BSOE 148 Solved Guess Paper 2026 for Social Stratification, IGNOU Bachelor of Arts (General) BAG

Social stratification and its organizing principles

Question: Define social stratification. Discuss its basic organizing principles.

Meaning of social stratification

Social stratification is a process through which groups and social categories in societies are ranked as higher or lower to one another in terms of their relative position on the scales of prestige, privileges, wealth and power.

Stratification is also a historical process. It emerged as a social institution at a certain level of social evolution. Simpler hunting-gathering societies had differentiation but lacked stratification because they generated no surplus and no accumulation of wealth. Stratification arose with technological change: animal husbandry, settled agriculture, surplus production, division of labour, and complex institutions of social control.

Organizing principles

The textbook identifies three major organizing principles: status, wealth and power.

1. Status: Ranking of groups on the basis of their relative position in terms of honour or respect. Honour is qualitative and inherited by birth, therefore ascribed and not acquired by effort. Caste in India is the most appropriate example of status groups, where membership rests on values, beliefs, legends and myths rather than achievement.
2. Wealth: Becomes an organizing principle when technological advancement and changes in the mode of production allow surplus generation and accumulation. Groups with greater control over economic resources (food grains, cattle, metals, money) are ranked higher. Class is the prime example: for Marx, class emerges from modes of production; for Weber, from the market situation.
3. Power: A diffused attribute, since not exclusive in character. Power, for Max Weber, endows persons or groups with the ability to impose their will on others by legitimate use of coercive means. The state is the prime example, holding sovereign authority over citizens. When the exercise of power is institutionalized, it becomes authority, that is, legitimate power. Power enters stratification through state policies such as reservation for Scheduled Castes, Tribes and OBCs.

Inter-relation of the three

These three principles often complement one another. For Max Weber, class is economic, status is social honour, and power is political, together giving a multi-dimensional view of stratification, in contrast to Karl Marx's single emphasis on class.

Conclusion: Social stratification is a structured ranking of groups based on status, wealth and power. These three principles operate jointly to determine the relative standing of groups in any society, with caste and class being its most visible Indian expressions.

Class struggle in Karl Marx

Question: What is class struggle? Explain with reference to Karl Marx.

Meaning of class struggle

Hitherto, the history of all societies is the history of class struggle.

For Karl Marx (1818–1883), class struggle is the engine of social change. He used the term 'class' to refer to the two main strata in all stratified societies: a ruling class and a subject class. The ruling class controls the means of production and appropriates the labour of the subject class; the two are simultaneously dependent on, and opposed to, each other. Class struggle is a recurring feature of all societies: in every society the ruling class sows the seeds of its own destruction.

Marx's theory of class struggle

1. Division of labour and private property: As production grew and surplus appeared, some people gained control over the means of production. Marx stated that division of labour and private property are identical expressions.
2. Two main strata: A ruling class and a subject class exist in every stratified society. Members of a class share the same relationship to the forces of production.
3. Four historical stages: Marx held Western societies developed through four main stages: primitive communism, ancient society, feudal society, and capitalist society, with masters and slaves, lords and serfs, and capitalists and wage labour respectively.
4. Class consciousness: Marx specified five variables: conflicts over economic rewards; easy communication within a class; feeling of solidarity and understanding of historical role; profound dissatisfaction of the lower class; and political organisation. A class moves from being a 'class in itself' to a 'class for itself' only when consciousness arises.
5. Mode of production: In capitalism, two opposing classes emerge, the bourgeoisie (capitalists who pay wages) and the proletariat (workers who receive wages). Inherent contradictions trigger class struggle.
6. Alienation: Workers feel alienated from a system which cannot exist without their labour. Without labour, capitalism cannot subsist; yet workers are excluded from its rewards.

The outcome: revolution

Exploitation drives the rise of an opposed class. When working-class consciousness clashes with oppression, workers overthrow the system, leading to a new stage of social formation and the abolition of private ownership, as a consequence of which classlessness emerges.

Conclusion: For Marx, the essential feature of social inequality is economic power. Society is divided into oppressors and the oppressed. Class struggle, born of contradictions in modes of production, is the inevitable mechanism through which one social formation gives way to another.

The functionalist theory of stratification: Davis and Moore

Question: Critically examine the functionalist theory of social stratification with reference to the Davis-Moore approach.

Meaning of functionalist theory

The system of stratification in a society is also necessary for its integration and its stability.

The functionalist approach views society as an organism with integrated parts, each performing specific functions necessary for stability. Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore developed the eminent functionalist account in their 1945 article "Some Principles of Stratification" in the American Journal of Sociology. They were students of Talcott Parsons and extended his arguments.

Functional prerequisites: four aspects of role allocation

1. All roles in society must be filled. Every occupation necessary for the society's existence must have personnel.
2. The most competent people must fill the positions. Wrong placement creates instability: a novelist running a power-generation company would cause electricity failures.
3. Training is necessary. To ensure the best persons are selected and prepared for important roles.
4. Roles must be performed conscientiously. Even trained, competent persons must work with dedication to ensure system effectiveness.

Functions of stratification

Davis and Moore argue that the most effective mechanism for fulfilling these prerequisites is social stratification, which offers unequal rewards and privileges to different positions. Unequal rewards make two contributions: they motivate people to fill important positions and acquire qualifications, and they motivate those already in position to improve their performance further. Two measures of a position's functional importance are the degree of uniqueness, where no other position can perform the same function, and the degree to which other positions depend on the one in question.

Melvin Tumin's criticism

1. Measurement problem: There is no objective way of measuring "functional importance". Workers may be as essential as managers, yet rewards differ.
2. Role of power: Higher rewards often flow from power, not importance. Organised-sector workers in India earn more than unorganised-sector workers doing similar work, because of unionisation.
3. Training is not pure sacrifice: Training involves learning and gaining skills; rewards are disproportionate to any sacrifices made.
4. Barriers to motivation: Social discrimination prevents talented people from rising. T.B. Bottomore (Elites and Societies) showed that in Britain and France, an overwhelming majority of civil servants were children of civil servants.
5. Stratification inhibits equality: Tumin argued that stratification systems are apparently antagonistic to the development of full equality of opportunity. Those at the top secure positions for their children and block others.

Conclusion: While Davis and Moore highlight stratification's role in efficient role-allocation and motivation, Tumin's critique shows that power, inheritance and discrimination, not functional importance alone, determine reward differentials in real societies.

Caste and class in Indian society: is there a nexus?

Question: Discuss the relationship between caste and class in Indian society. Is there a caste-class nexus?

Caste is an ascriptive grouping with several characteristics including an allegiance to the varna all-India scheme.

Caste and class

Caste illustrates the role of status; class illustrates the role of wealth. Traditionally, caste functioned as the central principle in all aspects of social life: economy, polity and culture. Caste is a closed group with ascriptive membership by birth, hereditary occupation, pollution-purity rules, endogamy and mutual segregation. Class, on the other hand, is an open group based on achievement criteria.

Basic features of the caste model: Andre Beteille

1. Based on ideas, not behaviour: Reflects ideas held and expressed by certain sections of people rather than observed behaviour.
2. Universal significance: Attaches primary and universal significance to caste as conceived in classical texts.
3. Rules of the game: Views the system as governed by explicit or implicit "rules of the game".
4. Complementary functions: Sees castes as fulfilling complementary, non-antagonistic functions.

The caste-class nexus

1. Summation of status: A caste low in ritual hierarchy is usually low in economic, political and social status too.
2. Joan Mencher (Marxian): Caste is a system of exploitation rather than interdependence; it has prevented class consciousness from developing.
3. Yogendra Singh: Class factors now operate within caste categories, creating a new sense of identity and visible contradictions.
4. K.L. Sharma: Change has been from one structure of inequality to another, not from caste to class.
5. Jat Sabha and Kisan Sabha: Peasant associations are also caste associations, so caste and class overlap.

Caste, class and conflict

B.R. Ambedkar observed that caste was not merely a division of labour but a division of labourers, preventing labourers from forming a class-for-itself. Arun Sinha calls atrocities against Dalits in Belchi, Marathwada and Bajitpur a "class war" against Harijans. Caste functions as an extremely effective method of economic exploitation: the dominant class acquires political power and social prestige, perpetuating caste hierarchy.

Conclusion: Caste and class are not ideological opposites in India but inseparable parts of social formation. There is a clear nexus: class struggle is also caste struggle. Any analysis must integrate dialectics, history, culture and structure.

Social mobility: intergenerational and intragenerational

Question: Discuss the concept of social mobility. Distinguish between intergenerational and intragenerational mobility.

Meaning of social mobility

By social mobility is meant any transition from one social position to another. Change in social position involves generally significant change in life-chances and life styles.

Pitirim A. Sorokin classically defined social mobility. The shift may be undertaken by an individual, a social object or a value. Implicit in mobility is the recognition of gradation in society, normally in terms of power, prestige and privileges. A hierarchical structure must operate for mobility to be meaningful.

Types of mobility

1. Horizontal mobility (Sorokin): Transition of an individual or social object from one social group to another situated on the same level, such as moving from one religious group to another, or from one job to a similar job in another factory. Anthony Giddens prefers calling it lateral mobility: geographical movement between neighbourhoods, towns or regions.
2. Vertical mobility (Sorokin): Upward or downward change in rank, called 'social climbing' and 'social sinking'. Examples include promotion, demotion, change in income, or marriage to a higher or lower status person.

Forms of mobility

1. Infiltration: Individuals of a lower stratum enter an existing higher stratum.
2. New group creation: A new group is formed and inserted into a higher stratum.
3. Contest mobility (Ralph H. Turner): Elite status is the prize in an open contest, taken by aspirants' efforts under rules of fair play.
4. Sponsored mobility (Turner): The established elite recruit individuals into their fold; mobility is like entry into a private club requiring sponsorship.

Intergenerational vs intragenerational mobility

Blau and Duncan's findings

Studying the American occupational structure, Blau and Duncan found three key influences on a person's chances of moving up the occupational ladder: the amount of education, the nature of the person's first job, and the father's occupation. Range of mobility may be short-range (close strata) or long-range (across many strata); Blau and Duncan found most American vertical mobility is short-range.

Conclusion: Social mobility is the movement of individuals or groups across social positions. Horizontal mobility is lateral; vertical mobility is up or down. Intergenerational and intragenerational mobility differ in time-frame, the former being more revealing of a society's structural openness.