The key meaning behind the concept of social stratification is the classification of people to the different social classes that possess or lack certain privileges. There is an evident pattern that displays that each society organizes their resources unequally, which leads to the unavoidable stratification (Tumin, 1953). The level of accessibility of certain privileges and resources defines social classes and differentiates them among each other. Although some people claim that classes are constructed as another means of generic labelling, the majority believes that the classes are defined by the properties and the boundaries that belong to them due to the hierarchical structure of society (Bourdieu, 1987). This way, the idea of social stratification is widely spread among the global population and is recognized to be truthful with a respect to classification of specific privileges.
In the context of structural functionalism the value of social classes is generally measured by the way they interact and work together. As the theory itself focuses on the collective work of societal structures, it evaluates any concept on a basis of its productivity within a bigger picture. Thus, following the key focus, social stratification encourages communication and competition among different classes, which makes it relevant due to the stimulation of the major interactions of the groups.
Following up the concept of the productivity of classes’ interaction, social conflict theory suggests that the main means of communication applied to social stratification are the rivalry and conflict. The theory focuses on the unequal distribution of resources and power, and claims that it stimulates a further gap among the classes. Therefore, it recognizes the privileges, material aspects, and power as the main classifiers that determine the belonging to a particular class.
Oppositely, symbolic interactionism highlights the subjective biases’ importance within the judgement of any concept. In fact, it recognizes both natural and symbolic environments as the correlated matters that depend on each other in the process of social judgment. Although the previous theories focused majorly on the conceptual aspects and material benefits while evaluating the stratification, symbolic interactionist perspective suggests that the classes’ separation is mainly supported by the idea of assigning subjective meaning to concepts. Hence, the association with power and privilege reinforces the conceptual strength of social recognition of the upper class in the context of this theory.
In order to evaluate the relevance of the discussed information, it is crucial to rely on the multiple sources that elaborate on the findings related to the theories. Additionally, a rational judgment of social stratification is supported by the evaluation of differing opinions and their comparison to the concepts and findings within the theories. Finally, the critical recognition of the theories is based on the assessment of the general compatibility among the introduced concepts and their relation to the social classification.
In the conclusion, the theory of structural functionalism is the most compatible to the key concepts of social stratification due to its balanced focus on the impacts of classes’ interactions. The stratification’s evaluation through the bias of this theory provides a wider perspective on the way the classes reinforce the hierarchal structure by interacting with each other without the radical limitation to rivalry exclusively that is used in social conflict theory (Davis & Moore, 1945). Additionally, it centers on the matters of the actual interactions and its consequences rather than the theoretical judgments related to the symbolism and subjective views like the symbolic interactionism theory. This way, the theory can be considered relevant and representative of the concept of social stratification.
References
Bourdieu, P. (1987). What makes a social class? On the theoretical and practical existence of groups. Berkeley journal of sociology, 32, 1-17. Web.
Davis, K., & Moore, W. E. (1945). Some principles of stratification. American sociological review, 10(2), 242-249. Web.
Tumin, M. M. (1953). Some principles of stratification: a critical analysis. American Sociological Review, 18(4), 387-394. Web.