It's called social differentiation. Trends in the development of social relations. Reasons for grouping people

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

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

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

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

social background;

Ethnic background;

Level of education;

Positions;

professional affiliation;

income and wealth;

Lifestyle.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The social institution is organized system ties and social norms, which brings together significant social values ​​and procedures that meet the basic needs of society.

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

Institutionalization is the process by which social practices become sufficiently regular and long-lasting.

The activity of the institute is determined by:

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

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

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

Explicit Functions of Social Institutions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The main functions of the family:

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

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

Societies, according to which, the main criterion for determining social differentiation was the attitude towards the means of production. In particular, this point of view was supported by Marxism. However, his theorists singled out not only classes, but also strata within each class (for example, the petty, middle and big bourgeoisie), thereby emphasizing that inequality and alienation are characteristic of any groups of people. Nevertheless, they believed that they should be overcome, and such a class as the proletariat plays precisely this mission in history.

As a counterbalance to class theory, a concept emerged that was also based on social differentiation. The author of this theory of stratification was Pitirim Sorokin. He developed a whole system of signs and criteria of social stratification that form the structure of a social organism. Sorokin distinguished between one-dimensional and multidimensional stratification, that is, the division of society into such groups as "strata" according to one attribute and according to their whole set. He divided these strata according to such characteristic features as employment, income, living conditions, education, psychological traits, religious beliefs, behavioral style, and many others. Many modern sociologists consider strata to be the basic and "final" element of social structure.

Scientists were also interested in the extent to which the fate of the individual and the social differentiation of society are determined by the division into strata. They calculated the possibility of moving from one group to another (horizontal mobility), as well as within classes (vertical), over one, two or more generations, highlighting regular and random mobility among them. The theory of Max Weber played an important role in the study of the problem of stratification. He believed that the difference between groups of people is due not only to access to public wealth, power and law, but also social indicators- status and prestige. According to Weber, each group has a certain lifestyle - habits, stereotypes, values.

The study of the norms that determine the behavior of people in a social system, as well as how social differentiation affects their status, was studied by such philosophers and sociologists as Lyndon and Mead. Components such as stereotype and prestige force a person to evaluate a person or phenomenon in an appropriate way, shared by their group (for example, what brand of clothes to buy, whether to send children to Yale University, whether it is necessary to have a Rolls-Royce or Mercedes). If a person wants to free himself from the role imposed on him, as a rule, it is considered that he has lost prestige, and

Social differentiation in such cases turns into a reaction of a group, and even the whole society, to the behavior of an individual who “evades” from fulfilling expectations, conforming to generally accepted norms and values. Such sanctions may be provided for by law, and sometimes they are based on custom, morality or religion. This is especially true when even physical actions- beating, death penalty, lynching or lynching, imprisonment. In other cases, economic sanctions such as fines or fines are applied. But in most modern countries, they are mainly limited to showing signs of disrespect.

The interaction between social roles, status, sanctions, prestige and other similar mechanisms is studied by a special discipline, interactionism. Each such group, scientists say, creates its own “world”, where the “life scenario”, certain actions, certain clothes are painted. There is even a social differentiation of language, generated by differences between large groups of people in a professional or corporate field. But such worlds are unstable. Certain social events, especially on a large scale, force people to rethink their roles and sometimes take completely unexpected actions. So there is a change in the familiar world, in which the roles are distributed again.

Applied 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. material independence, high income, etc., will be valued in the foreground).

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 economy(e.g. 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 refers to both a certain level of income and low cash income, and the lack 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.

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

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

This principle is based on Engel's law, derived back in Ser. XIX century, according to which, the lower the income, the greater the share of the expenditure should be intended for food. 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 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 transmission cultural heritage and 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 combination 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 rank differentiation of the social, 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 theories of classes. Sociologists attribute rank differences to all human groups and societies without exception due to the inevitable inequality (even with the abolition of private property) as necessary condition 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 enough 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.

Social mobility is the source of social change in society. During periods of the collapse of society, there is a disorderly, chaotic movement of people in society. Chaos in social mobility ultimately leads to the destruction of the social structure of society, since stability and orderliness of social relations are lost.

In a stable society social mobility does not at all resemble "Brownian motion". It reveals a certain direction, which is steadily manifested in certain periods of the development of society. For example, during the formation of an industrial society, most of the migrants move from the countryside to the city. At the same time, a significant part of the peasants is moving into the composition of workers and employees. Work as workers or employees involves the development of certain professions, therefore, the formation of new professional communities is also taking place. The reverse processes (from city to village, from workers to peasants) during this period are episodic and therefore do not determine the overall picture of social mobility of society.

Those communities and layers from which people move are gradually changing both quantitatively and qualitatively. As a result, they either disappear (“die off”) or cease to play any significant role in the life of society. Thus, social mobility changes both the quantitative ratio between communities and strata (in terms of the number of their members) and qualitatively (for example, in terms of the average age of people, in terms of education and qualifications, etc.).

Social mobility can take place within one community or stratum, as well as within a society and thus between communities and strata. Such types of social movements are designated above as intra- and extra-social mobility. As a result of intrasocial mobility, various strata and groups emerge and die within strata and communities. As a result of extrasocial mobility, new strata and communities are formed, other strata and communities disappear already within the framework of society as a whole. So, social mobility is the source of the emergence and development of some communities and strata and the withering away or decline of the role of others and strata of society.

What determines the direction of social movements in society? First, it is related to the nature of the changes functional interconnections in society, especially in the economic sphere. For example, certain professions "become obsolete", gradually losing their social important features. Accordingly, these professions become unprestigious and do not attract the younger generation. With the mechanization of agricultural labor, there is also a decrease in the demand for labor in the countryside, which causes an outflow of the population to the cities. Some professions and specialties, on the contrary, acquire more important functions, and as a result, there is an increase in competition in educational institutions that train specialists in these professions. Industrial labor begins to play a dominant role in an industrial society, and therefore there is a gradual increase in the population employed in this sector of the economy. In the 21st century, the structure of employment is changing - professions related to the service sector, intellectual and information spheres labor activity.

The direction of social movements is also determined by the nature of social stratification. The lower this type of work is paid, the less willing to take it. workplace. The village has much fewer opportunities to improve material well-being, receive vocational education, meet the spiritual, personal and informational needs than the city. Therefore, migration from the countryside to the city prevails, and not vice versa. In the same way, one can explain professional mobility: there are many more people who want to get a highly paid and prestigious profession than low-paid and not prestigious. Thus, the direction of social movements is determined by the peculiarities of the social structure.

At the same time, social movements change the very social structure of society. On the one hand, they destroy the existing vertical and functional relationships. However, over time, a new social "framework" of society is being built: the relationship between newly formed and traditionally existing societies and strata acquires a stable, orderly character. As a result of social movements, therefore, the social structure of society passes from one of its states to another state ("from the old to the new" social order). So, social mobility is a source of renewal of the social structure of society. In sociological science the process of renewal of society is called social differentiation.

Social differentiation is the process of updating the social structure of society as a result of social movements, characterized by the emergence of new social communities and strata, and the disappearance of those who have lost their social functions other social communities and strata.

Depending on which intra- or extra-social mobility is the source of social differentiation, the latter can exist, respectively, in two varieties. Intrasocial differentiation characterized by the division of a community or layer and the formation within them of new communities or layers.

For example, in a traditional society there is no clear division into generations (generations). Children gradually begin to perform many of the functions of adults. Having acquired full capacity for work, they turn into adults. People who have lost their ability to work turn into old people. Accordingly, cultural differences between generations are not developed. The same norms and values, symbols and rituals govern the behavior of everyone, regardless of age. The formation of an industrial society is accompanied by the division of society into generations. A significant part of children (especially in cities) are torn away from social production most of their time is spent on education and communication with peers. A new generation is being formed, occupying a place between children and adults - youth. Unlike a traditional society, an industrial society requires a special, transitional time during which general and vocational education, qualifications and the acquisition of sustainable social (primarily vocational) education take place. At the same time, the more difficult it is to obtain a profession and adapt to it, the longer this process takes. The life of the younger generation has been increasing since the beginning of the 20th century from 2-3 years to 10 years or more at the end of the century. The generation of adults is also divided into two: middle and old generations. The middle generation has the maximum capacity for work, the older generation, gradually losing capacity, nevertheless, has a high qualification, experience, connections, and, as a rule, generally has a higher social status. In developed countries, people older than 70 can be classified as elderly, in poor countries people age socially earlier. Having lost their ability to work and, accordingly, independently, without the help of society or other social groups, to provide for their lives, older people turn into old people. Thus, five generations are formed in an industrial society as a result of intrasocial mobility.

As a result extrasocial differentiation completely new communities and strata are formed, whose representatives acquire a new social status, moving from other communities and strata. So, as a result of the emergence of new professions, new professional groups are also emerging (for example, advertising agents, programmers). During the formation of an industrial society, an intensive process of the formation of classes (the working class, the bourgeoisie, the petty bourgeoisie) takes place at the expense of representatives of various classes - the peasantry, philistines, merchants, nobility, etc. In the course of urbanization, such completely new types of settlement as megalopolises and agglomerations appear.

As noted above, social movements have a certain direction. The predominant form may be profunctional or dysfunctional, upward or downward mobility. Depending on the direction and nature of social movements, social differentiation society can take two forms.

The first form of social differentiation is social integration. The source of social integration is profunctional(horizontally) and ascending(vertical) social mobility individual, communities and layers. In the process of pro-functional mobility, there is a strengthening of functional ties between different communities and strata of society. Relations between generations, professional, territorial, ethnic, class and other communities are becoming closer and more interdependent. For example, the performance of representatives of one profession is increasingly dependent on the performance of representatives of other professions. As a result of upward mobility, most of the newly formed or "growing" strata and communities are concentrated in the middle of the hierarchical ladder of society. As a result, many layers and communities are formed in the hierarchical structure of society, separated from each other by an insignificant social distance.

A society in which social differentiation is carried out mainly in the form of social integration (in a socially integrated society), in the social representation of people is perceived in the image of "We" ("we are different, but still we are a single whole"). Objectively, there is a strengthening of ties between communities and layers, their unification into a single whole.

So, social integration- this is a kind of social differentiation of society, characterized by the strengthening of hierarchical and functional ties between communities and layers, a tendency towards the integrity of society as a social system.

The opposite form of social differentiation is the social polarization of society. It is characterized by the following features. First, there is a weakening of the functional interconnections of various social communities and strata of society. Various communities and strata (village and city, generations, regional communities, professional communities, etc.) begin to functionally close, separate from each other. Citizens and rural residents, generations, regions, classes and other social communities are becoming less interconnected and interdependent in their life. As a result, there are symptoms of a gap between generations in society, a misunderstanding between them. Regional separatism is revealed. Various social classes and professional groups, as it were, begin to live only for themselves, not caring about the problems of other groups. Thus, horizontal mobility acquires dysfunctional shape.

Secondly, vertical mobility acquires descending shape. Most members of society lower their social status (in terms of income, property, power, access to education and other spiritual benefits). There is an increase social distance between different communities and strata of the population: between social "lower classes" and "tops", between classes and professional groups, between city and village residents, between "those in power" (the political elite) and citizens.

So , social polarization is a type of social differentiation of society, characterized by a weakening of functional relationships and an increase in the distance in the social hierarchy between communities and strata, a tendency towards disunity of society as a social system.

Social integration and social polarization in their pure form practically do not manifest themselves. In any society, in the process of its changes, both of these tendencies reveal themselves. At the same time, both ascending and descending, and profunctional and dysfunctional mobility occur. At the same time, one trend can be dominant, predominant, and the second - subordinate, insignificant. Depending on which trend of social differentiation prevails, the nature and direction of social changes in society depends.

Social differentiation determines the nature of changes in all types of the social structure of society: class, professional, demographic, ethnic, confessional, territorial. Under the dominance integration processes there is a strengthening of functional interdependence and relations of solidarity and partnership between classes, professional, ethnic and other communities. The gap between the main groups of society is disappearing. And, on the contrary, in the conditions of the predominance of polarization processes, there is a destruction of functional relationships and an increase in disunity between social strata and groups, and the social distance between them increases.

If social differentiation occurs predominantly in an integration form, then the social stratification of society takes the form of a diamond. Most of the emerging communities and strata of the population are strengthened as a result of social mobility in the "middle" of the hierarchical structure. For example, the formation of a layer of highly skilled workers and employees is accompanied by an increase in their social status (income, working conditions, living conditions, level of education, etc.), as a result of which the share of the middle strata of society increases.

With social polarization becoming the prevailing trend, a large part of society is lowering its social status. As a result, there is an increase in the proportion of social "lower classes". The social polarization of society leads to many negative consequences. Social tension and confrontation are on the rise. Under such conditions, the social base for social partnership between employers and employees for the development of entrepreneurship (which requires initial capital) is weakened. The middle strata are constantly "washed away" by the next wave of the economic crisis. There is a growth of political apathy, due to disbelief in the possibility of influencing the authorities. And this is fertile ground for totalitarianism and various forms of dictatorship, xenophobia and nationalism. Social polarization significantly changes not only social stratification, but the entire social structure of society. Downward social mobility to a large extent embraces entire social communities of people.

In the first decade of the 21st century, contradictory processes took place in the development of Russian society. On the one hand, society has become more integrated, poverty has somewhat decreased compared to the 1990s. On the other hand, integration processes were largely replaced by artificial consolidation against the backdrop of the construction of fictitious threats and mythical enemies of the nation. In addition, there was a process of "averaging" society by reducing the space of economic and political freedom. And, finally, integration was by no means always voluntary and natural (an example is the solution of the Chechen problem). Therefore, it is not so much the integration itself that is important, but its quality, type, level and technologies for achieving it. Therefore, by the beginning of the second decade of the new century, social integration and the unity of the Russian society are not sufficiently strong, stable and long-term.

Brief summary:

1. The stability of society is achieved by optimal combination social statics and social dynamics
2. Social mobility is social movements associated with changes in status
3. There are two main types of social mobility - intergenerational (intergenerational) and intragenerational (intragenerational).
4. There are two main types of social mobility – vertical and horizontal.
5. Social differentiation is the process of updating the social structure associated with the emergence of new social communities.
6. Social integration is characterized by the strengthening of vertical and horizontal links between communities and strata, the integrity of society.
7. Social polarization - the weakening of functional relationships and the increase in social distance between communities and strata, the split of society
8. Social integration is based on the voluntary association of social subjects and equal symmetrical communication

Practice set

Questions:

1. Why does the stability of society depend on the implementation of urgent reforms and changes?
2. Does individual mobility depend on group mobility?
3. How does social differentiation differ from a simple division of society from a simple division of society into different groups and strata?
4. For what reasons can social differentiation acquire the character of integration or polarization?
5. What type of social mobility can be attributed to redundancy?
6. Is it possible to call such a change of status as marriage an example of vertical mobility?
7. How are the concepts of social mobility and social stratification related?
8. Do you agree with the point of view that social order is associated with various forms of political dictatorship, and social chaos is generated by the processes of democratization and liberalization of society?

Themes for term papers, abstracts, essays:

1. Social mobility and migration
2. Migration picture of modern Russia
3. Stratification trends in modern Russian society
4. Factors of social integration and unity of Russian society
5. Social mobility and social dynamics
6. Structural mobility
7. Demographic factors of mobility
8. Social Dynamics of Soviet Society
9. Social mobility and cultural dynamics