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

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

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

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

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

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

Rice. 2.

Rice. 3.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

social community

Structural elements of society

One of the most common approaches to the formation of the social structure of society is the allocation of various types of social communities as the initial element.

social community- a really existing, empirically fixed set of individuals, distinguished by relative integrity and acting as an independent subject of social action. There is another definition of a social community, when it refers to all existing social associations, whose members are connected by common interests and are in direct or indirect interaction.

Social communities are distinguished by a variety of specific historical and situationally determined types and forms. Communities differ:

§ by the number of elements that make up the community (from two elements to many millions)

§ according to the duration of existence (from short-term, existing less than the long life of one generation of people, to long-term, existing for many generations)

§ according to the density of ties between members of the association (from closely knit teams to nominal associations)

According to the totality of features, social communities can be divided into two types - mass and group. Mass communities are different from group ones, first of all, by the quality and degree of interaction. Signs of mass community are the following features:

§ associations are amorphous formations with fuzzy dividing boundaries

§ to combine the nature of the uncertainty of the quantitative and qualitative composition, it is characterized by heterogeneity and intergroup nature

§ the association is characterized by a situational way of formation, the association is not stable, but rapidly changing

Mass communities are the crowd, political and social movements, various associations.

Due to the amorphous composition, mass generalities not considered as a structural social-group structure of society.

Group communities(social groups) differ from mass groups in closer interaction and act as the main elements of the structure of society.

[edit] Social group

Social group - a set of people who have a common socially significant feature, common interests, values ​​and norms of behavior that develop within the framework of a historically defined society.

According to Robert Merton: "A social group is a collection of individuals interacting with each other in a certain way, realizing themselves as part of a group and recognized as members of this group from the point of view of other people". In this case, belonging to a particular social group is considered as the basis for self-identification of a person.

Social groups, in turn, are divided by scale and degree of cohesion into large and small, primary and secondary.

Large groups - large associations of people, characterized by the presence of common interests and spatial disunity. Large groups include ethnic groups, classes, territorial communities, professional groups, social strata.

Small groups - small in composition associations, whose members are connected by common activities and are in direct, immediate, personal communication. The characteristics of small groups are small composition, spatial proximity of members, commonality of group values, norms and patterns of behavior, informal control over the behavior of group members. Examples of small social groups are a family, a school class, a student group, a sports team, a brigade, a gang.

Secondary groups - social groups whose members interact indirectly, as a rule - through membership in any institutions and organizations.

Primary groups are small social groups whose members are in direct direct interaction.

All large groups are secondary.

Small social groups can be both primary and secondary. Secondary small groups are usually united common function and are characterized by a lack of emotional contact.

The main elements of the social group structure can be various types of social groups, identified for various reasons. This complicates the formation of a unified social group structure of society, and gives rise to various approaches.

[edit] Approaches to the formation of the social group structure of society

Traditional approach includes several substructures:

§ demographic substructure (gender, age)

§ ethno substructure (tribe, nationality, nation)

§ territorial substructure (urban and rural population, region)

§ class substructure (classes and social groups)

§ family substructure

Socio-economic approach, defended, in particular, by Russian scientists Tatyana Zaslavskaya and Rozalina Ryvkina, understands the social structure of society as the people themselves, organized in different kind groups and performers in the system economic relations certain social roles.

As part of the approach, it also identifies a number of substructures:

§ ethno-demographic substructure

§ socio-territorial substructure

§ family-economic substructure

§ organizational and managerial substructure

§ social and labor substructure

§ professional and job substructure

Pitirim Sorokin's approach. Considering the social structure of society, Sorokin proposed a scheme for identifying the initial elements of the structure, depending on the nature of the values ​​that unite individual groups of communities that act as these elements.

The main forms of unorganized and semi-organized groups based on non-permanent values:

§ externally organized groups

§ crowd, public

§ nominal conglomerates

The most important one-sided groups built on the same set of values ​​are:

§ biosocial (racial, gender, age)

§ sociocultural (genus, territorial neighborhood, language group, trade union, economic group, religious group, political group, ideological group, elite group)

The most important multi-stakeholder groups built around a combination of two or more sets of values ​​are:

§ class

The series of values ​​that have developed in an organized group consolidate the rights and obligations of each member of the group in relation to others, the functions and roles of members, as well as prestige and social status.

Social differentiation

The word "differentiation" comes from a Latin root meaning "difference". Social differentiation is the division of society into groups occupying different social status. Many researchers believe that social stratification is inherent in any society. Even in primitive tribes, groups were distinguished according to sex and age, with their inherent privileges and duties. There were also an influential and respected leader and his entourage, as well as outcasts living "outside the law". At subsequent stages of development, social stratification became more complicated and became more and more obvious. It is customary to distinguish between economic, political and professional differentiation. Economic differentiation is expressed in the difference in incomes, living standards, in the existence of rich, poor and middle strata of the population. The division of society into rulers and ruled, political leaders and the masses is a manifestation of political differentiation. Professional differentiation can be attributed to the allocation in society of various groups according to the nature of their activities, occupations. At the same time, some professions are considered more prestigious than others.

Thus, clarifying the concept of social differentiation, we can say that it means not just the allocation of any groups, but also a certain inequality between them in terms of their social status, scope and nature of rights, privileges and duties, prestige and influence. Can we fix this inequality? There are different answers to this question. For example, the Marxist doctrine of society proceeds from the necessity and possibility of eliminating this inequality as the most striking manifestation of social injustice. To solve this problem, it is necessary first of all to change the system of economic relations, to eliminate private ownership of the means of production. In other theories, social stratification is also regarded as evil, but it cannot be eliminated. People should accept such a situation as an inevitability. According to another point of view, inequality is regarded as a positive phenomenon. It makes people strive to improve social relations. Social homogeneity will lead society to death. At the same time, many researchers note that in most developed countries there is a decrease in social polarization, an increase in the middle strata and a reduction in groups belonging to the extreme social poles. Reflect on the above points of view, try to correlate them with real socio-historical processes.

social stratification

social stratification(from Latin stratum - layer and facio - I do) - one of the basic concepts of sociology, denoting a system of signs and criteria of social stratification, position in society; the social structure of society; branch of sociology. The term "stratification" entered sociology from geology, where it refers to the location of the layers of the earth. But people initially likened the social distances and partitions existing between them to layers of the earth, floors of arranged objects, tiers of plants, etc.

Stratification- this is the division of society into special layers (strata) by combining various social positions with approximately the same social status, reflecting the prevailing idea of ​​social inequality in it, built horizontally (social hierarchy), along its axis according to one or more stratification criteria (indicators of social status). The division of society into strata is carried out on the basis of the inequality of social distances between them - the main property of stratification. Social strata line up vertically and in strict sequence according to indicators of wealth, power, education, leisure, consumption. In social stratification, a certain social distance is established between people (social positions) and a hierarchy is built from social strata. Thus, the unequal access of members of society to certain socially significant scarce resources is fixed by establishing social filters on the boundaries separating social strata. For example, the allocation of social strata can be carried out according to the levels of income, education, power, consumption, the nature of work, spending free time. The social strata identified in society are evaluated in it according to the criterion of social prestige, which expresses the social attractiveness of certain positions. But anyway social stratification is the result of a more or less conscious activity (policy) of the ruling elites, who are extremely interested in imposing on society and legitimizing

SOCIAL DIFFERENTIATION, any differences arising in the process of social interaction and fixed in the social structure between individuals, groups and their position (positions) in society.

Usually there are 4 main forms of social differentiation:

1) Functional differentiation (division of labor, professional and role) means the division of areas of activity: at the highest level - between politics, economics and culture; at the middle level - between multifunctional corporations; on the individual - between the economic specialties of individual workers.

2) Rank differentiation (caste, estate, class, etc. differences) reflects inequality in the distribution of scarce resources of any kind (power, property, status, prestige, privileges, etc.).

3) Cultural differentiation determines differences in values, lifestyle, mentality, in following different traditions, customs, norms and rules of behavior.

4) Competitive differentiation is built on the institutional recognition of individual achievements in education, in vertical social mobility, etc. (ranks, titles, awards, academic degrees, etc.). In reality, all these forms of social differentiation are intertwined and interdependent. Natural differences between people (age, sex, race, etc.) in different social systems acquire different meanings, turning into age categories, gender roles, discriminated groups and other positions in the social structure that determine the status differences between people in the process joint activities, in the transfer of cultural heritage, etc.

After H. Spencer, the functional and accompanying social structural differentiation is also interpreted as an evolutionary process of specialization of social roles, institutions and organizations in the performance of specific narrow functions that were previously merged into one role or organization. Thus, the functions of education, science, social control, care, etc., concentrated in church institutions during the Middle Ages, were eventually taken over by special secular institutions. The functional specialization of individuals and social groups requires both interchanges between "equals", that is, connections between those acting in equivalent social positions (horizontal social differentiation), and asymmetric relations along the line of power - subordination (vertical social differentiation, hierarchy). The totality of horizontal and vertical relations describes the structure of any social organization. In this description, it is important to highlight the transition of social differentiation into a special form - systemic social integration, differentially selecting connections that support the functional integrity and performance of the studied social system and not allowing the appearance of destructive discrepancies between its elements. In this understanding, both social differentiation and social integration that complements it are essentially used as adapted versions of the universal methodological principles of differentiation and integration from the general theory of systems and evolution.

Empirical and theoretical studies of social rank differentiation, closely related to the problems of social inequality, power and property, and therefore always dealing with people and groups in unequal social positions, form a special area of ​​“theories of social stratification” (stratification), including Marxist and Weberian class theories. . Sociologists attribute rank distinctions to all human groups and societies without exception, in view of the inescapability of inequality (even with the abolition of private property) as a necessary condition for any sociality. Without inequality, it is impossible to maintain motivation for a long time social activities. Developed social differentiation is an indicator of the evolutionary complexity of society. Since the time of Aristotle, who taught that there are free by nature and slaves by nature, to whom “to be slaves is both useful and fair”, the search and justification of harmonious correspondences between the natural differences of people in talents and abilities and the differences in their social positions has not stopped; in other words, the search for a natural scale of social rank differentiation for a “fair” placement of people in society. However, most social thinkers, starting with J. J. Rousseau, are of the opinion that it is impossible to rationally and scientifically prove a sufficiently significant connection between natural and social inequalities and, accordingly, between individual differentiation (due to random genetic inequality) and historically developing social differentiation. It cannot be destroyed, but the consequences of social differentiation can be mitigated and made tolerable for the poorest sections of society. AT contemporary politics this is achieved by encouraging a competitive form of social differentiation and endowing both the tops and the bottoms of society with the universal equal status of citizens in a democratic, legal, social state, the purpose of which is to provide everyone with internationally recognized standards of quality of life, nutrition and consumption, achievable at a given level of civilization.

Lit .: Lenin V. I. Great initiative // ​​Lenin V. I. Full. coll. op. 5th ed. M., 1963. T. 39; Aristotle. Politics // Aristotle. Op. M., 1983. T. 4; Weber M. Fav. op. M., 1990; Radaev VV, Shkaratan OI Social stratification. M., 1996; Rousseau Zh. Zh. On the social contract: Treatises. M., 2000; Dahrendorf R. Paths from Utopia. M., 2002.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

Federal State Educational state-financed organization higher professional education

"FINANCIAL UNIVERSITY UNDER THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION"

Department of "Macroeconomic regulation"

abstract

on the topic: "Social differentiation of societyTwa"

Completed by: Dudkin A.D.

Scientific adviser: Shmanev S.V.

Moscow 2013

• Introduction
• 1. Concepts of social division
• Sorokin's theory
• Warner theory
• Weber's theory
• 2. Conflicts associated with social differentiation
• 3. Social differentiation in Russia
• Conclusion
• Bibliography

Introduction

At all times of the existence of human society, from primitive communities to modern, more complex structures, it was common for a person to distinguish and isolate certain groups of people from others in order to increase or decrease their social and economic status. In primitive tribes, the division was relatively simple: an influential and respected leader, his close associates, ordinary members of the communities, as well as those living "outside the law", outcasts.

At subsequent stages of development, social stratification became more complicated and became more and more obvious. The division of labor, duties, the emergence of a stratum of entrepreneurs, the middle class - all this led to the inevitable expansion and complication of social ties within both society and the whole world.

What are the causes of social inequality? In modern Western sociology, the opinion prevails that social stratification grows out of the natural need of society to stimulate the activities of individuals, motivating their activities through appropriate systems of rewards and incentives. However, this stimulation in various scientific and methodological schools and directions is interpreted differently. In this regard, one can single out functionalism, status, economic theories, etc.

Representatives of functionalism explain the cause of social inequality by differentiation of functions performed by different groups, layers, classes. The functioning of society, in their opinion, is possible only through the division of labor, when each social group, stratum, class carry out the solution of the corresponding vital tasks for the entire social organism; some are engaged in the production of material goods, others create spiritual values, others manage, etc. For the normal functioning of a social organism, an optimal combination of all types of activity is necessary, but some of them are more important from the standpoint of this organism, while others are less important. Yes, based on the hierarchy social functions an appropriate hierarchy of groups, layers, classes that perform them is formed. Those who carry out general leadership and management are placed at the top of the social pyramid, because only they can maintain the unity of the state, create the necessary conditions for the successful performance of other functions.

Such a hierarchy exists not only at the level of the state as a whole, but also in every social institution. So, according to P. Sorokin, at the enterprise level - the basis of interprofessional stratification are two parameters: 1. the importance of occupation (profession) for the survival and functioning of the body as a whole; 2. the level of intelligence required for successful execution professional duties. P.A. Sorokin believes that the most socially significant professions are those that are associated with the functions of organization and control.

Consequently, high statuses and people occupying them are better rewarded, they have more power, the prestige of their occupation is higher, and the level of education should also be higher. So we got the four main dimensions of stratification - income, power, education, prestige. But because they exhaust the range of social benefits that people strive for. More precisely, not the benefits themselves (there may just be many of them), but the channels of access to them. A home abroad, a luxury car, a yacht, a vacation in the Canary Islands, etc. - social goods that are always in short supply (i.e. expensive and inaccessible to the majority) and are acquired through access to money and power, which in turn are achieved through high education and personal qualities. Thus, the social structure arises about the social division of labor, and social stratification - about the social distribution of the results of labor, i.e. social benefits. Speaking about the differentiation of society, one cannot but say about Russian society, which, at the moment, cannot be imagined without stratification division. Social differentiation was originally one of the foundations for the creation of a post-communist society in our country, one of the conditions for the formation of a fundamentally different view of man on the world.

1. Concepts of social division

Speaking of social differentiation, first of all, I would like to describe modern concepts social division.

Sorokin's theory

The famous sociologist P.A. Sorokin considered stratification as an integral characteristic of any complexly organized society. He saw the essence of stratification in the unequal distribution of economic resources, power and influence, rights and obligations among members of society. According to this sociologist, three main forms of stratification could be distinguished - economic, political and professional. Economic stratification was due to the unequal distribution of material, financial resources. The political one was associated with unequal access to power, and the basis of professional stratification was the division of social labor and the formation of various professions, among which more and less preferred ones stood out.

Sorokin studied the features of social stratification in various societies. Considering economic stratification, he analyzed two hypotheses, which were formulated respectively by Karl Marx and Vilfredo Pareto. According to Marx, as capitalism developed, so did the stratification of society. Wealth was increasingly concentrated in the hands of large owners, which was accompanied by the impoverishment of large sections of the population. In contrast, Pareto put forward the idea that in all societies the share of economic wealth in the hands of the ruling class is relatively constant. But, as Sorokin showed in his study, in the end, both of these hypotheses were not supported by historical facts. The nature of economic stratification could change over time, but no permanent trend could be found in such changes.

In addition to the concepts of social division, Sorokin also introduced the concept of social mobility. social mobility- this is a change in the place occupied by a person or a group of people in the social structure of society. The more mobile a society is, the easier it is to move from one stratum to another, the more stable it is, according to supporters of the theory of social stratification.

There are two main types of social mobility - vertical and horizontal. Vertical mobility involves movement from one stratum to another. Depending on the direction of movement, there is upward vertical mobility (social uplift, upward movement) and downward vertical mobility (social descent, downward movement). Promotion is an example of upward mobility, dismissal, demolition is an example of downward mobility.

With a vertical type of mobility, a person can make both rises, for example, from a cashier to a bank manager, and falls. An entrepreneur can lose part of his fortune, move to a group of people with lower incomes.

Having lost a qualified job, a person may not find an equivalent job and, in connection with this, lose some of the features that characterize his former social status. Horizontal mobility involves the movement of a person from one group to another, located at the same level, on the same step.

With this type of mobility, a person, as a rule, retains the main features of the group, for example, a worker moved to work in another enterprise, retaining the salary level and the same rank, or moved to another city; the same in terms of the number of inhabitants, etc. Social movements also lead to the emergence of intermediate, boundary layers, which are called marginal.

Warner theory

Lloyd Warner, in his book Yankee City, presented the first large-scale empirical study of social stratification in the United States. Warner followed the Weberian tradition of status groups. He attempted to develop a standard index of status characteristics (a Standard Index of Status Characteristics), starting from such points as education, place of residence, income and origin. All these factors, according to Warner, are used by Americans in assessing their social value, in choosing friends for themselves and for their children. In contrast to Marx, Warner relied heavily on "subjective" criteria for stratification, i.e. on how members of a particular community (community) assess each other's social position than on such "objective" differences as, for example, income.

Warner's main merit in dividing American society into classes is considered to be a theory in which groups consist of individuals with the same prestigious rank. It was Warner who put forward the idea of ​​the existence of a six-class structure (“reputation theory)” instead of the usual two or three-class structure, which included:

· The upper layer of the upper class - were rich aristocrats.

The lower layer of the upper class - included people of high income, but they did not come from aristocratic families, they flaunted their wealth, managed to “grow through the asphalt, have a strong character, arrogance and phenomenal enterprise.

· The upper layer of the middle class - consisted of highly educated people engaged in intellectual work, and business people with high incomes: doctors, lawyers, owners of capital.

· The lower layer of the middle class - represented mainly by "white collars" (secretaries, clerks, clerks, cashiers).

· The upper layer of the lower class - were "blue collars" (skilled workers and other manual laborers).

The lower stratum of the lower class - included the poorest and most outcast members of the community, very similar to the lumpen proletariat (homeless vagrants, beggars and unemployed).

Warner defined classes as groups that are believed to exist by members of society and are located respectively at the highest or lowest levels.

Weber's theory

The famous sociologist Max Weber, conducting many years of research that laid the foundation for his theory of social stratification, brought to it his own, completely different from the vision of other theorists, a three-dimensional approach. The basis of his three dimensions of social stratification are: economy, power and prestige. Subsequently, these three dimensions were called autonomous by him. According to the theory of Max Weber, it is property, or rather, the types of its possession, that make it possible for the emergence of economic classes, in which there are measures of access to power, education political parties, and the prestige of some of them creates status groupings.

Weber defines class as the ability of an individual to gain access to various goods and income in market conditions. Simply put, a class includes individuals with starting positions, professions, incomes, and access to resource opportunities. This sociologist, not without reason, believed that classes take place only in a society with a capitalist system, since it is this system that is determined by market relations. But in the conditions of the market, individuals are divided into two types: the first offer goods and services, and the second only labor. In turn, the former differ from the latter only in the quantitative possession of property. Like other theorists of sociology, Max Weber does not in any of his works have a clear classification of the structure of the society he studied, in particular, the capitalist one. Therefore, most sociologists who study the work of this theorist give us completely different lists, depending on their own interpretation. According to the general opinion, the classifications determined on the basis of the works of Weber by Radaev and Shkaratan are considered the closest. It looks like this:

Working class;

Petty bourgeoisie;

Intelligentsia and engineering and technical workers;

Administrative and managerial personnel;

Owners;

Landlords;

Entrepreneurs

The economic component, mentally divided into two parts, allows us to classify into one of the parts the owners with a consistently positive attitude and the proletariat with its negative attitudes due to the lack of property and, by and large, qualifications for its possible implementation in market conditions. With such a stratification in the center, a middle class is formed, which includes small owners and people who have certain skills and knowledge required in market conditions. The next division according to Weber's theory is the division based on prestige and the resulting vertical of status groups, in other words, the hierarchy. The basis in which communities serve, in which the concept of honor is formed, defined as any of the qualities appreciated by a large number of individuals in the community. Often this kind of assessment was associated with a class difference, in which property should be noted, or rather, the quantitative possession of it played an important role, and possibly the dominant one, but both people with property and those without property could be included in one status group. Max Weber considered the acquisition of honor (prestige) in status groups possible only by firmly assigning strictly exclusive activities to group members, imposing a ban on other individuals doing the same, in other words, monopolizing any benefits. This was manifested within the groups in the following way - the possibility of wearing certain clothes, jewelry, insignia, the production of a certain product, the recreation of a separate and different from other individuals of the group to emphasize the exclusivity of members of this particular status group and possible strengthening and increasing the distance between groups. Also, to create exclusivity, marital relations of persons within the same circle and similar measures of isolation through exclusivity were widely used. All this led to the formation of a progressive isolation of the status group. Weber considered the third basis for social division to be differences in power, in turn giving rise to the emergence of parties in which people united according to their beliefs. According to Weber, a person belonging to a certain group has equal amounts of power, wealth and prestige, which are independent of each other. Parties, on the other hand, represent interests according to the status of the individuals included in them and, of course, with the possibility of replenishing their ranks from their own status groups, but an optional condition for the formation of parties is class or status orientation, but rather loyalty to any status groups ideally.

Weber's only expressed agreement with other theorists who have studied the theory of sociological stratification is the acceptance of the existence of social differentiation as an axiom.

2. Conflicts associated with social differentiation

social inequality differentiation society

It is obvious that social differentiation generated by the difference in income, status, opportunities inevitably leads to conflicts in society. In this case, the conflict will be the clash of opposing goals, positions, opinions and views of the subjects of social interaction. Understanding the causes of conflicts occurring in society, one can not only solve the problems of these particular conflicts, but also in general analyze the main consequences of the social differentiation of society.

Each of the sociologists studying the issue of social differentiation and conflicts associated with this concept, sought to give his own classification, supplementing or curtailing existing knowledge.

So, Max Weber gave a classification according to the direction of the conflict: purposeful and value-oriented. Purposeful actions strive for success, using the external world as a means, value-oriented actions do not have any goal and are valuable in themselves. The way of thinking of people of the first type of actions is the following: “I seek, I achieve by using others”, the second type of actions is “I believe in some value and I want to act for this ideal, even if it harms me.” The difference between the value and purposeful type of activity is that the goal is understood as an idea of ​​success, which becomes the cause of action, and value is the idea of ​​duty, which becomes the basis of action. People in their actions can be both purposeful and value-oriented, but, nevertheless, they act in certain social relations in a non-isolated manner.

Karl Marx studied the theory of social conflict and came to the conclusion that conflict is inevitable in any group, organization, society. The main reason for the emergence of the conflict, Marx singled out the deficit and unfair distribution of resources and, of course, power. The negative consequences of the conflict are predetermined and a priori.

Georg Simmel, considered the founder of theoretical conflictology, argued that conflict in society is inevitable, because conflict is a natural component of some social processes. But unlike Marx's theory, in Simmel's theory conflict did not necessarily lead to negative consequences and destruction of social systems. The conflict also brought positive aspects to society - the strengthening of social systems, their cohesion. Simmel considered possible sources of conflict not only a clash of interests, but also the manifestation of hostility and aggression towards each other by people. Based on this, he singled out the factors guiding the nature of the conflict - the instincts of hatred and love.

Ralf Dahrendorf defines contemporary conflict as a conflict between resources and claims. Economic progress alone will not eliminate either unemployment or poverty. The majority class has found a relatively comfortable existence, defends its interests in the same way as other ruling classes did, does not seek to break the circle of deprivation of people who have sunk to the position of declassed. On the contrary, in troubled times, he actively pushes some of his fellow citizens beyond the threshold of society and keeps them there, protecting the position of those inside. Like the previous ruling classes, they find enough reasons for the need for such boundaries and are ready to "let in" those who accept their values. At the same time, they prove that there should be no boundaries between classes. They want to remove the barriers that divide society, but are completely unprepared to do anything about it. The majority class draws boundaries not only horizontally, but also vertically (racial-ethnic problem). Dahrendorf writes that the charms of a multi-ethnic society were wasted for the majority, who are more concerned about maintaining interracial barriers than about achieving openness. This state of society is a step back in the history of the development of citizenship. Affirmative action is needed: providing minorities and other disadvantaged with some social benefits in education and employment. A new type of "tarnished" liberalism has emerged, abandoning the great gains in the field of universal civil rights and norms in order to satisfy the separatist demands of national minorities. Minority rights were initially misunderstood and consequently turned into minorities.

Lewis Coser, approaching the problem of conflict, agrees with the works of G. Simmel, whose monograph "Conflict" is built around the main thesis: "Conflict is a form of socialization." For L. Koser, conflicts are not social anomalies, but necessary, normal natural forms of existence and development of social life. In almost every act of social interaction lies the possibility of conflict. He defines conflict as a confrontation between social subjects (individuals, groups) arising from a lack of power, status or means necessary to satisfy value claims, and involving the neutralization, infringement or destruction (symbolic, ideological, practical) of the enemy. The subject that causes the vast majority of conflicts are real social benefits recognized by both parties as such. The main causes of the conflict are the lack of resources and the violation of the principles of social justice in their distribution. The initiators of the aggravation of relations and bringing them to the point of conflict are most often representatives of those social groups that consider themselves socially disadvantaged. The more stable their confidence in this, the more actively they initiate conflicts and the more often they clothe them in illegal, violent forms.

As you can see, the authors of social theories adhere, for the most part, to two opposite poles: conflicts in society, generated by various forms of differentiation, can be both negative for society, leading to irreversible changes, and neutral, being a special form of socialization for strata.

Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which a successful resolution of social conflicts is possible. Firstly, it is a timely and accurate diagnosis of the causes of the conflict. Secondly, it is a mutual interest in overcoming contradictions on the basis of mutual recognition of the interests of each of the parties. The third, indispensable condition is the joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of means and methods: direct dialogue of the parties, negotiations through an intermediary, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc. The final, post-conflict stage is of great importance. At this stage, efforts must be made to finally eliminate the conflicts of interests, goals, attitudes of the warring parties, and the socio-psychological tension between them must be eliminated.

Based on the foregoing, I would like to note that the most effective way to reduce the level of tension in society associated with differences in strata is to facilitate the transition from one social group to another; which, in general, is implemented in modern society and the mechanism for this continues to improve.

3. Social differentiation in Russia

Despite the fact that the Russian economy after the collapse of the Soviet Union took on a clearly market and Western outlines, one cannot speak of the ongoing differentiation of society in the "Western" direction. The creation of a "middle class", free enterprise, the privatization of former state property - everything that political power was so striving for, although it reflected obvious changes in society in the process of leaving the communist system, it has its own unique features.

The formation of a post-industrial society in Russia is manifested not only in the creation of an information-technological basis for material and spiritual production, but also in the development of market relations based on various forms of ownership, a change in the mechanism state regulation, a significant increase in the role of the service sector, large-scale concentration of production while lagging behind small and medium-sized businesses. The economic reforms carried out in recent decades have most directly affected the state of social groups and strata.

Most significant changes occurred in the content of social groups identified on the basis of the criteria of position in the system social production, division and spheres of application of labor. First of all, I mean the new parameters of the economically active population, which is most directly related to the production of goods and services. Statistical data show that a steady trend in the development of social differentiation in post-industrial countries has been an increase in the size of the labor force (for example, in the USA it changed from 125.8 million people in 1990 to 153 million people in 2010); however, directly opposite changes took place in Russian society - a decrease in the quantitative parameters of the economically active population from 75.1 million people. in 1990 to 72.9 million people. in 2003 and only by 2010, it was possible to reach the figure of 75.4 million people, which was a reflection of the crisis development of the economy in this period. Also, I would like to cite the following data on the social gradation of Russian society: despite the steady growth in the number of employed people in the world (for example, in the USA - from 118.8 million people in 1990 to 139.0 million people in 2010), the dynamics of the average annual number of people employed in the economy in Russia was characterized by ambiguous indicators: 1990 - 71.2 million people, 2000 - 65.1 million people, 2010 - 69.8 million pers. The reduction in production volumes during the crisis led to a decrease in the parameters of the employed labor force. At the same time, the quantitative indicators of the unemployed group and its specific gravity as part of the economically active population from 3.9 million people. in 1990 to 5.6 million people. in 2010, which was largely a consequence of the ongoing processes of industrialization of the country.

Analyzing the works of well-known sociologists, one can come to the conclusion that in any developing society there is a so-called class of "entrepreneurs", which is a significant transition to a new round of development of economic relations. However, modern statistics indicate the opposite: the results of population censuses indicate that the absolute majority of those employed in the economy are employed (2002 - 58 million people (95%), 2010 - 61.6 million people). people (94%) We should also not forget about the spontaneous and extremely rapid formation of a class of entrepreneurs in Russia their quantitative composition increased to 1.4 million). state property, transfer to the private sector of production and sale natural resources and redistribution of power. It also does not contribute to the development of entrepreneurship in modern Russia judicial and criminal law: for example, according to Forbes magazine, every fifth convict in Russia in 2012 received a sentence precisely because of his entrepreneurial activity - whether it was mismanagement accounting, speculative operations or a simple desire of public authorities to maintain a monopoly in a particular area of ​​activity.

Also, the aforementioned "polarization" leads to a certain intensity of relations in society: in a short period in Russia, a ruling class (large owners, top managers, politicians) was formed, characterized by an ultra-high level of income, and a lower class, uniting hired workers performing the functions of performing labor in various spheres of social production and characterized by a low level of income (according to this indicator, up to 70% of the population can currently be classified as a lower class).

Finally, I would like to provide information on the created "middle class", which unites individuals characterized by a standard level of income and consumption, having a fairly high level of education, professional status, and certain political and moral values. The specificity of the Russian reality lies in the fact that, despite the development of small and medium-sized businesses and the increase in the educational level of the population, representatives of these groups are characterized by a low property status and income level. In this regard, at present, one can only raise the question of the formation of a middle class in Russia, subject to the implementation of an appropriate state policy, but not the full functioning of this class as a subsystem of society.

Conclusion

Summing up, I would like to say that the modern differentiation of society is the result of complex social, political and economic processes that took place in societies various countries Europe, Russia, Asia and the USA during the period of their existence and, in many respects, determined by them.

Obviously, over time, there is a decrease in the pressure of the spiritual and moral spheres on the freedom of thought and speech of a person, there is a creation of new strata, new categories of social division, the existence of which is unthinkable in the realities of past centuries. There is, in the literal sense, the evolution of society, which is based on the ideas and thoughts of past centuries, but introduces its own, fundamentally new, adjustments.

However, despite the strong softening of the framework, today it is impossible to declare an unequivocal victory of reason over differentiation - and people still evaluate each other not so much by moral and personal qualities, but by internal systems evaluation and categorization, taking into account precisely the social class classification.

I believe that one of the most important directions in the evolution of the social differentiation of society in the coming years should be the rejection of the categorization scheme of thinking and evaluation by social elements of each other and the transition to a new system that guarantees even greater freedom of self-expression and self-determination.

Bibliography

1. Belokrylova O. S., Mikhalkina E. V., Bannikova A. V., Agapov E. P. Social science. Moscow: Phoenix, 2010.

2. Kasyanov VV Social science. Moscow: Phoenix, 2009.

3. Kokhanovsky V.P., Matyash G.P., Yakovlev V.P., Zharov L.V. Sociology for secondary and special educational institutions. Tver, 2008.

4. Kravchenko A. I. Social science. Moscow: Russian Word, 2006.

5. Kurbatov V. I. Social science. Rostov n/a: Phoenix, 2008.

6. Rosenko Svetlana Ivanovna: “Society as a whole. Social development ": M.: EKSMO, 2012.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Similar Documents

Social differentiation and social inequality as the basis of the theories of social stratification and mobility. Concept, essence and types of social responsibility. General characteristics, main causes and stages of social conflicts, ways to resolve them.

abstract, added 05/19/2010


Theoretical and methodological foundations of the study of social differentiation of the population, its concept, essence and causes. Current state and the main directions for improving the level and quality of life of the population in Russia. Forms and types of social inequality.

term paper, added 01/21/2015


Stratification concepts, social differentiation of populations into classes in a hierarchical rank. The main forms of stratification and the relationship between them, the causes of social inequality. The ratio of inequality, equality and justice.

abstract, added 11/17/2010


Social inequality arising from social differences and differentiation. Factors of social difference. Natural differences between people. Fundamentals of differentiation of society. The structure of social stratification. Basic principles of division.

presentation, added 12/11/2016


Comparative characteristics social inequality in Russia and Brazil. The study of social differentiation. Measuring economic inequality across population groups. The study of the poverty line and the level of material security in the state.

term paper, added 10/11/2014


Characteristics of the main systems of social stratification. The study of stratification tendencies of modern Russian society. Analysis of the problem of the origin of social inequality. Marx's class theory. Social mobility: channels and mechanisms.

abstract, added 02/13/2016


Inequality between strata of society. Social differentiation of society. The division of society into social groups that occupy different positions in society. Social inequality as a stimulus for a person to self-development and achieve their goals.

abstract, added 01/27/2016


Characterization of the foundations of forecasting the social structure of society, consideration of its role in the sustainable development of society in the context of market transformations. Analysis of trends and prospects for the development of the social structure of society in the Russian Federation.

term paper, added 04/09/2015


Changing the social stratification of Russian society in the course of the development of democratic reforms. Differentiation of incomes of the population and polar stratification of society. Marginalization of society as a loss of connection with one's social, national-ethnic group.

presentation, added 04/12/2015


Analysis of the role of the processes of integration and differentiation in the formation and development of society in the context of the social system, their functions and systemic significance, practical significance. Ways of classifying social communities. The concept of classes and social strata.

on the course "Natural Science"

on the topic "Social differentiation of society"

1. Social stratification

The theories of social stratification and social mobility are based on the concepts of social differentiation and social inequality. Sometimes these concepts are identified, but it should be noted that the concept of "social differentiation" is broader in scope and includes any social differences, including those not related to inequality. For example, some people are football fans and others are not. This occupation acts as a differentiating quality, but will not be a sign of social inequality. Social inequality is a form of social differentiation in which individual individuals, social groups, strata, classes occupy a certain position in the hierarchy of social statuses, have unequal life chances and opportunities to meet needs.

The idea of ​​social equality is one of the great and most attractive myths of mankind. In reality, there was not and is not a single complex society in which social equality would exist. Moreover, it is social differences and social inequality that ensure the development of mankind as a whole. At the same time, a significant level of social inequality is completely unacceptable. The main problem is to constantly find a ratio acceptable to society and its constituent individuals between the degree of inevitable social inequality and people's ideas about social justice.

If among the members of a society there are both haves and have-nots, then such a society is characterized by the presence of economic stratification. No, labels, signs are not able to change the fact of inequality, which is expressed in the difference in income, living standards. If within a group there are rulers and ruled; this means that such a group is politically differentiated. If members of a society are divided into different groups according to the nature of their activities, occupations, and some professions are considered more prestigious in comparison with others, then such a society is professionally differentiated. These are the three main forms of social stratification. As a rule, they are closely intertwined. People who belong to the highest stratum in one respect usually belong to the same stratum in other respects, and vice versa, although there are exceptions.

The very term "stratification" of Latin origin, borrowed from geology, means "layering, stratification" in translation. Social stratification is a set of social groups arranged hierarchically according to the criteria of social inequality and called strata. There are many such criteria. K. Marx brought to the fore the possession of property and the level of income. M. Weber added social prestige, belonging of the subject to political parties, to power. P. Sorokin called the cause of stratification the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties in society, in addition - citizenship, occupation, national, religious affiliation. He proposed the following stratification division of society:

the highest layer of professional administrators;

mid-level technicians;

commercial grade;

petty bourgeoisie;

technicians and workers performing managerial functions;

skilled workers;

unskilled workers.

There are many other variants of the stratification division of society. AT last years The most widely used six-layer hierarchy of modern Western society:

Upper class:

the upper stratum of the upper class (hereditary wealth, up to 1% of the population);

the lowest stratum (earned wealth, up to 4% of the population);

Middle class:

the upper stratum (highly paid representatives of mental labor and business people, from 15 to 25% of the population);

the lowest layer ("white collars", managers, engineering and technical workers - up to 40% of the population);

Lower class:

the upper stratum (manual workers - 20 - 25% of the population);

the lowest stratum (lumpen, unemployed - 5-10% of the population).

There is social inequality between the strata, which cannot be overcome. The main way to reduce social tension is the ability to move from one stratum to another

2. Social mobility

The concept of social mobility was introduced into scientific circulation by P. Sorokin. Social mobility is a change in the place occupied by a person or a group of people in the social structure of society. The more mobile a society is, the easier it is to move from one stratum to another, the more stable it is, according to supporters of the theory of social stratification.

There are two main types of social mobility - vertical and horizontal. Vertical mobility involves movement from one stratum to another. Depending on the direction of movement, there is upward vertical mobility (social uplift, upward movement) and downward vertical mobility (social descent, downward movement). Promotion is an example of upward mobility, dismissal, demolition is an example of downward mobility. With a vertical type of mobility, a person can make both rises, for example, from a cashier to a bank manager, and falls. An entrepreneur can lose part of his fortune, move to a group of people with lower incomes. Having lost a qualified job, a person may not find an equivalent job and, in connection with this, lose some of the features that characterize his former social status. Horizontal mobility involves the movement of a person from one group to another, located at the same level, on the same step. With this type of mobility, a person, as a rule, retains the main features of the group, for example, a worker moved to work in another enterprise, retaining the salary level and the same rank, or moved to another city; the same in terms of the number of inhabitants, etc. Social movements also lead to the emergence of intermediate, boundary layers, which are called marginal.

"Social elevators" with the help of which movements are carried out, first of all, are the army, the church, the school. Additional "social lifts" include the media, party activities, the accumulation of wealth, marriage to members of the upper class.

3. Social control and social responsibility

The concept of responsibility in a broad sense is characterized in science as a social relationship between individual subjects (a person, a group, etc.) and those who control their behavior. It can be control of one's own conscience, public opinion or the state. Social responsibility can be defined as one of the aspects of the relations of participants in public life, characterizing the relationship of an individual, society and the state, individuals among themselves and including the subject's awareness of the social significance of his behavior and its consequences, his duty to act within the requirements of social norms governing social relations. In relation to an individual, responsibility is the obligation and willingness of the subject to be responsible for the actions, deeds and their consequences. Responsibility for an individual is formed as a result of the requirements that society imposes on him, the social group in which he is included. The requirements realized by the individual become the basis for the motivation of his behavior, which is regulated by conscience, a sense of duty. The formation of a personality involves cultivating a sense of responsibility in it, which becomes its property. Responsibility is manifested in the actions of a person and covers the following questions: is a person able to fulfill the requirements at all, to what extent he correctly understood and interpreted them, can he foresee the consequences of his actions for himself and society, is he ready to accept sanctions in case of violations. Responsibility must be approached based on the organic unity of rights and duties, taking into account the place individuals and groups of people occupy in the system of social ties. The wider the public powers and the real possibilities of individuals, the higher the measure of their responsibility.

Depending on the content of social norms, moral, political, legal and other types of social responsibility are distinguished. Sanctions are different in case of violation of certain norms. For example, in the absence of moral responsibility, violation of moral norms, the so-called informal negative sanctions are applied: censure, remark, ridicule. Social responsibility is not only the responsibility of individuals, but also the responsibility of the state, all subjects of the political system of society for the obligations assumed, which is the essence of political responsibility. The main sanctions in case of non-fulfillment by politicians of their obligations are non-election for the next term, criticism by the public, in the media. A specific feature of legal liability is a clear definition in the law of the subjects, content, types, forms and mechanisms of implementation. The basis of legal liability is the commission of an offense. Depending on the nature of the offense, the types of legal liability are determined: criminal, administrative, disciplinary, civil law.

4. Social conflict and ways to resolve it

The social heterogeneity of society, differences in income levels, prestige, access to power are a source of social tension. Social tension often develops into conflict. Social conflict is a clash of opposing goals, positions, opinions and views of the subjects of social interaction. Every society, every social group, social community is subject to conflicts to one degree or another. The wide spread of this phenomenon and the heightened attention to it by society and scientists contributed to the emergence of a special "branch of sociological knowledge - conflictology.

Marxist sociologists are of the opinion that conflict is a temporary state of society that can be overcome by rational means and, therefore, it is possible to achieve a level of social development when social conflicts disappear. Most sociologists of non-Marxist orientation believe that the existence of a society without conflicts is impossible. They believe that conflict is an integral part of being, the main engine of social development. The conflict, in their opinion, is a necessary element of social life, which gives an outlet for social tension, the energy of activity, giving rise to social changes of various scales. Another thing is that the conflict should not be allowed to escalate excessively, because this can lead to catastrophic consequences.

Marxist sociologists bring economic factors to the fore as the causes of social conflicts. One of the creators of modern conflictology, the German sociologist R. Dahrendorf put political factors at the basis of social conflicts: the struggle for power, prestige, authority. P. Sorokin pointed out the connection between the conflict and the satisfaction of people's needs. At the same time, he emphasized that it is not the needs in themselves that are important, but also the means of satisfying them, access to the relevant types of activities, which is due to the social organization of society.

Usually, 4 stages are distinguished in a social conflict: pre-conflict, conflict, conflict resolution and post-conflict. In turn, each of these stages can be divided into a number of phases. The pre-conflict stage after the latent phase of the development of the conflict ends with an incident, some external event, which is an occasion that sets the conflicting parties in motion. The second, main stage of the conflict is characterized by conflict behavior, i.e. actions aimed at directly or indirectly blocking the achievement by the opposing side of its goals, intentions, interests. The resolution of the conflict is carried out both through a change in the objective situation, and through a subjective, psychological restructuring, a change in the subjective image of the situation that has developed among the warring parties.

Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which a successful resolution of social conflicts is possible. First, it is a timely and accurate diagnosis of the causes of the conflict. Secondly, it is a mutual interest in overcoming contradictions on the basis of mutual recognition of the interests of each of the parties. The third, indispensable condition is the joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of means and methods: direct dialogue between the parties, negotiations through an intermediary, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc. The final, post-conflict stage is of great importance. At this stage, efforts must be made to finally eliminate the contradictions of interests, goals, attitudes of the warring parties, and the socio-psychological tension between them must be eliminated.

Since conflicts are inevitable in our lives, we need to learn how to manage them, strive to ensure that they lead to the least cost for society and the individuals involved.

Bibliography

1. Belokrylova O. S., Mikhalkina E. V., Bannikova A. V., Agapov E. P. Social science. Rostov n/a: Phoenix, 2006.

2. Kasyanov VV Social science. Rostov n/a: Phoenix, 2007.

3. Kokhanovsky V.P., Matyash G.P., Yakovlev V.P., Zharov L.V. Philosophy for secondary and special educational institutions. Rostov n/a, 2008.

4. Kravchenko A. I. Social science. Moscow: Russian Word, 2006.

5. Kurbatov V. I. Social science. Rostov n/a: Phoenix, 2007.