Social Stratification, social classes, social mobility and

“nature vs nurture “

SOCIOLOGY
Sara Kadriovska
 Social stratification
 Just as in all things, when humans compete with one another in a capitalist society, there
are going to be some individuals that do better than others. Because of this difference,
the individuals who make more money will have more power and influence than those
who do not. The natural variance in status between individuals is defined as social
stratification.
 But what is social stratification? There are four principles that define the term and
explain how a society can be stratified:

1. Social stratification is a trait of society - This means that stratification, as with other
competitive aspects, is a natural occurrence within any free society.
2. Stratification carries between generations - It is often the case that a child will remain in
the same social class as their parents.
3. Stratification is variable - There are many different forms that social stratification can
take, depending on factors like government influence.
4. Stratification includes inequality in belief - Social stratification can take place in belief
systems as well, with lower-income earning individuals in the United States being more
likely to believe in God than those of a higher-earning income level.

 The most common stratification factors include three broad layers of the upper, middle,
and lower classes. Today, sociologists use the term "socioeconomic status" to refer to
ranking based on various dimensions of social inequality.
 Social classes
 Social class refers to a group of people with similar levels of wealth, influence, and
status. Sociologists typically use three methods to determine social class:
 The objective method measures and analyzes “hard” facts.
 The subjective method asks people what they think of themselves.

 The lower class

 The lower class is typified by poverty, homelessness, and unemployment. People of this
class, few of whom have finished high school, suffer from lack of medical care, adequate
housing and food, decent clothing, safety, and vocational training. The media often
stigmatize the lower class as “the underclass,” inaccurately characterizing poor people as
welfare mothers who abuse the system by having more and more babies, welfare fathers
who are able to work but do not, drug abusers, criminals, and societal “trash.”

 The middle class

 The middle class are the “sandwich” class. These white collar workers have more money
than those below them on the “social ladder,” but less than those above them. They
divide into two levels according to wealth, education, and prestige. The lower middle
class is often made up of less educated people with lower incomes, such as managers,
small business owners, teachers, and secretaries. The upper middle class is often made up
of highly educated business and professional people with high incomes, such as doctors,
lawyers, stockbrokers, and CEOs.

 The upper class

 Comprising only 1 to 3 percent of the United States population, the upper class holds
more than 25 percent of the nation's wealth. This class divides into two groups: lower‐
upper and upper‐upper. The lower‐upper class includes those with “new money,” or
money made from investments, business ventures, and so forth. The upper‐upper class
includes those aristocratic and “high‐society” families with “old money” who have been
rich for generations. These extremely wealthy people live off the income from their
inherited riches. The upper‐upper class is more prestigious than the lower‐upper class.
 Wherever their money comes from, both segments of the upper class are exceptionally
rich. Both groups have more money than they could possibly spend, which leaves them
with much leisure time for cultivating a variety of interests. They live in exclusive
neighborhoods, gather at expensive social clubs, and send their children to the finest
schools. As might be expected, they also exercise a great deal of influence and power
both nationally and globally.
 Social mobility
 When studying social classes, the question naturally arises: Is it possible for people to
move within a society's stratification system? In other words, is there some possibility
of social mobility, or progression from one social level to another? Yes, but the degree
to which this is possible varies considerably from society to society.
 On the one hand, in a closed society with a caste system, mobility can be difficult or
impossible. Social position in a caste system is decided by assignment rather than
attainment. This means people are either born into or marry within their family's caste;
changing caste systems is very rare. An example of the rigid segregation of caste
systems occurs today in India, where people born into the lowest caste (the
“untouchables”) and can never become members of a higher caste. South Africa also has
a caste system.
 On the other hand, in an open society with a class system, mobility is possible. The
positions in this stratification system depend more on achieved status, like education,
than on ascribed status, like gender. For example, the United States' social stratification
is of this type, meaning movement between social strata is easier and occurs more
frequently.

 Nature vs Nurture
 The wording of the phrase “nature vs. nurture” makes it seem as though human
individuality—personality traits, intelligence, preferences, and other characteristics—
must be based on either the genes people are born with or the environment in which they
grew up. The reality, as scientists have shown, is more complicated, and both these and
other factors can help account for the many ways in which individuals differ from each
other.
 How do nature and nurture work together?
 A person’s biological nature can affect a person’s experience of the environment. For
example, a person with a genetic disposition toward a particular trait, such as
aggressiveness, may be more likely to have particular life experiences (including,
perhaps, receiving negative reactions from parents or others). Or, a person who grows up
with an inclination toward warmth and sociability may seek out and elicit more positive
social responses from peers. These life experiences could, in turn, reinforce an
individual’s initial tendencies. Nurture or life experience more generally may also
modify the effects of nature—for example, by expanding or limiting the extent to which
a naturally bright child receives encouragement, access to quality education, and
opportunities for achievement.