political edifice inhabited by free members of society: whether there is a constant tendency in its changes to "level" (that is, to reduce the height and relief of the pyramid) or in the direction of "raise". The generally accepted opinion is in favor of the "levelling" trend. People tend to take it for granted that there is an iron trend in history towards political equality and towards the destruction of political "feudalism" and hierarchy. Such a judgment is typical of the present moment. As G. Vollas rightly noted, “the political creed of the masses of people is not the result of reflections verified by experience, but a collection of unconscious or semi-conscious assumptions put forward out of habit. What is closer to reason is closer to the past, and how a stronger impulse allows you to quickly come to a conclusion ". As for the height of the upper part of the political pyramid, my arguments are as follows. Among primitive tribes and at the early stages of the development of civilization, political stratification was insignificant and imperceptible. A few leaders, a layer of influential elders - and, perhaps, everything that was located above the layer of the rest of the free population. The political form of such a social organism somehow, only remotely, resembled a sloping and low pyramid. It rather approached a rectangular parallelepiped with a barely protruding elevation at the top. With the development and growth of social relations, in the process of unification of the originally independent tribes, in the process of natural demographic growth of the population, political stratification intensified, and the number of different ranks increased rather than decreased. The political cone began to grow, but did not even out. The same can be said about the earliest stages in the development of modern European peoples, about ancient Greek and Roman societies. Regardless of the further political evolution of all these societies, it seems obvious that their political hierarchy will never become as flat as it was in the early stages of the development of civilization. If this is the case, then it would be impossible to admit that in the history of political stratification there has been a constant trend towards political "levelling". The second argument is that, whether we take the history of ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, China, or modern European societies, it does not show that over time the pyramid of the political hierarchy becomes lower and the political cone flatter. In the history of Rome during the period of the republic, instead of several ranks of the archaic period, we see the highest pyramid of different ranks and titles, overlapping each other even in terms of privilege. Something similar is happening today. Specialists in constitutional law rightly point out that the US president clearly has more political rights than the European constitutional monarch. The execution of orders given by high officials to their subordinates, by generals to the lowest military ranks, is as categorical and obligatory as in any non-democratic country. Compliance with the orders of an officer of the highest rank in the American army is as mandatory as in any other army. There are differences in recruitment methods, but this does not mean that the political building of modern democracies is flat or less stratified than the political building of many non-democratic countries. Thus, as far as the political hierarchy among citizens is concerned, there is no tendency in political evolution towards a lowering or flattening of the cone. Despite the various methods of recruiting upper class members in modern democracies, the political cone is now as high and stratified as at any other time, and certainly higher than in many less developed societies. But this assertion is in no way supported by anything. "All we see is 'random', undirected, 'blind' fluctuations, leading neither to strengthening nor to weakening political stratification...
Consequences of political stratification:
1. The height of the profile of political stratification varies from country to country, from one period of time to another.
2. In these changes there is no constant tendency either to equalization or to an elevation of stratification.
3. There is no constant trend of transition from monarchy to republic, from autocracy to democracy, from minority rule to majority rule, from the absence of government intervention in society to comprehensive state control. There are also no reverse trends.
4. Among the many social forces contributing to political stratification, an important role is played by the increase in the size of the political body and the heterogeneity of the composition of the population.
5. The profile of political stratification is more mobile, and it fluctuates more widely, more often and more impulsively than the profile of economic stratification.
6. In any society there is a constant struggle between the forces of political alignment and the forces of stratification. Sometimes one force wins, sometimes another prevails. When the fluctuation of the profile in one of the directions becomes too strong and sharp, then the opposite forces different ways increase their pressure and bring the stratification profile to the equilibrium point.
Occupational stratification
Includes professional and interprofessional stratification. The existence of occupational stratification is established from two main groups of facts. It is obvious that certain occupational classes have always constituted the upper social strata, while other occupational groups have always been at the bottom of the social cone. The most important occupational classes do not lie horizontally, that is, on the same social level, but, so to speak, overlap each other. Secondly, the phenomenon of professional stratification is also found within each professional sphere. Whether we take the field of agriculture, or industry, trade or management or any other professions, people employed in these areas are stratified into many ranks and levels: from the upper ranks, which exercise control, to the lower ranks, which are controlled and which are subordinated to their hierarchy in hierarchy. "directors", "authorities", "managers", "bosses", etc. Occupational stratification thus manifests itself in these two main forms: 1) in the form of a hierarchy of main professional groups (interprofessional stratification) and 2) in form of stratification within each professional class (professional stratification).
It should be noted that whatever the various temporary foundations of interprofessional stratification in different societies, next to these ever-changing foundations, there are constant and universal foundations. Two conditions, at least, have always been fundamental: 1) the importance of the occupation (profession) for the survival and functioning of the group as a whole, 2) the level of intelligence necessary for the successful performance of professional duties.
Professional groups that carry out the basic functions of social organization and control are placed at the center of the "engine of society." Bad behavior a soldier may not greatly affect the entire army, the unscrupulous work of one worker has little effect on others, but the action of the army commander or group leader automatically affects the entire army or group whose actions he controls. Moreover, being at the control point of the "social engine", if only by virtue of such an objectively influential position, the corresponding social groups ensure for themselves the maximum of privileges and power in society. This alone explains the correlation between the social significance of a profession and its place in the hierarchy of professional groups. The successful performance of the socio-professional functions of organization and control naturally requires a higher level of intelligence than for any physical work of a routine nature. Accordingly, these two conditions turn out to be closely interrelated: the performance of the functions of organization and control requires a high level of intelligence, and a high level of intelligence is manifested in achievements (directly or indirectly) associated with the organization and control of the group.
Thus it can be said that in any given society the more professional work lies in the exercise of the functions of organization and control, and in the higher level of intelligence necessary for its performance, in the greater privilege of the group and in the higher rank it occupies in the interprofessional hierarchy, and vice versa. Four amendments should be added to this rule. First, the general rule does not rule out the possibility of overlapping the upper strata of the lower professional class with the lower strata of the next higher class. Secondly, the general rule does not apply to periods of disintegration of society. At such moments in history, the ratio can be broken. Such periods usually lead to a reversal, after which, if the group does not disappear, the former ratio is quickly restored. Exceptions, however, do not invalidate the rule. Thirdly, the general rule does not exclude deviations. Fourthly, since the concrete historical character of societies is different and their conditions change with time, it is quite natural that the specific content of professional occupations, depending on this or that general situation, changes.
Systems of social stratification
Regardless of the forms that social stratification takes, its existence is universal. Four main systems of social stratification are known: slavery, castes, clans and classes. Let's consider each of these types of systems separately.
Slavery is an economic, social and legal form of enslavement of people, bordering on complete lack of rights and an extreme degree of inequality.
Main causes of slavery
An essential feature of slavery is the possession of some people by others. Both the ancient Romans and the ancient Africans had slaves. In ancient Greece, slaves were engaged in physical labor, thanks to which free citizens had the opportunity to express themselves in politics and the arts. Slavery was the least common among nomadic peoples, especially hunter-gatherers, and most prevalent in agrarian societies.
Usually point to three causes of slavery. First, a debt obligation, when a person who was unable to pay his debts fell into slavery to his creditor. Secondly, the violation of laws, when the execution of a murderer or a robber was replaced by slavery, i.e. the culprit was handed over to the affected family as compensation for the grief or damage caused. Thirdly, war, raids, conquest, when one group of people conquered another and the winners used some of the captives as slaves.
Basic conditions of slavery
Conditions of slavery and slaveholding varied significantly in different regions of the world. In some countries, slavery was a temporary condition of a person: having worked for his master for the allotted time, the slave became free and had the right to return to his homeland. Thus, the Israelites freed their slaves in the year of jubilee, every 50 years. Slaves in Ancient Rome, as a rule, had the opportunity to buy freedom; in order to collect the amount necessary for the ransom, they entered into a deal with their master and sold their services to other people (this is exactly what some educated Greeks who fell into slavery to the Romans did). However, in many cases, slavery was for life; in particular, criminals sentenced to life work were turned into slaves and worked on Roman galleys as rowers until their death.
Not everywhere the status of a slave was inherited. In ancient Mexico, the children of slaves were always free people. But in most countries, the children of slaves automatically also became slaves, although in some cases the child of a slave who served all his life in a rich family was adopted by this family, he received the surname of his masters and could become one of the heirs along with the rest of the children of the masters. As a rule, slaves had neither property nor power. However, for example, in ancient Rome, slaves had the opportunity to accumulate some kind of property and even achieve a high position in society.
Slavery in the New World originates from the indentured service of Europeans. This service in the New World was a cross between a labor contract and slavery.
Many Europeans who decided to start a new life in the American colonies were unable to pay for a ticket. The captains of ships sailing for America agreed to carry such passengers on credit, provided that after their arrival there would be someone who would pay their debt to the captain. Thus, the poor were able to get to the American colonies, the captain received payment for their transportation, and wealthy colonists received free servants for a certain period.
General characteristics of slavery
Although slaveholding practices differed from region to region and from different eras, but regardless of whether slavery was the result of an unpaid debt, punishment, military captivity, or racial prejudice; whether it was permanent or temporary; hereditary or not, the slave was still the property of another person, and the system of laws secured the status of a slave. Slavery served as the main distinction between people, clearly indicating which person is free (and legally receives certain privileges) and which is a slave (without privileges).
There are two forms of slavery:
patriarchal slavery - a slave had all the rights of a younger family member: he lived in the same house with his masters, participated in public life, married freemen; it was forbidden to kill him;
classical slavery - the slave was finally enslaved; he lived in a separate room, did not participate in anything, did not enter into marriage and had no family, he was considered the property of the owner.
Slavery is the only form of social relations in history when one person acts as the property of another, and when the lower stratum is deprived of all rights and freedoms.
A caste is a social group (stratum), membership in which a person owes solely to his birth. The achieved status is not able to change the place of the individual in this system. People who are born into a low-status group will always have this status, no matter what they personally manage to achieve in life.
Societies that are characterized by this form of stratification strive for a clear preservation of the boundaries between castes, therefore endogamy is practiced here - marriages within one's own group - and there is a ban on intergroup marriages. To prevent contact between castes, such societies develop complicated rules concerning ritual purity, according to which it is believed that communication with representatives of the lower castes defiles the higher caste.
A clan is a clan or a kindred group connected by economic and social ties.
The clan system is typical of agrarian societies. In such a system, each individual is connected to a vast social network relatives - clan. The clan is something like a very extended family and has similar features: if the clan has a high status, the individual belonging to this clan has the same status; all funds belonging to the clan, whether meager or rich, belong equally to each member of the clan; loyalty to the clan is a lifelong obligation of each of its members.
Clans are also reminiscent of castes: belonging to a clan is determined by birth and is lifelong. However, unlike castes, marriages between different clans are quite allowed; they can even be used to create and strengthen alliances between clans, since the obligations that marriage imposes on spouses' relatives can unite members of two clans. Processes of industrialization and urbanization turn clans into more fluid groups, eventually replacing clans with social classes.
Class - 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 earning income.
The main characteristic of this system of social stratification is the relative flexibility of its boundaries. The class system leaves room for social mobility, i.e. to move up or down the social ladder. Having the potential to improve one's social position, or class, is one of the main driving forces.
Conclusion
Social stratification has always been one of the main topics of P. Sorokin's scientific research. Today, the problems of social stratification are very relevant, since we have the opportunity every day to observe the processes of transition from one social stratum to another, changes in the social space of an individual. According to Pitirim Sorokin, a person moves up the social ladder thanks to his talent and abilities. Unfortunately, in our life everything is completely different. The dominant role is occupied by money, today they are the main channel of vertical circulation.
The works of Pitirim Sorokin on social stratification are important for the history of Russian sociology. He touched on the most important problems of society, which no one had touched before him. Pitirim Sorokin is one of the most important Russian sociologists, whose works continue to be great value not only Russian, but also foreign in modern sociology.
P. Sorokin belongs to that rare type of scientists whose name becomes a symbol of the science he has chosen. In the West, he has long been recognized as one of the classics of the 20th century, standing on a par with O. Comte, G. Spencer, M. Weber.
Indeed, this Russian-American sociologist made an enormous contribution to the development of social thought and to the development of sociology as a science of society.
Social stratification expresses the social heterogeneity of society, the inequality that exists in it, the unequal social status of people and their groups. Social stratification is understood as the process and result of the differentiation of society into various social groups (strata, strata) that differ in their social status. The criteria for dividing society into strata can be very diverse, moreover, both objective and subjective. But most often today, profession, income, property, participation in power, education, prestige, self-assessment of one's social position are singled out. According to researchers, the middle class of a modern industrial society determines the stability of the social system and at the same time provides it with dynamism, since the middle class is primarily a highly productive and highly skilled, initiative and enterprising worker. Russia is classified as a mixed type of stratification. Our middle class is in its infancy, and this process is of key and broad significance for the formation of a new social structure.
List of used literature
1. Novikova S. "History of the development of sociology", Moscow-Voronezh, 2006
2. Sorokin P.A. "Social stratification and mobility", 2007
3. Sorokin P.A. "Man. Civilization. Society" (Series "Thinkers of the XX century"), M., 2004
4. Sorokin P.A. "Publicly accessible textbook of sociology", Science, 2007
5. Sorokin P.A. "System of sociology", volume 2, M., 2006
Social stratification is the same as social stratification. The term "stratification" literally means the division of the entire society into layers, that is, groups of the rich, the prosperous, the affluent, the poor and the very poor, or beggars.
Social stratification is the process of formation of layers among the population and its result. The starting point of this process is a socially homogeneous society, that is, a society in which people do not differ in property and social status. In Latin, it corresponds to two terms accepted in the modern science of sociology - differentiation and stratification.
Stratification describes social inequality in society, the division into rich and poor, privileged and unprivileged. In primitive society, inequality was insignificant, therefore, stratification was almost absent there. In complex societies, inequality is very strong, it divided people by income, level of education, power. Castes arose, then estates, and later classes. In some societies, the transition from one social stratum (stratum) is prohibited, in others it is limited, and in others it is completely allowed. Freedom of social movement (mobility) determines whether a society is closed or open.
Theory of stratification by Pitirim Sorokin.
P. Sorokin considers the world as a social universe, that is, a kind of space filled not with stars and planets, but with social ties and relationships between people. They form a multidimensional coordinate system, which determines the social position of any person. In a multidimensional space, two main coordinate axes are distinguished - the X-axis and the Y-axis. In addition to them, P. Sorokin identifies three types of social stratification: economic, political and professional. Social stratification generally describes the stratification of people into classes and hierarchical ranks. Its basis is an uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, power and influence. Its subspecies, economic stratification, means the unequal economic statuses, in other words, the presence of economic inequality, which is expressed in the difference in incomes, living standards, in the existence of the poor and the rich. Political differentiation describes a system of hierarchical ranks that has entangled, like a giant web, the entire society. It includes authorities, power, prestige, titles, honors. Professional differentiation - the division of the population into occupations, occupations and professions, some of which are considered more prestigious, others less, and their organization necessarily includes leaders of various ranks and subordinates.
For economic stratification, two phenomena are indicative, which Sorokin calls fluctuations:
1) enrichment and impoverishment of a group or society;
2) decrease and increase in the height of the economic pyramid.
Using vast statistical material, he proves that there is no family, village, city, region or country that does not become richer or poorer year by year. There is no stable trend in history. In the development of any society, periods of enrichment are followed by periods of impoverishment. So it was in ancient Egypt and so it is in modern America. Aimless fluctuations (fluctuations) occur cyclically, enrichment is followed by impoverishment. Small cycles - 3-5, 7-8, 10-12 years, large - 40-60 years. Sorokin believes that his theory of fluctuations refutes the idea of human progress - the constant improvement of the economic situation.
Comparing different classes, eras and countries, he unexpectedly found that there is no stable trend in the fluctuations in the height of the economic pyramid. If height is measured by the difference between the incomes of the upper, middle and lower strata of society, then it turns out that over the past 500 years it has either increased or decreased. This means that the rich don't get richer and the poor don't get poorer all the time. Instead of a rectilinear process, there are periodic fluctuations. They are equal to 50, 100 and 150 years. In the same way, world prices fluctuate in history, either falling or increasing. The connection between two phenomena - poverty and world prices - is not surprising, because price changes contribute to the redistribution of national income in favor of one class or another.
In a society based on private property, there are no social upheavals. His pyramid is not too high, but not too low either. As soon as private property is destroyed, society enters a period of social upheaval. In 1917 the Bolsheviks nationalized the banks, liquidated the rich, reduced the gap between the highest and lowest wages to a ratio of 175:100.
The economic pyramid has become almost flat. Although such cases are rare in history, they serve as a harbinger of the coming catastrophe, after which society seeks to restore the normal form of income distribution. And in communist Russia, the rich, the middle and the poor soon appeared. Humanity must learn a simple truth, Sorokin believes: either a flat pyramid of universal equality and moderate poverty, or a prosperous society with inevitable inequality. There is no third.
When the profile of the pyramid is excessively stretched, this means that there is excessive social stratification. When the stratification reaches its peak, a social catastrophe follows - a revolutionary leveling fever. Two outcomes are possible: either the society immediately returns to the normal form of stratification, or goes to it through " big catastrophe". The first way is closer to reforms, the second - to revolution.
Points in space are social statuses. The distance between the turner and the miller is one, it is horizontal, and the distance between the worker and the master is different, it is vertical. The master is the boss, the worker is the subordinate. They have different social ranks. Although the case can be presented in such a way that the master and worker will be located at an equal distance from each other.
This will happen if we consider both of them not as a boss and a subordinate, but as just workers performing different labor functions. But then we will move from the vertical to the horizontal plane.
The inequality of distances between statuses is the main property of stratification. She has four measuring rulers, or coordinate axes. All of them are located vertically and next to each other:
* education;
* prestige.
Income is measured in rubles or dollars that an individual or family receives during a certain period of time, say one month or a year.
Education is measured by the number of years of study at a public or private school or university.
Power is measured by the number of people who are affected by the decision you make (power is the ability to impose your will or decisions on other people, regardless of their desire).
Three scales of stratification - income, education and power - have completely objective units of measurement: dollars, years, people. Prestige is outside this range, as it is a subjective indicator.
Prestige - respect for status, prevailing in public opinion.
If the upper part of the scale is occupied by representatives of creative, intellectual labor, then the lower part is occupied by representatives of predominantly physical low-skilled: a driver, a welder, a carpenter, a plumber, a janitor. They have the least status respect. People occupying the same positions on the four dimensions of stratification constitute one stratum.
Income, power, prestige and education determine the total socio-economic status, that is, the position and place of a person in society. In this case, the status acts as a generalized indicator of stratification. Earlier we noted its key role in the social structure. Now it turned out that he plays a crucial role in sociology as a whole. The assigned status characterizes a rigidly fixed system of stratification, that is, a closed society in which the transition from one stratum to another is practically prohibited. Such systems include slavery and caste system. The achieved status characterizes a mobile system of stratification, or open society where people are allowed to move freely up and down. Such a system is referred to as a class system. Finally, feudal society, with its inherent estate structure, should be classified as an intermediate type, that is, a relatively closed system. Here, crossings are legally prohibited, but in practice they are not excluded.
People are in constant motion, and society is in development. The totality of social movements of people in society, that is, changes in their status, is called social mobility. The unexpected rise of a person or his sudden fall is a favorite plot of folk tales: a cunning beggar suddenly becomes rich, a poor prince becomes a king, and the industrious Cinderella marries a prince, thereby increasing her status and prestige.
However, human history is made up not so much of individual destinies as of the movement of large social groups. The landed aristocracy is being replaced by the financial bourgeoisie, low-skilled professions are being squeezed out of modern production by the so-called "white collars": engineers, programmers, operators of robotic complexes. Wars and revolutions reshaped the social structure of society, raising some to the top of the pyramid and lowering others. Similar changes took place in Russian society after the October Revolution of 1917. They are still taking place today, when the business elite is replacing the party elite.
There is a certain asymmetry between ascent and descent: everyone wants to go up and no one wants to go down the social ladder. As a rule, ascent is a voluntary phenomenon, and descent is forced.
There are two main types of social mobility - intergenerational and intragenerational, and two main types - vertical and horizontal. These species and types, in turn, fall into subspecies and subtypes that are closely related to each other.
Intergenerational mobility implies that children achieve a higher social position or fall to a lower rung than their parents. Example: A miner's son becomes an engineer.
Intragenerational mobility takes place where the same individual, beyond comparison with his father, changes social positions several times throughout his life. Otherwise, it is called a social career. Example: a turner becomes an engineer, and then a shop manager, plant director, minister of the engineering industry.
The first type of mobility refers to long-term, and the second - to short-term processes.
Vertical mobility implies moving from one stratum (estate, class, caste) to another. Depending on the direction of movement, there is upward mobility and downward mobility. Promotion is an example of upward mobility, dismissal, demolition is an example of downward mobility.
Horizontal mobility implies the transition of an individual from one social group to another, located at the same level. An example is movement from an Orthodox to a Catholic religious group, from one citizenship to another, from one family to another, from one profession to another. Such movements occur without a noticeable change in social positions in the vertical direction.
Geographical mobility is a variation of horizontal mobility. It does not imply a change in status or group, but a movement from one place to another while maintaining the same status. An example is international and interregional tourism, moving from a city to a village and back, moving from one enterprise to another.
If a change of status is added to a change of place, then geographic mobility turns into migration. If a resident came to the city to visit relatives, then this is graphic mobility. If he moved to the city for permanent residence and found a job here, then this is migration. He changed his profession.
Vertical and horizontal mobility is affected by gender, age, birth rate, death rate, population density. In general, young people and men are more mobile than older people and women. Overpopulated countries are more likely to experience the effects of emigration than immigration. Where the birth rate is high, the population is younger and therefore more mobile, and vice versa.
Young people are characterized by professional mobility, middle-aged people - economic mobility, the elderly - political mobility. The birth rate is unevenly distributed across classes. The lower classes tend to have more children, the upper classes have fewer. There is a pattern: the higher a person climbs the social ladder, the fewer children he has. Even if every son of a rich man follows in the footsteps of his father, voids are still formed on the upper steps of the social pyramid, which are filled by people from the lower classes. In no class do people plan for the exact number of children needed to replace parents. The number of vacancies and the number of applicants for the occupation of certain social positions in different classes is different.
Professionals and skilled workers do not have enough children to fill their jobs in the next generation. By contrast, farmers and agricultural workers, in the US, have 50% more children than they need to be self-sustaining. It is not difficult to calculate in which direction social mobility should proceed in modern society.
High and low birth rates in different classes have the same effect on vertical mobility as population density has on horizontal mobility. different countries. Strata, like countries, can be overpopulated or underpopulated.
It is possible to propose a classification of social mobility according to other criteria. So, for example, they distinguish:
* individual mobility, in which movement down, up or horizontally occurs for each person independently of others;
* group mobility, in which movements occur collectively, for example, after a social revolution, the old class cedes its dominant position to the new one.
Individual mobility and group mobility are connected in a certain way with assigned and achieved status. Individual mobility corresponds more to the status achieved, and group mobility to the assigned status.
Individual mobility occurs where and when the social significance of an entire class, estate, caste, rank, or category rises or falls. October Revolution led to the rise of the Bolsheviks, who previously did not have a recognized high position. Brahmins in India became the highest caste as a result of a long and stubborn struggle, and earlier they were on an equal footing with the kshatriyas. In ancient Greece, after the adoption of the constitution, most people were freed from slavery and climbed the social ladder, and many of their former masters went down.
The transition from a hereditary aristocracy to a plutocracy had the same consequences. In 212 AD e. almost the entire population of the Roman Empire received the status of Roman citizenship. Thanks to this, huge masses of people who were previously considered to be deprived of their rights have raised their social status. The invasion of the barbarians disrupted the social stratification of the Roman Empire: one after another, the old aristocratic families disappeared, and new ones replaced them. Foreigners founded new dynasties and new nobility.
Mobile individuals begin socialization in one class and end in another. They are literally torn between dissimilar cultures and lifestyles. They do not know how to behave, dress, talk in terms of the standards of another class. Often adaptation to new conditions remains very superficial. A typical example is Moliere's tradesman in the nobility.
These are the main types, types and forms of social mobility. In addition to them, organized mobility is sometimes singled out, when the movement of a person or entire groups up, down or horizontally is controlled by the state, with the consent of the people themselves, or without their consent. Voluntary organized mobility should include the so-called socialist organizational recruitment, for example, public calls for Komsomol construction projects, etc. Involuntary organized mobility includes the repatriation (resettlement) of small peoples and dispossession during the years of Stalinism.
Structural mobility must be distinguished from organized mobility. It is caused by changes in the structure of the national economy and occurs against the will and consciousness of individual individuals. For example, the disappearance or reduction of industries or professions leads to the displacement of large masses of people. In the 1950s and 1970s, small villages were reduced and enlarged in the USSR.
Social interactions
3. general laws of society
4 people
5. community management
2. Judgment belonging to O. Comte:
1. sociology originated in ancient Greece
Sociology is based on experience and real facts
3. the task of science is to give an essential explanation of phenomena
4. sociology is an objective science
5. sociology studies "meaningful things"
3. E. Durkheim believed that sociology:
1. social science
The Science of Social Facts
3. the science of social behavior
4. natural science
5. science of natural factors
4. Object of sociology:
1 person
2. society
Social life of a person, group, society
4. patterns of behavior
5. set of acting individuals
5. Applied sociology:
1. microsociological theory of society
2. social engineering
3. macrosociological theory of society, patterns and principles of this field of knowledge
A set of research methods and procedures
5. one of the directions in modern sociology
6. Objectivity in sociology is ensured by:
1. cognition
Rejection of ideology and bias
3. typology
4. filtering
5. integration
7. He considered as an example of imitation of sociology to natural science:
1. C. Montesquieu
2. K. Marx
3. J.J. Rousseau
O. Comte
5. G. Spencer
8. Subject of sociology:
1. social relations and social interactions
2. interpersonal interactions of people
3. personality
4. distribution of productive forces management of society
5. community management
Branch of science about the process of social relations and interactions between individuals:
sociology
cultural studies
philosophy
political science
psychology
A science that originated from the ideas of the Enlightenment and as a reaction to the French Revolution:
psychology
anthropology
philosophy
sociology
cultural studies
Society as an integral system and the processes taking place in it are studied:
1. cultural studies
2. philosophy
3. history
4. sociology
5. religious studies
Sociology as a science arose in:
2. XX century
3. 40s of the XIX century
4. XVIII century
5. Ancient Greece
13. The term "sociology" was introduced by:
1. M. Weber
2. K. Marx
5. Aristotle
14. Ancestor of sociology:
1. Aristotle
2. N. Machiavelli
3. C. Montesquieu
5. K. Marx
The term "sociology" appeared in:
early 17th century
middle of the 19th century
the first half of the XX century.
40s of the nineteenth century
Ancient Greece
16. Reasons for the belated emergence of sociology:
1. the complexity of the object of her research
2. objective pattern of development of society
3. scientists discovered social patterns with less success than the laws of the universe
4. insufficient level of development of knowledge at the time of its occurrence
5. natural and exact sciences were considered more important than social
17. The sphere of public life, which began to be explored earlier than others:
1. spiritual
2. political
3. economic
4. social in the broad sense of the word
5. social in the narrow sense of the word
18. Philosopher in sociology and sociologist in philosophy R. Aron considered:
1. O. Konta
2. G. Spencer
3. M. Weber
4. P. Sorokina;
5. E. Durkheim.
19. Direction in sociology, whose representatives tried to reduce the laws of development of society to the laws of natural selection:
social darwinism
behaviorism
morganism-mendelism
individual choice
lifeworld
20. Direction in sociology, which believes that the organization of social life is based on special laws - the laws of imitation:
instinctivism
"crowd theory"
interactionism
social conflict
psychoanalysis
21. The question "A thief makes a hole in the fence or a hole in the fence makes a thief" belongs to:
1. psychologist
2. philosopher
4. sociologist
5. teacher
22. Science that studies a holistic socio-cultural space:
1. philosophy
2. history
3. psychology
4. cultural studies
5. sociology
23. Levels of sociological knowledge:
1. fundamental
2. branch
3. empirical
4. theoretical
5. empirical, theoretical
24. The field of sociological knowledge that studies large-scale social objects:
1. microsociology
2. branch sociology
3. macrosociology
4. methodology
25. The field of sociological knowledge, focused on the study of individuals and their interaction with the social environment:
1. microsociology
2. macrosociology
3. general sociological theory
4. branch sociology
5. special sociological theory
Topic 2. The main stages in the development of sociology as a science
26. The "Law of Three Stages" developed:
1. K. Marx
2. P. Sorokin
3. M. Kovalevsky
5. M. Weber
27. Sections of sociology "social statics" and "social dynamics" are developed:
1. G. Spencer
2. E. Durkheim
3. A. Gobineau
4. O. Kontom
5. Plato
28. The Social Darwinist tradition in sociology was represented by:
1. L. Gumplovich
2. Z. Freud
3. Ch. Darwin
5. J. Gobineau
29. The central concept of sociology of K. Marx:
3. social space
4. social fact
5. social system
30. The concept of "materialistic understanding of history" was introduced by:
1. C. Montesquieu
2. K. Marx
3. J.J. Rousseau
5. R. Dahrendorf
31. The idea of social solidarity belongs to:
1. T. Hobbes
2. V. Pareto
3. E. Durkheim
4. Plato
32. Ch. Valikhanov about contemporary Kazakh society:
1. slave society
2. patriarchal-feudal society
3. capitalist society
4. communist society
5. post-industrial society
33. Ch. Valikhanov on the social status of the people:
1. interests of noble and rich people for the most part hostile to the interests of the masses, the majority
2. class struggle is tearing society apart
3. the increase in the number of livestock increases the well-being of the people
4.preservation of estates contributes to the improvement of the social situation of the people
5. The oppression of the common people is a historical necessity
2. R. Merton
3. T. Parsons
4. G. Spencer
5. E. Durheim
35. Causes of social injustice in society, according to Abai:
1. icy (jute) barymta
2. tribal strife
3. the division of society into rich and poor and the contradiction of their interests
4. inaction of adopted laws, customs and traditions
5. backlog of science, education, culture
36. Abai Kunanbaev on the social role of science:
1. practice without science can give everything
2. science is an acquired thing, it can be achieved by labor, desire
3. science gives a person light, shows the way, ways out of ignorance
4. science makes it possible to reveal the secrets of the universe
5. science is the basis of inequality
37. Abay about the social role of labor:
1. barymta - one of the ways of enrichment, welfare
2. all types of labor are useful, incl. and hired labor
3. work contributes to the all-round development of a person
4. The source of wealth can be speculation, the market, theft
5. work is the source of independence
38. The factors named by Abai that influence the socialization of the individual:
1. laziness, litigation
2. politics, religion, school
3. aspiration, work, contentment, thoughtfulness, nobility
4. labor, industry
5. market, wealth, nobility
The main work of O. Kont:
"On the division of social labor"
"Positive Philosophy Course"
"Suicide"
"History and class consciousness"
"The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism"
40. The concept introduced by E. Durkheim as a link between society and value ideas as the interaction of individual consciousnesses:
analytic concept
operational concept
model concepts
ideal type
solidarity
41. A scientist who, in his work “Course of Positive Philosophy”, considered “the law of the three stages of the intellectual development of consciousness”:
P. Sorokin
M. Kovalevsky
Aristotle
42. The founder of the biological (organic) trend in sociology:
G. Spencer
E. Durkheim
T. Parsons
43. The first special work on sociology:
"Sovereign" N. Machiavelli
"Capital" by K. Marx
Politics of Aristotle
"Course of Positive Philosophy" by O. Comte
"The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State" by F. Engels
44. Founder of social Darwinism:
G. Spencer
E. Durkheim
P. Sorokin
45. O. Comte's law that became a theory social development:
1. law of three degrees
2. law of the structure of society
3. law of instincts
4. law of classification of sciences
P. Sorokin
F.Engels
G. Simmel
R. Dahrendorf
E. Giddens
47. The statement "The history of all hitherto existing societies has been the history of class struggles" belongs to:
1. K. Marx
2. M. Gandhi
3. E. Durkheim
4. D. Bellu
5. T. Merton
48. Suicide as a social phenomenon considered:
1. E. Durkheim
2. T. Parsons
3. G. Spencer
5. R. Merton
49. According to E. Durheim, organic solidarity is generated:
1. division of social labor
2. difference of individuals
3. structural violence
4. mass repression
5. unfair distribution of resources
50. A systematic approach to the analysis of society substantiated:
1. Z. Freud
2. F. Nietzsche
3. K. Marx
5. G. Spencer
Topic 3. Paradigms of sociology of the 20th century
51. M. Weber formulated:
1. law of social harmony
2. the importance of understanding subjective meaning
3. the law of the correspondence of productive forces to the nature of production relations
4. system of theoretical concepts
5. understanding of society as a value-normative system
52. Founder of "understanding" sociology:
1. E. Durkheim
2. T. Parsons
3. M. Weber
4. K. Marx
5. V. Pareto
53. At the origins of the sociology of conflict was:
1. R. Dahrendorf
2. K. Marx
3. A. Quetelet
4. L. Koser
5. T. Parsons
54. The main concept in the theory of structural functionalism:
1. social system
2. society
3. social community
4. social conflict
5. compromise
55. The central concept of phenomenological sociology:
1. life world
2. individual choice
3. social product
4. traditions
5. social process
56. School, which arose on the basis of the concept of E. Durkheim:
1. structural-functional analysis
2. positivist sociology
3. conflict sociology
4. evolutionary-organic direction
5. biological and ethnological school
1. M. Kovalevsky
4.P. Sorokin
5. T. Parsons
58. An American sociologist who considered equilibrium as the most important feature societies:
1. P. Sorokin
2. T. Parsons
3. M. Weber
4. V. Pareto
5. K. Marx
59. Empirical sociology is an independent direction of sociological research became in:
4. Germany
60. Names of J.G. Mida, C.H. Cooley, M. Weber connects:
1. positivism
2. structural functionalism
3. social behaviorism
4. naturalistic direction
5. conflictology
61. The concept that considers social life as a result of the interaction of people:
"formal school" R. Park
structural functionalism of T. Parsons
G. Simmel's "theory of conflict"
psychological evolutionism of E. Giddens
neo-Freudianism E.Fromm
62. The school that views sociology as a behavioral science:
European
american
french
german
63. The development of bureaucracy as a positive perspective of the historical process was proved by sociologist:
T. Parsons
A.Toldner
A.Prigozhin
64. "Ideal type" in the sociology of M. Weber:
1. empirical reality
3. theoretical design
4. individual choice
1. P. Sorokin
2. T. Parsons
3. M. Weber
4. K. Marx
5. R. Merton
66. The great bourgeois antipode of K. Marx:
1. M. Weber
2. G. Simmel
3. R. Dahrendorf
4. P. Sorokin
5. T. Spencer
67.K. Marx, G. Simmel, R. Dahrendorf - what unites these names:
1. these are well-known figures of the international labor movement
2. supporters of the theory of social conflict
3. famous Western economists
4. representatives of positivism
5. founders of "understanding sociology"
68. The greatest development of general questions of the theory of society was found in the works of:
E. Durkheim
P. Sorokina
P. Florensky
N. Berdyaeva
69. The problem of group behavior was developed by:
1. G. Spencer
2. G. Lebon
3. T. Parsons
4. J. Gobineau
71. The theory of the functional ability of the elite is developed:
1. P. Sorokin
2. T. Parsons
3. M. Weber
4. V. Pareto
5. L. Koser
72. A follower of Z. Freud A. Adler, the desire for leadership explains:
a sense of superiority
state of frustration
feelings of inferiority
interiorization
social conflict
73. The criteria for social stratification, according to M. Weber, in addition to income, prestige, include:
education
nationality
belonging to a significant clan
74. The type of behavior according to R. Merton, suggesting the correspondence of cultural goals and their means achievements:
conformity
innovation
ritualism
retreatism
75. Three types of cultures: postfigurative, configurative and prefigurative suggested:
T. Parsons
Sh.Aizenshtadt
S.Ikonnikova
Topic 4. Society as a social system
76. Society:
1. set of acting personalities
2.set of different groups
3. a set of people carrying out a joint social life
4. a unifying principle in the development of different peoples
5. a certain stage of historical development
77. The elements of society as a system include links between:
1. energy resources of the country and the development of production
2. people in the process of creating cultural values
3. self-actualization
4. reflection
5. social technology
78. Element of society:
1. ecosystem
2. empathy
4. heuristic
5. fertile land
79. A sign of society is:
1. disorganization
2. no integrating force
3. the ability to maintain and reproduce internal relationships
4. the presence of extra-institutional connections
5. inability to meet the needs of individuals
80. Closed society:
1. in which there is no publicity, freedom of speech and press
2. that interacts with other societies
3. which is easily changed and adapted to the circumstances of the external environment
4. individual community of collective ideas, feelings, beliefs
5. commonality of fundamental norms and values
81. characteristic feature traditional society:
1. rule of law
2. predominance of industry
3. dynamic development
4. tradition as the main way of social regulation
5. recognition of the value of the human person
82. A civilized society guarantees a person:
1. an equal share of social wealth with others
2. prosperity and success in professional activities
3. life longevity
4. the opportunity to get a secondary education
5. regulation of social behavior
83. Synonym of pre-industrial society:
1. primitive
2. traditional
3. simple
4. information
5. horticultural
84. Character traits modern society:
1. readiness and desire for development, change
2. social mobility
3.rigid planning
4. criticism, rationalism, individualism
5. development, change, mobility, market relations, rationalism
85. System-forming qualities of society:
1. integrity
2. decentralization
3. historicity
4. self-regulation
5. integrity, dynamism, self-regulation
86. Criteria for the Marxist typology of societies:
1. production and management levels
2. level of management and property differentiation
3. production method and form of ownership
4. production and social differentiation
5. Religious teachings are at the heart of society
87. Transition from pre-industrial to industrial society through comprehensive reforms:
1. industrial revolution
2. scientific revolution
3. modernization
4. technical revolution
5. information revolution
88. An industrial society is inherent in the division:
1. class
2. class
3. professional
4. confessional
5. caste
89. The concept, which is based on the communist principles of the organization of society:
1. concept of convergence
2. utopian socialism
3. post-industrial society
4. societies of equal opportunities
5. the theory of "industrial society" W. Rostow
90. Social sphere of society:
1. relationship between economic culture and consciousness
2. commodity-money relations
3. market relations
4. relationship between abilities and capabilities
5. ratio between social groups
91. The function of the social system introduced by T. Parsons:
1. adaptation, goal achievement, integration, maintenance of patterns of interaction in the system
2. adaptation, integration, autonomy
3. economics, politics, kinship and culture
4. socialization, adaptation, goal setting
5. dysfunction
92. The difference between closed and open societies is based on:
1. social control and freedom of the individual
2. exchange of volitional impulses
3. orderliness of the individual's actions
4. situationality
5. links of social interactions
1. A. Saint-Simon
3. D. Inkels
4. D. Bernheim
5. E. Durkheim
94. In the structure of sociology, two levels of knowledge of society are distinguished:
1. microsociology and macrosociology
2. epistemology and ontology
3. fundamental sociology and applied
4. combined and structural
5. selective and direct
95. Society in the social sense:
world community of peoples
world system of capitalism
developing countries
civilized countries
United Nations (UN)
96. Traditional society:
1. pre-industrial European society with a slow pace of development
2. socialist society
3. a society in which Christian traditions are strong
4. medieval society
5. consumer society
97. A society characterized by rational cognition of the world, criticism and individualism:
1. socio-economic formation
2. closed
3. open
4. information
5. technotronic
98. A closed society corresponds as a typical status:
1. main
2. attributed
4. achievable
5. role-playing
99. A society characterized by magical thinking, dogmatism and collectivism:
1. consumption
2. traditional
3. closed
4. complex
5. primitive
100. "Post-industrial society" is a society:
2. European late XIX - early XX centuries.
3. contemporary western
4. Oriental style
5. socialist
Topic 5. Social processes, social changes and social institutions as the basic elements of society
101. An institution that gives the ability to replenish the population:
2. church
5. property
102. The main functions of social institutions:
satisfy social needs, give society stability
provide society with dynamism, mobility, variability
issue diplomas to graduates
control the worldview
carry out the function of social exchange
103. The process and result of the emergence of a social institution in society is:
institutionalization
dysfunction
stabilization
streamlining
stagnation
104. The main advantages of a social institution:
predictability, reliability, controllability
unpredictability, sporadic
possibility of experiment
chance, spontaneity
chaos, instability
105. High efficiency of social institutions is promoted by:
high level of personal responsibility
division of labor and professionalism
material interest
moral interest
106. T. Parsons called the process by which the elements of culture are assimilated:
1. identification
2. social learning
3. imitation
4. socialization
5. deviation
107. The mechanism by which society regulates the behavior of individuals and maintains social order:
socialization
education
social control
compulsion
108. The diverse ties that arise in the process of economic, social, political and cultural life is the relationship:
national
production
public
geopolitical
interpersonal
109. Activities in the field of relations between large social groups, primarily classes, as well as nations and states:
control
policy
diplomacy
110. A stable set of formal and informal rules, attitudes that form social system of society:
social community
social organization
social structure
social politics
111. Arbitrary agreement of people for the most effective activity:
social institution
social organization
social group
social interest
social politics
112. A concept that unites the following categories: division of labor, family, property, army, marriage, education:
social structure
social relations
social institutions
social organization
social mobility
113. The stability of ties in the community, one way or another, depends on:
1. the effect that gives the individual a community
2. material interest
3. coercion
4. habits
5. a person's desire to become a member of society
114. The process by which a person loses connection with his class, morally falls, falls out of the system of social production:
alienation from the means of production
declassification process
lumpenization process
pauperization
marginalization
115. There are mainly two types of social ties:
contacts
interactions and social roles
social roles and social conflicts
contacts and social interactions
conflicts and social groups
116. Marginalization resulting from the economic crisis:
1. natural
2. prescribed
3. extreme
4. planned
5. spontaneous
117. The area of life of human society, in which the social state policy through the distribution of benefits:
culture
youth policy
gerontology
118. Social movements leading to radical changes:
1. reformist
2. utopian
3. reactionary
4. liberal
5. revolutionary
119. The social law of the evolution of society includes:
1. succession
2. cultural diversity
3. disaster
4. unequal speed of development of peoples
5. revolution
120. Social progress in the interpretation of G. Spencer:
the result of the emergence and resolution of social contradictions
degree of development of the productive forces
reducing the degree of dependence of the individual on society
compromise
set of acting individuals
121. From the point of view of M. Weber, the basis of the "spirit of capitalism", which determined the development civilized capitalism:
ascetic ethics of the Protestant denomination
characteristics of the catholic religion
extreme individualism, success orientation
"achievement complex" inherent in "Western man"
pragmatism
122. The social process of growth of cities, urban population, increasing their role in development societies:
centralization
urbanization
migration
differentiation
population
123. Ecological catastrophe:
1. political coup
2. industrial revolution
3. irreversible change in natural complexes
4. cultural revolution
5. scientific and technological revolution
124. The concept of progress reflects:
1. not the law, but the hope of history
2. invention of the enlighteners
3. increasing solidarity of all members of society
4. gradual but steady movement towards the better, higher (in all spheres of human life and society)
5. an ideal that is constantly approached, but never reached
125. Generalized criteria for social progress:
1. the degree of mastery by society of the elemental forces of nature
2. level and structure of consumption of material goods and services
3. accelerating social development
4. Opportunities and prospects for the development of the productive forces of society
5. expansion of conditions and opportunities for freedom and creativity of people
Topic 6. The social structure of society
126. A social group that has fixed customs and is inherited rights and obligations:
2. estate
4. nomenclature
127. Social group:
1. any set of interacting individuals
2. social standard by which an individual evaluates himself and others
3. any collective with which the individual relates his behavior or future
4. individuals selected on the basis of the principle of the greatest similarity with the group that is the object of the sociological experiment
5. movement of individuals between different levels of the social hierarchy
128. Groups associated with other positions by the system of rights and obligations of the individual:
1. social role
2. social status
3. status dial
4. personal status
5. assigned status
129. Interaction of individuals based on statuses and roles:
1. waiting
2. prescription
3. foresight
4. regularity
5. randomness
130. large group people, formed on the basis of common interests in the presence of specific situation:
1. public
3. social community
5. youth
131. The theory that develops the problems of functioning in society of various social groups:
1. middle level theory
2. theory of sociocultural dynamics
3. theory of group dynamics
4. Theory of social solidarity
5. theory of "mirror - I"
132. A spontaneously formed system of social connections, interactions, norms of interpersonal and intergroup communication is:
social institution
civilization
informal organization
formal organization
5. social structure
133. Small social group:
1. believers
2. Democrats
4. sports team
5. pensioners
134. Initial number for a small group:
1. two people
2. five people
3. ten people
4. fifteen people
5. twenty people
135. The trend in the development of social structures of modern Western societies:
1. declining growth of the “middle class”
2. decrease in the share of farmers
3. Lack of highly skilled knowledge workers
4. growth of social mobility
5. the presence of an underclass
136. The main class of modern Kazakh society:
2. farmers
3. middle class
4. top class
5. underclass
137. Signs of a class distinguished in Marxism:
1. the nature of entertainment and leisure
2. relation to the means of production
3. cultural needs and interests
4. religion
5. nature and degree of education
1. religious
2. gender and age
3. political
4. professional
5. ethnic
139. Social differentiation:
1. division of society into groups occupying different positions
2. the transformation of the middle class into the most numerous social group
3. loss of stability by society
4. lack of benefits and privileges for certain social groups
5. strengthening the position of the financial oligarchy
140. People with similar functions, statuses, social roles, cultural needs, unite in common:
1. ethnic
2. cultural
3. economic
4. social
5. political
141. Social group:
1. any collectivity, real or imagined, to which the individual relates his behavior or future
2. a certain social standard by which an individual evaluates himself and others
3. people with common interests, values and norms of behavior
4. striving for the highest labor achievements
5. careerists
142. Normatively regulated behavior based on generally accepted norms, a component of social society structures:
social status
marginal status
social role
social control
143. The penitentiary subculture is formed by:
1. marginal groups
2. teenagers
3. students of technical universities
4. Russian speakers in the Baltic countries
5. prison inmates
144. Outcasts:
1. social groups occupying an intermediate position between stable communities
2. descended to the "bottom" of society come from different classes
3. ruined bourgeois
4. underpaid proletariat
5. adventurers
145. A sure sign of marginality:
1. level of education
2. qualification
3. political status
4. cultural level
5. incompleteness of the movement of social groups
146. Marginal segments of the population:
1. military personnel
2. emigrants
3. students
4. housewives
5. pensioners
147. The state of groups of people placed by social development on the verge of two cultures:
1. marginality
2. modality
3. conflict
4. hostility
5. conformity
148. Signs of formal social organization:
1. lack of purpose
2. distribution of relations of power and subordination
3. normative regulation of behavior
4. formation of rules for regulating relations
5. the presence of a goal, the formalization of functions and the normative regulation of relations, behavior
149. Components of the socio-territorial structure of society:
2. transport communications
4. urbanization
5. Territorial-subject collection and settlement community
150. A group in which an individual is not really included, but relates himself as to a standard:
3. conditional
4. reference
5. laboratory
Topic 7. Problems of social inequality and the theory of social stratification
151. A group of people whose membership is inherited:
1. estate
3. profession
4. religion
5. nationality
152. Social equality:
1. equality of natural inclinations and inclinations of people
2. lack of privileges for certain groups
3. distribution of material wealth among all equally
4. equality of all before the law
5. ability to predict the future
1. P. Sorokin
3. Aristotle
4. M. Weber
5. K. Marx
154. Historical types of stratification:
1. slavery
3. estates
4. slavery, castes, estates
155. Universal measurement of inequality:
156. Social inequality manifests itself in:
1. differences between people in natural ability and inclinations
2. differences between people by professional activities
3. lack of distribution of material goods equally
4. Availability of privileges for individual groups
5. confessional differences
157. Causes of social inequality from a Marxist point of view:
1. rooted in property relations
2. due to the natural differences of people
3. caused by differences in education and culture
4. are the result of imperfect laws
5. this is a historical pattern
158. Open stratification system:
1. caste
2. estate
3. class
4. professional
5. property
159. Stratification, which is the main one in Soviet society:
1. class
2. class
3. caste
4. Etacratic
5. socio-professional
160. A geometric figure that characterizes the profile of the social stratification of the modern societies:
1. square
2. isosceles triangle
161. A new element of the stratification system of Kazakhstani society:
1. scientists
2. engineering and technical workers
3. collective farmers
4. intelligentsia
5. entrepreneurs
162. Criteria for the allocation of the highest class:
1. privileged lifestyle
2. the largest sizes of property and income
3. the widest range of political rights
4. the highest skill level
5. ability to influence social change
163. Social stratification is measured by:
1. culture
2. Oratory skills
4. education
5. lifestyle
164. The main criterion of social stratification:
2. inequality
3. prestige
4. education
5. nationality
165. "Underclass" in sociology:
1. top class
2. middle class
3. lower class
4. middle middle class
5. upper middle class
166. Type of stratification characterizing an open society:
3. estates
4. tribal system
5. slavery
167. Historical first form of social stratification:
2. estates
3. slavery
168. Strat:
1. disposition
5. Orientation
169. Estates are based on:
1.Professional accessories
2. religions
3. capital
4. kinship
5. land ownership
170. The classical caste system existed in:
171. Property as a criterion of inequality loses its meaning in:
1. industrial society
2. pre-industrial society
3. post-industrial society
4. agrarian society
5. horticultural society
172. Signs of stratification according to T. Parsons:
1.intelligence
2.property
3.professional activity
4. labor activity
5.characteristics that people have from birth and are associated with the performance of the role
Criteria of social stratification according to P. Sorokin
4. profession
5. income level, political status, professional roles
174. The most important criterion of social stratification:
1. family ties
2. gender, education
3. age, profession
4. nationality
5. education, income, power, profession
175. M. Weber on social inequality:
1. Inequality is determined by inadequate income opportunities, power, status
2. it is caused by economic relations
3. it is the natural state of society
4. Born of Power Relations
5. place of residence determines inequality
Topic 8. Social mobility and its main trends
176. The most correct definition of classes:
1. "a set of agents with a similar position in social space" (P. Bourdieu)
2. "a set of status groups occupying similar market positions and having similar life chances" (M. Weber)
3. "a class is determined by its place in the social division of labor" (N. Poulantsas)
4. "conflict groups that arise as a result of a differentiated distribution of authority" (R. Dahrendorf)
5. "method of collective action" (F. Parkin)
177. The totality of social movements of people in society:
1. stratification
2. mobility
3. socialization
4.structure
5. differentiation
178. The demotion of an officer refers to mobility:
1. vertical
2. horizontal
3. geographic
4. organized
5. spontaneous
179. An institution serving as the main channel of social mobility:
2. church
5. media
180. The definition of classes that are in an antagonistic relationship belongs to:
1. M. Weber
2. Confucius
3. K. Marx
4. Plato
5. Aristotle
181. The middle class in modern Western society is:
182. The current growth of the middle class in many countries:
1. leads to stagnation, impedes social mobility
2. contributes to the qualification of workers
3. increases the resilience and stability of society
4. increases social tension
5. raises the position of the upper strata of society
183. The middle class includes:
1. unemployed
2. unskilled workers
3. owners of large industrial corporations
4. materially secure layers of the intelligentsia
5. chief executive officers of national corporations
184. The main sign of class belonging in Marxist theory:
1. nature of activity
2. the amount of income received
3. form of income received
4. attitude towards ownership of the means of production
185. Social mobility:
1. equality of opportunity for all members of society
2. the ability to travel within the country and abroad
3. rapid social change
4. the transition of people from one social group to another
5. moving from one age to another
186. Raising the status of an individual within a social group - an example:
1. vertical social mobility
2. horizontal social mobility
3. change by the individual of the territory of residence or work
4. unrelated to social mobility
5. moving from one place to another
187. The most complete description of vertical mobility channels was given by:
1. T. Parsons
2. M. Weber
3. E. Durkheim
4. P. Sorokin
5. K. Marx
188. Vertical mobility:
1.transition from one social group to another, located on the same level
2. transition from one stratum to another
3. moving from one place to another
4. state-controlled displacement
5. elemental movement
189. Horizontal mobility means moving:
1. from one social group to another, located on the same level
2. from one country to another
3. from one place to another
4. state-run
5. elemental movement
190. Movement from Orthodox to Catholic group - mobility:
1. vertical
2. horizontal
3. status
4. geographical
5. organized
191. Downward social mobility:
1. transition from military to civilian service
2. moving from the city to the countryside
3. transition from a managerial position to an ordinary
4. transition from a state-owned enterprise to a private one
5. transition from one religion to another
192. The term "social mobility" was introduced into sociology in 1927:
B. Barber
A.Turan
P. Sorokin
L. Warner
R. Dahrendorf
193. A society in which movement from one stratum to another is not officially restricted:
1. patriarchal
2. slave
3. closed
4. open
5. totalitarian
194. Promotion to positions of higher prestige, income and power:
1. nomenclature career
2. social mobility
3. career and anti-career
4. social contract
5. group dynamics
195. Intergenerational mobility involves:
1. children achieve a higher social position or go down a lower step than their parents
2. the same individual changes social positions several times throughout his life
3. individuals, social groups move from one stratum to another
4. an individual or social group moves from one social position to another at the same level
5. transition from one faith to another
196. Main types of social mobility:
1. career, education, position
2. intergenerational and intragenerational
3. vertical and horizontal
4. integration
5. professional
197. Horizontal mobility:
1. increase in social status
2. lowering social status
3. transition to another social group at the same level
4. state of marginality
5. spatial movements
198. Channels of vertical mobility:
2. profession
4. education system, family, business, politics, army
5. religion
199. Defeat in elections refers to the type of social mobility:
1. horizontal, group
2. vertical, ascending, group
3. horizontal, customized
4. vertical, downward, group
5. vertical, downward, individual
200. Taking another nationality is an example of mobility:
1. horizontal
2. vertical
3. intergenerational
4. intragenerational
5. geographic
Topic 9. Personality as a social system
201. The need to fulfill the requirements of incompatible roles is called:
role conflict
role behavior
marginal status
transition state
role expectation
202. The situation in which social and personal status come into conflict with each other and the individual is forced to prefer one to the other:
frustration
status conflict
marginal status
social role
adaptation
203. The position of the individual in accordance with his personal qualities:
1. social role
2. social status
3. status dial
4. personal status
5. prescribed status
204. The status with which a person is identified in society:
1. personal status
2. main status
3. social status
4. status dial
5. achieved status
205. The doctrine of social character was developed by:
1. R. Dahrendorf
2. G. Marcuse
3. E. Fromm
4. J. Moreno
5. Z. Freud
206. Typology "traditionally oriented personality", "inside-oriented personality" and the "outward-oriented personality" belongs to:
1. D. Risman
2. T. Shibutani
3. V. Yadov
