The nature of socio-economic differentiation of the population: a comparative analysis of Russia and Europe

Introduction

Until recently, the mass of comparative studies devoted to the analysis of social inequality, as a rule, used categorical apparatuses and concepts developed by Western sociologists. Moreover, theoretical competition between such alternative approaches as (neo-) Marxist, (neo-) Weberian or functionalist is not fundamental in this case - all of these approaches were developed with the aim of offering an explanation for the nature of inequality in modern Western societies. And this is not surprising if you pay attention to how intensively the social sciences developed in Western countries, starting from the end of the first half of the last century, and how widespread the results of these studies were throughout the world.

The success of the post-war development of the capitalist countries of Europe and the United States predetermined the sympathy of the majority of the scientific community for modernization projects, within the framework of which the same developed countries were proclaimed as the standard of development. Atlantic capitalism, with its inherent special structure of social and economic relations based on the institutional triad of “market - private property - democracy,” was considered by most ideologists of the post-socialist reformation as an ideal to which one should and should strive. However, despite the consequences of these reforms, which for most post-socialist countries today can clearly be considered catastrophic, the analysis of social inequality in these societies is still carried out from the point of view of their relative conformity/inconsistency with Western models. At the same time, which is typical, cultural affiliation and historical conditioning of institutions, which largely shape the social organics of specific societies, until recently were considered by these ideologists as secondary (if not completely insignificant) factors determining the “adaptation potential” of transforming post-socialist countries. It is not surprising that the adoption of such a one-sided approach to the assessment and analysis of social inequalities in the societies concerned often entails interpretive problems. This is where, in particular, such heated and numerous discussions arise regarding status discrepancies and the content of such a concept as the “middle class” in relation to transforming countries.

On the other hand, the marginal nature of socio-economic differentiation in a number of countries of the former socialist camp of Europe ceases to look like an anomaly within the framework of an approach that assumes the historical conditioning of social development processes. According to this approach, in the specific socio-economic order that developed within the Eurasian civilization and became a parallel branch of the capitalist industrial-economic system, social inequality, the entire structure of social group relations, and the stratification hierarchy are also of a specific nature. Despite the interaction with other systems, for centuries within this extremely stable ethacratic order, the class hierarchy was reproduced in a transformed form. This hierarchy in relation to Tsarist Russia was clearly characterized by the famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky. In the class system, groups were distinguished by legal rights, which, in turn, were strictly linked to their responsibilities and were directly dependent on these responsibilities. They were also the basis of differentiation. Moreover, responsibilities meant obligations to the state, enshrined in law. The method of determining differences was legal registration, which was, first of all, a legal, and not an ethnic-religious or economic division. Belonging to a class was inherited, but not strictly, which contributed to the relative openness of this system.

At the same time, taking into account the commonality of the socio-technological foundations of all late-industrial and post-industrial (information societies), the author does not deny the existence in modern societies of an ethacratic type of class differentiation based on private property, market relations and division of labor. The modern technical and technological order, which unites all civilizations coexisting in the modern world, gives rise to a professional and qualification division of labor, expressed in a system of professions and occupations. The latter have two aspects: technical and technological itself and socio-economic. The socio-economic aspect of the division of labor determines, on the one hand, socio-professional stratification, which is inherent in all societies. On the other hand, mediated by the labor market and the system of real inequality, it serves as a source of the formation of social classes in the countries of the Atlantic civilizational area.

In this case, we are talking about the possible coexistence and mutual intertwining of two types of relationships. The degree of expression of one or another form of these relations depends on the rootedness of historically established institutions connecting societies with various civilizational systems. This point of view was expressed by V.I. Ilyin, who also argues that class differentiation as the dominant form of socio-economic inequality is inherent exclusively in capitalist systems. He believes that class structure is a specific reflection of the distribution of power according to the logic of labor and capital markets, and class formation remains an integral part of the broader process of transition (return) to capitalism. In étacratic societies, we are talking specifically about occupations that differ in the nature (i.e., content and conditions) of labor, and not in their qualitative status characteristics developed by the corporatism of common belonging to one profession.

Thus, a direct comparison of countries that differ in their type of development and/or belonging to non-European civilizational areas is not entirely correct. At the same time, works that take into account this specificity are usually limited to the study of a single country and are practically not included in the context of international comparisons. For example, by examining the materials of representative surveys of the economically active population of Russia conducted in 1994, 2002 and 2006. in a number of previous publications with the participation of the author of this article, it was possible to reveal how specifically social inequality is structured in modern Russian society. In particular, solving the problem of ranking stratification criteria according to the degree of their influence on real differentiation in society, it was shown that homogeneous social groups are formed in the “power-property” attribute space.

The fundamental question is to what extent this type of social relations is specific to post-socialist societies in general and Russia in particular. The present study is essentially devoted to answering this question, at least in the form of testing the validity of existing theories that explain the phenomenon of social inequality in modern societies.

Conceptual basis for the analysis of social inequality in modern societies

The extreme differences in the incomes of skilled and unskilled workers observed today in developed countries indirectly confirm the validity of the view established in Western literature, according to which the decisive factor of differentiation is employment status, associated with certain characteristics of economic activity and position in the labor market. It is worth noting that in theoretical terms this idea is not new, since a fundamental explanation for this phenomenon was proposed in the works of the classics of sociological theory of the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. and is associated with the names of two outstanding scientists K. Marx and M. Weber.

According to Marx, inequality in the form of dividing people into social classes arises on the basis of the different positions and different roles performed by individuals in the productive structure of society. In other words, the most general basis for the formation of classes is social division of labor. This refers to “...a large division of labor between the masses engaged in simple physical labor and the privileged few who manage the work, engage in trade, government affairs, and later also in art and science.”

The division of labor into executive and organizational historically preceded the formation of private property and, during periods of dominance of different methods of production, served as the basis for the division of people into exploiters and exploited: in ancient societies people were divided into “masters” and “slaves”, in feudal societies - into “feudal lords” and “slaves”. peasants”, etc. However, with the development of the bourgeois (read, modern) mode of production and the emergence of private property, according to Marx, certain functions, spheres and types of activity are assigned to different classes in a single production process. Since the emergence of the latter, it is not the type of activity that determines membership in a given class, but, on the contrary, membership in a class determines a predetermined range of professions that a person from a given class can engage in. Thus, while recognizing the division of labor as such as one of the sources of inequality, Marx nevertheless drew attention to the fundamental criterion that explains the inequality of social positions based on the inequality of people's access to the means of production.

As already mentioned, following Marx, another classic of world sociological theory, M. Weber, played a decisive role in the development of modern ideas about the sources, forms and essence of social inequality. Let us immediately note that today it is the (neo-)Weberian approach to analyzing the problems of social inequality that is dominant in the world sociological literature and, in this regard, deserves special attention.

According to Weber, Marx's model was a source of fruitful hypotheses, but it remained too simple to explain the complexities of stratification, which prompted him to develop an alternative analysis that assumed the plurality of sources of social hierarchy: in addition to its purely economic aspect, Weber proposed to take into account such aspects as prestige And power, which along with property were considered by him as the main interacting dimensions of social inequality in any society. Each of these dimensions generates a corresponding type of stratification. In relation to property, these are economic classes; to prestige - status groups; to power - the party.

However, unlike Marx, who recognized the objectivity of the existence of classes and the clear division that determines the opposition of their interests based on the criterion of attitude to the means of production, Weber gave a softer interpretation of classes as groups of people with similar “life chances.” The category of “life chances” is one of the central ones in Weber’s reasoning and is associated with probabilistic assessments of the duration and quality of people’s lives. Despite the fact that Weber recognizes the criterion of property as an important aspect determining the class situation (and at the same time “life chances”), a more fundamental aspect in his concept of classes is the market, which, in his opinion, is the main regulator of relations in capitalist societies . Thanks to the market, it becomes clear who is worth what in society. In this case, not only property is subject to assessment, but also human talents, abilities, in other words, everything that determines the different opportunities of individuals to receive income and other types of benefits on the market. Thus, a class according to Weber is people who have a similar position in the economic sphere: similar occupation, approximately the same level of income, property, etc. As a result, it is no longer group interests, as with Marx, but the interests of a typical representative included in a class that become the source of class homogeneity. In this understanding, a class is an incomplete (fuzzy) set of individuals that does not have clear boundaries and is united by similar socio-economic parameters.

In fact, the approaches to defining the class situation according to Marx (based on property relations) and Weber (based on market relations) are not so contradictory. The ideological confrontation lies in the fact that Weber denied the likelihood of a conflict between the positively privileged classes, to which he classified owners, and the negatively privileged classes - those who are not owners. Recognition of the conflict of interests between different social groups is still decisive today for distinguishing between approaches based on the Marxist tradition and approaches based on the Weberian tradition. However, under mutual influence, followers of both approaches continue to develop ideas about how social inequality is structured in modern societies. As a result of bilateral criticism and penetration of ideas, not only a gradual rapprochement of the two traditions occurs, but also the understanding of certain entities with the help of which modern researchers comprehend the principles of differentiation of people is clarified.

In particular, the most striking example of the continuation of a unique (neo-)Weberian tradition in the analysis of social inequality in modern sociological science is the approach of the English sociologist J. Goldthorpe, who proposed a class model of society based on differences in employment status, i.e. differences in employment relationships that take place in an industrial society where the principles of economic and technological exploitation are observed.

Goldthorpe argues that the market mechanism that ensures the distribution of people in the system of social division of labor is the main cause of their inequality. At the same time, they are allocated three main class positions: workers, employers and self-employed: employers buy the labor power of workers and thereby gain some power over them; workers are forced to sell their labor power; The self-employed are, to a certain extent, autonomous workers who are not employees and do not hire labor themselves.

However, much more important from the point of view of studying social differentiation, as the author himself admits, is the inequality that arises within the largest group of hired workers. And in this regard, Goldthorpe introduces a new differentiating criterion, which is directly related to the nature of labor relations - type of employment contract, regulating employment. The conceptual rationale for this approach lies in the natural risks that employers face when entering into a contract with a worker, namely the inability to fully control their activities and the specificity of skills and knowledge, the value of which for some types of employment increases in direct proportion to the duration of employment. All these conditions are thus taken into account by the employer and determine the appropriate nature of the employment contract.

Goldthorpe argues that the classes thus defined are differentiated by their own specific constraints and opportunities, which include those that affect individual economic security, stability, prospects, intra- and intergenerational social mobility, etc.

However, the standard argument of critics of this approach is that Goldthorpe, unlike more Marxist-oriented authors, does not single out large owners as a separate social group and actually “merges” them with highly qualified employees and senior managers. A serious alternative to Goldthorpe's views in this regard is the approach of one of the most consistent modern neo-Marxists, E.O. Wright.

Wright, like all followers of Marx, emphasizes that the main division of people into social classes in modern societies still lies in inequality of access to the means of production. This division creates a contrast of interests, which is one of the main reasons why it cannot be ignored.

Relations of exploitation, Wright believes, have not lost their significance and, moreover, have not disappeared anywhere. Wright's ideological extension of Marx's views, which more accurately describes the nature of differentiation in modern society, is that exploitation is caused not only by inequality in the ownership of the means of production, but also by differences in the degree of ownership of organizational and skill assets, as well as the degree of autonomy of labor.

The introduction of additional criteria for exploitation allowed Wright, in particular, to “fit” into his scheme the so-called “middle classes”, which occupy intermediate positions between the traditional classes of capitalists and workers. Thus, on the basis of inequality in the degree of labor autonomy, a place was found in the scheme for the traditional middle class, i.e. petty-bourgeois owners who, on the one hand, act either as employers or as workers engaged in individual labor activities, and on the other, are not among the large-capitalist owners, whose decisions often have far-reaching consequences, if they do not at all run counter to the interests of the small-scale property. A similar logic applies when explaining the contradictory class position of professionals and managers, or representatives of the new middle class. Inequality in the possession of special skills, on the one hand, determines the relative similarity of their interests with the interests of the owners, and on the other, puts them in the position of the same employees.

Thus, the concept of “social class” among scientists who have devoted themselves to social sciences and, in particular, to the study of the phenomenon of social inequality, still does not have a single interpretation due to persistent differences in views on how societies are structured and what social forces ensure its development. What is universal in this regard for researchers is only the recognition that people are differentiated among themselves in one way or another and the nature of this differentiation depends on the characteristics of the social and economic organization of society. However, despite the conceptual differences in Wright's and Goldthorpe's schemes (see table 1), There is reason to believe that in the Western scientific community there is a certain convergence of positions regarding the disclosure of real social inequalities and the hierarchical structures that reflect them. One way or another, both of these structures reflect the principles of social division in accordance with the logic of reproduction of modern capitalist societies, the constitutive elements of which are the market and the institution of private property.

Table 1. Main modern theoretical views on the nature of social inequality in comparison

To some extent, a common feature of most modern approaches to the analysis of social differentiation is the adoption of the concept of occupation as an elementary unit of classification ( occupations ). This, in particular, is the basis for many national and supranational classifications (for example, ISCO-88), which represent “softened” class models of society that do not directly affect the most acute aspects of the distribution of power, property and inequality of life chances. One way or another, any state faces the need to build policies in accordance with the differentiated and often multidirectional demands of various social groups, and therefore state social statistics in almost every country in the world, as a rule, have not only their own information network that allows them to track the progress of social -economic processes in their society, but also a special methodology for assessing these processes, taking into account national specifics. The structure and meaning of national classifications are largely based on the specific features of the social and economic structure of their countries and are a reflection of the state approach to managing various spheres of society. In other words, the state collects and organizes statistics in a certain way in order to make qualified decisions based on relevant information.

National socio-professional classifications, at least in Europe, are based, as a rule, on three approaches to the meaningful differentiation of the employed:

At the same time, the standard objection to the use of such structures from the scientific community is the lack of not only a unified methodology for their construction, but also often a theoretical justification as such. And this is not surprising, since the purpose of statistics is not the analysis of any problems, but the routine description of certain facts of social and economic reality - official statistics can be considered only as one of the possible tools of applied science.

Scientists seeking not just to describe, but to systematize information about the world around them, set themselves the task of not only establishing the extent to which typical representatives of the corresponding social groups are unequal among themselves in terms of level and lifestyle, economic and social behavior, etc., but What is more important is to explain the nature and reasons for this differentiation. In this regard, data on the distribution of socio-economic indicators in professional or sectoral contexts, often published by official statistical bodies, cannot be used as material for a comprehensive study of the nature of social inequality. At best, these data can identify individual “symptoms,” but they are likely to be insufficient to provide a “diagnosis” for society as a whole.

However, the study of stratification based on socio-professional differences has a solid conceptual foundation. This is confirmed by the results of the discussion on the problems of studying social inequality, which took place on the pages of leading Western journals already at the beginning of this century. In them, in addition to the above-mentioned J. Goldthorpe and E.O. Wright, other prominent representatives of various ideological views took part, such as J. Scott, E. Sorensen, D. Grusky, K. Weeden and others. The debate in this professional environment centered, in particular, on the model of social classes based on professional associations ( occupational groupings), originating from the scientific tradition of E. Durkheim. The authors of the idea (American sociologists Grusky and Weeden) suggested that the latter are increasingly becoming fundamental units of exploitation, occupying an intermediate position between the state and the individual. Without going into a list of the many counterarguments voiced against this model of social classes, we can only conclude that the logic of the two American scientists is fully consistent with the modern European tradition of uniting social groups based on the aggregation of occupations.

Thus, the professional structure, which embraces the entire diversity of professions and connects the system of social relations with the economic activities of members of society, can be considered as a hierarchical system consisting of ranked social positions of economically active members of society. The peculiarity of the socio-professional structure is that it is, as it were, a projection of social differentiation onto the processes of economic activity, since it determines the connections between people that are established during these processes. The connections record the unity of occupations and professional differences as a special form of social differences. Such differences arise on the basis of differentiation of special training and status levels, so the professional structure itself can be considered as a hierarchical system consisting of ranked social positions of workers. Moreover, each group of professions (occupations) with similar social characteristics is considered as a formal statistical “frame” of a real social stratum. After all, the latter can be identified only taking into account the social values, norms, interests, and lifestyle of the individuals included in the stratum. In the case of social movements, the assimilation of norms and values ​​of the social layer is carried out through industrial social networks, neighborly communication, etc., which requires a certain period of adaptation.

However, the occupations themselves directly reflect only the technical (functional) division of labor, and not its social heterogeneity. Therefore, there are quite frequent cases when carriers of the same profession or persons practicing similar occupations belong to different social strata. It is no coincidence that the practical use of occupation as an empirical indicator of social differentiation often requires the use of additional indicators, which in some cases are given decisive importance. In addition, one should take into account the short life of professions in the modern economy with a relatively longer period of existence of social strata. So, for example, it can hardly be said that a machine operator in the 1930s and 1990s. occupied the same social positions in society. From this we can assume that social strata can change their content as society itself develops. Nevertheless, despite all the doubts expressed, the sociological classification of professions based on the direct operationalization of the generic properties of labor gives stable and experience-tested results in identifying social strata that reflect socio-economic inequality in society.

Data and method

Solving the problem of finding objective criteria for social and economic differentiation in modern Russia, the author of the article dealt with materials from representative surveys in 1994, 2002 and 2006, the main purpose of which was to study the new stratification system emerging in the country. The specialization of the surveys made it possible to construct the necessary attribute space, covering almost all known dimensions of stratification: human resources, professional and qualification characteristics, behavior in the field of cultural consumption, parameters of property ownership, place of management hierarchy and many others.

However, the comparative context, which distinguishes this study from the tasks posed earlier, led to the search for a source of information that would provide similar opportunities for carrying out stratification studies with a comparability of the design and attribute space of national samples. An equally important aspect of this choice was the availability and recognition of the relevant source among experts dealing with similar problems.

The choice was made on one of the most large-scale projects to collect comparative information on the population of European countries, initiated over the last decade - the project European Social Survey (or European Social Survey). The significance of this project for European sociology is confirmed by the fact that for the first time in the history of social sciences it was awarded the Descartes Prize for its contribution to scientific achievements. One of the main advantages of ESS is the uniform methods of sampling, collecting information, organizing and processing data, applicable to all participating countries - to date, 34 countries of Old and New Europe are involved in the project, including Russia, which became a participant in 2006. Thanks to this organization, ESS is one of the most attractive sources of comparative information about the social, cultural and political changes that modern European societies are undergoing in the process of their transformation and mutual integration.

Data collection for the survey program is carried out regularly every two years using a sample survey of the population of the participating countries. Sample sizes vary across countries and range from 1,500 to 3,000 respondents (population over 15 years of age). Currently, materials from four waves, conducted in 2002, 2004, 2006 and 2008, are publicly available. The research is largely funded by the European Science Foundation and partly by regional organizations interested in disseminating research results.

An equally important feature that determines the choice European Social Survey As an empirical basis for this study, it is also the fact that some of the features that are of particular interest from the point of view of studying the class structure of European societies are already encoded in it, taking into account the corresponding possibility. We are talking, first of all, about a set of indicators that make it possible to accurately determine the position of the respondent in the system of labor relations, assess the degree of autonomy and complexity of their work, establish their employment status and the corresponding main source of income, etc.

A peculiar form, a language with the help of which researchers explain the principles of social and economic differentiation in various societies, are stratification schemes built on the basis of theoretical concepts. The quality of these schemes at the empirical level is determined by their ability to produce social groups that are homogeneous in their composition, which, as a result, are recognized by researchers as objective or, in other terminology, real. Expressed in the language of mathematics, provided that the operationalization of classes is scrupulously carried out on the basis of a single theory, the variable corresponding to the essence of these classes should be in close correlation with other characteristics that are recognized as subordinate in relation to the “class”, such as: characteristics of the level and way of life, social and economic behavior, etc.

Having determined the general theoretical context of the research situation, which presupposes the difference in the principles of socio-economic differentiation in societies belonging to different civilizational areas, taking into account the considerations just expressed, we can formulate an operational hypothesis that the objectivity of the existence of social classes, identified in accordance with the theoretical views on the structure of modern, as a rule, late-industrial societies, will be less typical for countries most distant from the core of the capitalist world-system (in other words, eastern in the civilizational dichotomy “West-East”, or southern - in the “North-South” dichotomy). In other words, we can expect that the groupings obtained for the respective countries (be it Goldthorpe, Wright, or simply the criterion of professional affiliation) will turn out to be less stable and less homogeneous due to the weakness or practical absence of institutional mechanisms that bring the possession of certain resources into line with the criteria of the class situation.

One of the most understandable criteria by which one can determine the adequacy of a stratification model of empirically recorded reality is the criterion of homogeneity of the groupings obtained using this model. However, this criterion is not sufficient. For researchers involved in the study of society, the concept of “social class” is a very capacious tool with the help of which scientists seek to explain a number of phenomena related to the unequal distribution of resources within society, the characteristics of people’s behavior, their life attitudes, etc. Thus, it is necessary that the concept of “class” not only correspond to a certain homogeneity in the composition of the characteristics reflecting its content, but also that this content itself significantly distinguishes it from other “classes”.

If the researcher is faced with the task of testing the applied theoretical schemes and trying to unbiasedly identify group-forming criteria from the entire space of features characterizing the population under study, in a mathematical sense it can be resolved using the method of entropy analysis. In general, the principle on which this method is based can be described as follows. When selecting from the entire set of social properties available to the researcher such spaces of features (combinations of these properties) for which the value of entropy (or the measure of uncertainty of filling a particular space) is minimal, in these spaces the smallest deviations from the average values ​​of the social properties under consideration will be observed. The proximity of the entropy value of a separate feature space, i.e. a limited combination of social characteristics, to a minimum indicates the significance of this subspace among the set of all social spaces in the population of respondents under consideration. Understanding social inequality as the difference between respondents in the entire composition of the social properties we are considering, on the basis of entropy analysis it is possible to rank all bundles of characteristics according to the degree to which they order the population under study. Thus, it becomes possible to unbiasedly solve the problem of identifying the most significant factors of heterogeneity in the social macrospace, i.e. criteria of social inequality in the society under study. For a detailed mathematical description of the method, the reader is referred to one of the author's previous publications, including earlier original studies using it.

How could one interpret the results of entropy analysis in its application to such a problem as determining the validity of stratification schemes in general and their constitutive (group-forming) criteria in particular? Let's take some combination of P social characteristics that represent some significant dimensions of stratification. What does the “most dense” filling of such a “-dimensional space” mean? If we develop a metaphor that represents the latter in the form of a “residential building,” then combinations of specific meanings of features will appear before us in the form of a set of “apartments.” The more densely the individual “apartments” of this “house” are “populated” by respondents (i.e., by real observations) and the more of these apartments remain empty, the greater the degree of heterogeneity of filling will characterize this “house” (space). More strictly, this means that in a given specific space, that is, in the dimension of data of specific dimensions of social inequality, there is a certain order of filling the cells contained in the space with social observations. In this case, one can interpret the cells (“apartments”) as possible “social classes”. At the same time, it is absolutely not necessary to have any a priori assumptions about the nature of the relationship between the analyzed characteristics, which, by the way, is one of the most serious limitations when using such a widespread method today as regression analysis in stratification studies.

The method of entropy analysis can be explained using another specific example. Let’s say the task is to test the hypothesis that in a certain developed society there is an effectively functioning labor market that, according to the principles of “Weberian” rational economics, ensures correspondence between income parameters, skill level and occupation. At the same time, another society is taken as an object for comparison, where this market is just being formed - let’s call it conditionally “post-socialist”. In order to test this albeit very crude assumption using entropy analysis, it is necessary to operationalize the hypothesis in a form adequate to the method used and imagine a system of inequality in the form of a space of corresponding empirically fixed characteristics (“income level - education - occupation”). Then the non-randomness of filling this space, that is, the presence of a mutual connection between the three features that form it, can be considered as a consequence of the functioning of the corresponding mechanism - the labor market. Roughly speaking, at the empirical level, the indicator of heterogeneity of occupancy for the considered spaces “income level - education - occupation” in “post-socialist” countries is most likely to be higher than in more developed countries.

The task of determining the specific type of inequality that, according to previously put forward assumptions, has formed in some post-socialist countries, can thus be reduced to testing a series of assumptions about the universality of the principles of socio-economic differentiation, which are traditionally considered by modern theorists.

The model of analysis that underlies the comparison of class schemes can be seen as somewhat traditional for most comparative stratification studies, the purpose of which is to critically analyze existing classifications and their subsequent refinement for international comparisons. This model involves constructing “social classes” based on key criteria that have been justified within the framework of one or another theory, and then using these “classes” as a kind of integral indicator of socio-economic status. What is characteristic is that the “classes” identified in this way are then considered by researchers as objectively existing - they recognize the main problem as determining the relationship and content of these “classes” in the societies to be analyzed.

In fact, you don’t have to go far to confirm the reality of the groupings obtained in this way: the corresponding division in European societies is reflected not only in class-tinged collective actions (trade union protests), but also in the mutual identification that is very common in Europe today based on belonging to “whites.” "or "blue collar workers", etc. On the other hand, this situation characterizes Eastern European countries to a lesser extent, where the relative passivity of social groups against the backdrop of socio-economic problems that have sharply worsened during the global financial crisis calls into question the thesis about the “class character” of the respective societies. Here, however, it is worth emphasizing that the formation of “class consciousness” or the definition of “class interests” lies beyond the scope of the tasks posed in this study. As has been noted more than once, a more important task from the point of view of studying the fundamental principles governing socio-economic differentiation in various societies is a comparative analysis of objective patterns that exist regardless of the opinions and ideas of people and are to a greater extent an objective result of the functioning of the relevant institutions .

Let's start with the fact that the differences in the theoretical approaches discussed above between neo-Weberians, neo-Marxists and functionalists are not considered by the author as fundamental, since all these approaches are based on such a factor as the unequal distribution of socio-professional positions. Empirically, this is easily confirmed by the results of the mutual imposition of the considered stratification hierarchies, which indicate that, subject to certain rules, one can easily move from one classification system to another. Thus, regardless of the emphasis that various researchers place on certain components of the class situation, the elementary criteria remain the same: employment relations, on the basis of which self-employed and hired workers are distinguished, and occupation (occupation), which, including at the operational level (as, for example, in the case of ISCO-88) already includes a number of important parameters that determine stratification in market societies - level of education and qualifications, conditions and content of work, etc. The nature of the connection between these factors and the parameters of the socio-economic situation and behavior derived from the “class situation” is essentially laid down at this basic level.

An alternative to constructing an integral indicator of the “class situation” based on derived parameters is, as already mentioned, a more unbiased method of entropy analysis, which makes it possible to empirically determine the degree of homogeneity of the distribution of the main characteristics that describe class position.

Modern stratification schemes (classifications), reflecting alternative approaches to the analysis of social inequality, are procedures for comprehensively combining information about the socio-economic status of individuals based on a certain system of basic characteristics. Systems of these characteristics can be decomposed into elementary criteria for the purpose of further empirical verification of their real significance as factors influencing certain parameters of “class position”. Moreover, we can consider these factors as interrelated (remember at least Marx’s previously cited statement that the attitude towards the means of production determines a predetermined range of activities that people can engage in) and existing independently of each other (for example, employment relations and the level of qualifications). And if this nuance is significant when specifying an analytical model based on a regression apparatus, then in the case of entropy analysis it is possible a priori do not classify variables into dependent and independent - it is important to determine as objectively as possible how random or non-random the distribution of people in the system of characteristics under consideration is.

In this regard, let us move on to the analysis of spaces that combine, on the one hand, criteria-factors (determining class position/position in the system of social inequality), and on the other - criteria-results (as criteria resulting from class position/position in a system of social inequality).

Of the entire possible set of spaces, attention was focused on those that, in the opinion of the author of the article, most correspond to the three main approaches to stratification discussed above: conditionally neo-Weberian (J. Goldthorpe), conditionally neo-Marxist (E.O. Wright) and stratification on based on occupation (ISCO-88). Information about criteria-factors, identified at the elementary (disaggregated) level within each of the presented approaches to social class division, systematized in table 2.

Table 2. Criteria-factors of the class situation in alternative stratification schemes

Note: For a more detailed description of the feature space based on materials from the European Social Survey, see Appendix 1

In order not to significantly complicate the entropy analysis procedure, which turned out to be extremely sensitive to the dimension of spaces, when selecting outcome criteria it was decided to limit ourselves to a simple indicator traditionally used to verify any stratification models - the indicator income. Despite the heated debate surrounding the adequacy of using this indicator to assess the financial situation, I would like to make the following remark. Of course, any researcher would like to have a subtle tool that allows him to accurately diagnose the financial situation of respondents, and the author of the article is no exception. However, he is also strongly opposed to the overcomplication of social information, since such manipulations carry no less danger of distorting social facts. In connection with this, and also due to the absence of a pure income indicator in the materials European Social Survey it was decided to use a subjective assessment of the financial situation that the respondent gives in relation to the income level of the household to which he belongs. There is a certain reason for this, not least due to the peculiarity of the method on which the author relies in his research. Considering that the nature of the distribution of these estimates is extremely susceptible to such factors as the general level of the socio-economic situation in a particular country, it would be fair to assume that the analysis uses a deliberately defective indicator. However, from the point of view of the mathematical functionality of entropy analysis, this argument is meaningless, since this method considers all scales as nominal and records exclusively how non-random the deviations from the most typical distributions of feature values ​​on these scales are.

Another argument in favor of using a subjective assessment of income as an approximation of the financial situation of respondents was that this assessment is very closely related to the placement of the latter on the corresponding interval scale.

Having decided on the feature spaces to be studied, we can begin to analyze the empirical results that we have obtained. The first such space was represented by, perhaps, the most intuitively understandable system of measuring inequality “occupation - level of qualifications/education - income”. All of us, as a rule, in everyday observation stratify those around us precisely according to these three main characteristics. Moreover, this system of stratification is to some extent universal for any modern society: on the one hand, they are characterized by a certain technical and technological order, giving rise to a professional and qualification division of labor, expressed in a system of professions and occupations; on the other hand, in each of them the corresponding institute of vocational education is reproduced and developed, providing training for individuals to perform different types of activities; and, finally, income also represents an important dimension of stratification as a result of the functioning of the mechanism that ensures the distribution of material goods in society.

Returning to the central problem of the study, the author sought to answer the question of how “fair” (natural) is the placement of individuals in the system of these dimensions in different societies? Are those institutional connections that bring into mutual correspondence the level of professional preparedness of people, the level of their material wealth and the place they occupy in the system of functional division of labor really strong?

On Figure 1 the results obtained as a result of evaluating the criterion are reflected H N (degrees of heterogeneity) for the corresponding spaces. For convenience, here and below, countries that historically and culturally are carriers of different civilizational characteristics have been highlighted in color. What's the result?

Figure 1. “Fairness” of socio-economic inequality in European countries

Note: H N“education - occupation - income”

As can be seen, there is in fact no strict correspondence between the degree of distance of countries from the core of the so-called ethacratic world-system, the extreme representative of which in the list of represented countries is Russia. At the same time, the distribution of countries according to the degree of regularity in the distribution of individuals in the corresponding stratification system (“occupation - level of qualifications/education - income”) is not, according to the author of the article, random.

According to the presented diagram, Russia, neighboring Portugal, has one of the lowest indicators N N, corresponding to the high randomness of the placement of respondents in the specified space (0D99). This similarity is largely a reflection of the similar labor market situation in both countries, since, obviously, neither Portugal nor Russia can be classified as a country in which this market can be considered developed. On the other hand, the proximity to Belgium and, to a lesser extent, France looks somewhat discouraging, since these countries in the theoretical model adopted by the author are clearly classified as countries belonging to the core of societies for which a strong labor market institution is one of the historically determined features European civilization.

Nevertheless, with the exception of two, in general, deviant cases - France and Belgium, further results of entropy analysis do not seem unexpected. The rest of the former socialist countries that were included in the program European Social Research - Estonia, Hungary, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Ukraine are closely located in one narrow interval (0.214-0.222) in terms of the degree of regularity in the distribution of respondents in the stratification system under consideration. Such a non-random neighborhood can be considered the best evidence of the institutional homogeneity of countries that once belonged to a single socialist camp, but unlike, say, Russia, preserved and reproduced in the new socio-economic conditions those institutional forms that were characteristic of them as countries, to a greater extent to a greater extent than Russia, gravitating towards the European civilizational area. At the same time, it is worth recognizing that the logic of the location of these countries within this group does not provide serious grounds for asserting that, for example, Ukraine (0.222), which we attribute to the semi-periphery of the ethacratic world-system, has the corresponding features to a greater extent than Estonia (0.214) , lying on its periphery. Spain, which is among the countries represented, seems to be less of a random example, since in its case approximately the same logic applies as with Portugal (see below for details).

The example of Poland, which is so isolated in relation to other post-socialist countries (0.243), to some extent corresponds to the original ideas: this country lies on the very border of the “post-socialist” world and is today an organic part of modern Europe to the same extent as it remained market and “dissident” in relation to the mass of states that were part of the “socialist bloc” in the middle of the last century. The general view of how the countries of Old Europe lined up in relation to each other, which were not part of the ethacratic world in any of their essential characteristics, at least does not cause any tension from the point of view of those theoretical subjects that are subject to empirical verification in this study.

A general preliminary conclusion from the results that were obtained when considering the systemic attribute space “occupation - level of education - income” may be that the considered dimensions of stratification are largely derived from how strongly developed such an institutional component is in it as the labor market (which corresponds to the polarization of countries into developed and post-socialist on Figure 1 ).

Thus, the coordinate system used to analyze social inequality in developed Western societies and, as has been noted more than once, describes the correspondence of income, human capital parameters and socio-professional status, with a high probability loses its explanatory power in European societies gravitating towards the Eurasian civilization area. In other words, the probability of the formation of real (homogeneous) social groups in the corresponding spaces in societies of the étacratic type is noticeably lower.

Let us now consider one of the most widespread conceptualizations of this approach - the well-known class scheme of the English sociologist J. Goldthorpe, which is most often used to analyze social inequality and social mobility in European countries. The space of features subject to entropy analysis is in this case operationalized as follows: “type of contract - occupation - employment status - income - risk of unemployment.” The risk of unemployment (as a separate resulting criterion of the class situation according to J. Goldthorpe) is non-random in this case, since it is traditionally included by the British sociologist in his explanatory model as one of the categories reflecting the “life chances” of people (in this case, “career chances” ) .

The results of the analysis are presented above (see. Figure 2). As you can see, among the countries demonstrating the highest level of correspondence between these characteristics are Sweden, Denmark and Switzerland - one of the most advanced countries of old Europe. The neighborhood of the Scandinavian countries, as, by the way, in the previous example (see . picture 1) is not accidental: apparently, the current model of socially oriented economic development based on compliance with the principles of the welfare state, which with a certain degree of irony can be described as “socialist”, is more consistent with the logic of the distribution of life chances between people according to J. Goldthorpe, than in other developed European countries.

Figure 2. Explanatory power of J. Goldthorpe's (EGP) scheme for various European countries

Note: in terms of heterogeneity of space filling H N“contract type - occupation, employment status - income - risk of unemployment”

On the other hand, you can again find Spain, Russia and, characteristically, Bulgaria located nearby - here the correspondence between these characteristics is minimal. And by the way, the example of Spain in this regard does not seem unexpected, since this country belongs to the European civilizational area only conditionally - it represents part of the border Ibero-European civilization. By the way, the result obtained here echoes what was commented above for Portugal (see . picture 1). As is known, the specifics of border civilizations (usually these include Russia, Latin America, the Iberian and Balkan regions), in contrast to the “classical” ones, are determined by the dominant diversity. In relation to the interaction of these civilizations with the core of Western European (more broadly, Western Christian European), they retain traces of the centuries-old influence of contacts with neighboring and adjacent civilizations. In relation to Spain and Portugal - with the Muslim-Arab cultural and civilizational community, in relation to the Balkan countries - with the Turkic-Muslim one.

In general, the results obtained demonstrate that the explanatory power of Goldthorpe stratification, which is based on the theoretical assumption that the latter is mediated by the labor market (to a greater extent) and employment status (to a lesser extent), in contrast to the simpler system of stratification (by occupation and skill level) , does not allow differentiating countries according to the degree to which the functioning of the relevant institutions is conditioned by etacratic influence. And if the example of Poland, Slovenia and Estonia fits well into the theoretical framework defined above, then the degree of heterogeneity characterizing the pattern of placement of individuals in the Goldthorp scheme for such post-socialist countries as Hungary, Ukraine and Slovakia, in some sense, contradicts the postulate that , that the nature of inequality in these countries should have a certain similarity with those patterns observed for étacratic countries (for example, in Russia).

Finally, the third scheme, which describes a person’s place in the system of social inequality and was reflected within the framework of the development of the neo-Marxist approach of E.O. Wright, allows us to operationalize the class situation based on parameters such as employment status, level of qualifications in the profession, and place in the management hierarchy. For the analysis, an appropriate space was constructed that reflected all significant dimensions of stratification according to E.O. Wright, adding to them, as in the other two examples, the parameter of financial situation (income). The results of the analysis are shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Explanatory power of E.O.'s scheme. Wright for various European countries

Note: H N“employment status - level of education/qualification - place in the management hierarchy - income”

According to the results obtained, in contrast to the other two cases analyzed above, it is impossible to state with any certainty the connection between the applicability of Wright’s stratification scheme and the nature of the location of countries in the “West-East” dichotomy. When ranking societies according to the degree of heterogeneity H N What attracts attention is not only the “chaotic” nature of their location in the context of civilizational affiliation, but also the rather high (in relation to those previously considered) levels of the corresponding indicator: from 0.317 in Ireland to 0.474 in Hungary. On the one hand, this situation characterizes a relatively higher density of filling spaces with observations, subject to the conditions of their heterogeneity, which indicates a higher degree of crystallization of classes in the system of inequality under consideration equally for all societies. On the other hand, this suggests that the logic of class formation according to Wright (read Marx) can to some extent be considered universal for all societies, one way or another, following the path of capitalist development, and independent of the macrostructure determined by civilizational affiliation .

Unfortunately, based on such ambiguous results, an experiment with empirical verification of the E.O. scheme. Wright cannot be considered successful. One of the possible reasons in this case may be the not entirely correct operationalization of the class situation, but the author of the article proceeded from the fact that he was using the best operationalization based on the characteristics that were available. Another, no less probable reason may be insufficient elaboration of the “class” category according to E.O. Wright and its more precise specification in relation to the category that was proposed above to explain inequalities in societies of the étacratic type - estates. One of the basic criteria for selecting estates, according to the theoretical concepts initially adopted by the author, is a place in the system of hierarchy of power (both in a specific organization and in the political system of society as a whole), which Wright also presents as one of the components of the “class” situation characterizing relations of exploitation. Such terminological convergence, however, is not so accidental, if you believe the considerations of the German sociologist W. Teckenberg, who paid a lot of attention to the study of stratification in Soviet-type societies. In particular, he showed that groups formed on the basis of a similar socio-professional situation and place in the managerial hierarchy under certain circumstances can crystallize in the form of estates. These circumstances, according to V. Teckenberg, are the state mode of production, in which inequality is determined by the form of bureaucratic and professional control over access to certain types of resources.

Thus, it is not unreasonable to believe that in the scheme of E.O. Wright, there is a mutual overlap of the class situation itself (defined purely on the basis of relations to the means of production), socio-professional stratification (through differentiation by level of education/qualification) and class (based on place in the hierarchical system of power relations). This, in turn, causes such an ambiguous result obtained during the analysis. In any case, in the future it is planned to develop these ideas and, in particular, to pay special attention to the study of the role of non-class principles of socio-economic differentiation.

The calculations were based on materials European Social Survey as a unique source of comparative information on most European countries, including post-socialist ones. However, the use of these materials, as in the majority of other cases when researchers resort to secondary analysis of data collected for purposes other than the purpose of the study they designed, raises certain difficulties. Thus, in particular, the country’s place on the scale “late industrialism (post-capitalism of the Western type) - neo-statism of the Eurasian type” can be judged only by indirect indicators. It seems that the most important of these indirect criteria is the degree of meritocratism as the principle of formation of the national elite. Direct measurement of key indicators of such social resources as power (power ) and property, based on ESS materials it is impossible to realize.

In modern literature, the typology of existing stratification systems proposed by Professor D. Grusky has received the greatest recognition. In accordance with this typology, the class system of industrial society is being replaced by “advanced” industrialism, called by other authors information (network) society, post-industrial society, etc. It should be noted that the main value, the main building material of this modern emerging society, in contrast to the class industrial one, are not economic resources (means of production), but human ones (education, knowledge and experience).

It is quite obvious that from this approach to the dynamics of modern societies the conclusion follows that the character of the elite has changed. If the class system is based on the formation of an elite distinguished by control over the main means of production (in a different conceptual context - control positions in the labor market), then with “advanced” industrialism (information society) control positions are occupied by people depending on their merits to society, associated, first of all, with their creative contribution to the innovative processes occurring in a given society.

Another major sociologist M. Castells called this meritocratically advanced part of society information workers. In this system, class hierarchy is intertwined with an ever-increasing hierarchy in the ownership of human and cultural capital. This means that in the modern information age, such a factor of inequality and the formation of a higher social stratum as the ability of people to assimilate information and apply the acquired knowledge and skills in their activities, that is, to realize their intellectual capital, is becoming increasingly important. Thus, the social hierarchy begins to line up along a scale that measures not only the physical, but also the intellectual capital of individuals and groups.

All of the above applies to the region we are studying (that is, to post-socialist countries taken in conjunction with other European countries) to the extent that these countries can be classified as post-capitalist. As an analysis of studies by foreign and domestic authors shows, these properties are most pronounced primarily in the United States and, to a lesser extent, in Western European countries.

As for the post-socialist world, which is the direct subject of analysis in this article, it can be assumed that in countries such as Russia and other neo-etacratic states, the role of the meritocratic principle in the formation of the elite, replenishing its ranks, is to a very weak extent connected with social selection according to creative criterion.

Therefore, it can be assumed that both in public perception and in real social selection, the degree of expression of meritocratic principles corresponds to the country’s place on the scale between information (network) and neo-etacratic societies. From this point of view, let us consider the results of the analysis of materials European Social Survey for the European group of countries.

Despite the difficulties that arose with the empirical verification of the principles of class differentiation, certain evidence was found above in favor of the fact that in societies belonging to the so-called European civilizational area, and in societies gravitating towards them, the placement of people in a system of stratification " occupation - level of education - income" is a more natural phenomenon than in countries facing the East (and to some extent, the South). However, the results obtained look much more interesting in light of how the population of these countries themselves relates to the meritocratic principles of social inequality. To demonstrate this, an additional indicator was introduced into the analysis to assess how people in different societies feel about the principle of sharing social wealth based on their actual achievements, talents and abilities. The European Social Survey asks, in part, “How much do you agree or disagree with the following statement: My salary is commensurate with the effort I put in and the success I achieve in my job?” IN table 3 contains information on the share of positive answers to this question (“Completely agree” and “Agree”) for all countries represented, which allows it to be compared with information about the objectively recorded “fairness” of inequality using the indicator mentioned above.

Table 3. Relationship between the degree of perception of the meritocratic principle in the distribution of social wealth and the degree of “fairness” of inequality in the context of European countries

The connection between both signs is obvious, as evidenced by the corresponding correlation indicator, which was 0.554 at less than a 1% significance level. Thus, people’s subjective opinion about how the principle of distribution of social wealth is implemented is practically in functional correspondence with how this inequality is implemented in practice (if you believe the results of entropy analysis). Moreover, the nature of these subjective assessments, as well as the “fairness” of inequality, depends, among other things, on which “camp” these countries belong to. Thus, in post-socialist countries, the share of respondents who answered positively to the question about the adequacy of material rewards for the efforts they expend varies from 9.9% (in Poland) to 22.4% (in Slovenia). Whereas for Western European countries, excluding Portugal (14.7%), this figure is 22.8% (in Finland) and higher.

Another important indicator describing the nature of social inequality emerging in societies is the degree to which the chances of parents and children in the labor market are related. Studying the intensity of intergenerational mobility in the context of the countries under consideration is of particular interest, since the idea of ​​​​the “classes” of societies of the neo-etacracy type, which we have already expressed more than once, requires additional testing on empirical material. In this regard, the logic of entropy analysis was also adapted to solve this seemingly non-trivial problem.

To solve the problem outlined below, it was necessary to analyze the nature of the placement of observations in the space connecting the socio-professional positions of respondents and their parents. For the analysis, aggregated socio-professional categories according to ISCO-88 were used. The final result is presented at Figure 4.

In the figure below, lower values ​​of the degree of heterogeneity H N The space “occupation of the respondent - occupation of the father - occupation of the mother” corresponds to a higher volatility of socio-professional movements. Higher - on the contrary, the lack of socio-professional mobility or, at least, a high probability of reproducing similar trajectories of socio-professional mobility.

Figure 4. Level of “stagnation” of intergenerational socio-professional mobility in European countries, including Russia

Note: in terms of heterogeneity of space filling H N“occupation of the respondent - occupation of the father - occupation of the mother”

According to the results obtained, Russia is again located not only at the extreme pole of the axis under consideration, but also in the “familiar company” of countries: Portugal, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria. A more general view of the situation allows us to characterize intergenerational socio-professional mobility in post-socialist countries, in general, as relatively less mobile than in the developed countries of Western Europe. The only exception is Estonia, which is characterized by increased diversity of socio-professional movements, which is apparently due to the high proportion of so-called “non-citizens” in the population of this country. In general, the author is inclined to believe that this case does not violate the general logic of the analysis.

Our proposed interpretation of the results can, however, be criticized from the point of view that less predictable movements in more developed countries may be caused by a significant “redrawing” of the socio-professional structure of the corresponding societies, which took place in connection with the transition to a new post-industrial type of economy . This argument assumes a reduction in the workforce in low-status occupations (primarily manual labor) and an increase in the proportion of more skilled workers, as well as an expansion of the tertiary sector (services). In this regard, it would be logical to assume that in developed societies, less consolidation in socio-professional statuses was due to their significant increase in relation to previous generations, which were characterized by lower-status types of employment. Analysis of the evidence, however, shows that this is not the case (see Figure 5).

Figure 5. Intensity of downward intergenerational socio-professional mobility (in the share of respondents who lowered their socio-professional status in relation to their parents)

Designations: RT-Portugal, ES-Spain, RU-Russia, N-Hungary, VO-Bulgaria, PL-Poland, EE-Estonia, CY-Cyprus, NO-Norway, SK-Slovakia, UA-Ukraine, UK-Great Britain, FI- Finland, SE-Sweden, DE-Denmark, AT-Austria, NL-Netherlands, FR-France, BE-Belgium, SL-Slovenia, CH-Switzerland.

As shown, residents of developed European countries are much more likely to lower their socio-professional status in relation to their parents than representatives of post-socialist societies, as well as two southern European countries - Spain and Portugal, which has already been interpreted in the context of civilizational affiliation (see. higher). Russia clearly occupies the most unenviable position among post-socialist countries in terms of mobility indicators.

Against the background of the previously discussed results, according to which in developed Western societies social stratification is carried out on more meritocratic principles and is mediated by an effective labor market institution, the “stagnation” of intergenerational socio-professional mobility in a significant part of post-socialist countries does not seem unexpected and, in fact, quite clearly indicates the “class” nature of their social inequality.

Conclusion

The presented study is based on the ideas of social differentiation as the prime mover of social change, which are original to the classical tradition in sociology. Both at the theoretical and empirical levels, differences in the nature of socio-economic differentiation of some post-socialist societies, including Russia, were analyzed in comparison with developed Western countries. In particular, the results of the study reflected that the specific nature of social inequality, based on the interweaving of undeveloped elements of class differentiation and class hierarchy, is not accidental in societies that once belonged to the ethcratic group of countries and continue to feel the influence of the Eurasian civilizational system. On the other hand, it is also shown that in countries that are more a continuation of Western civilization, the stratification hierarchy can be seen as predominantly class (i.e. based on place in the system of division of labor and property relations).

In a certain way, when applied to the problems of studying social inequality, the method of entropy analysis has proven itself, which is not traditional in the practice of modern sociological research, not to mention comparative cross-country analysis. However, as has been shown, the corresponding calculation method can be adapted to study possible connections in multidimensional attribute spaces, in the form of which, among other things, various systems of inequality can be operationalized. Thanks to the use of this mathematical apparatus, in particular, it was possible to solve a number of problems posed in this study and directly related to the processing of empirical material, namely: to test the explanatory ability of various approaches in the operationalization of the unequal socio-economic position of individuals in society, to determine the degree of correspondence between different dimensions of stratification, as well as explore the nature of socio-professional mobility.

To summarize the above, I would like to note that much work remains to be done to determine clearer differences in the nature of inequality between post-socialist and developed Western societies. In particular, an experiment testing the validity of social stratification schemes using the entropy analysis method, despite the rather interesting results that generally fit into the theoretical framework, requires additional verification in the context of comparison with the results obtained using a wider range of tools (for example, the use of multiple regressions, cluster analysis, etc.).

In addition, in the process of familiarization with empirical material European Social Survey and as we developed our own theoretical ideas about the nature of inequality in non-European societies, some hypotheses that were minor in relation to this study were formulated and partially tested, on the basis of which in the future it is planned to develop a more in-depth analysis of social inequality in societies representing different civilizational systems. A common feature of these hypotheses is the assumption that in societies largely based on the state mode of production, a special role in the processes of social stratification belongs to such non-class principles of socio-economic differentiation as gender, race, ethnicity, etc.

At the same time, the limitations of such a source of social information as the materials of the European Social Survey are obvious. In particular, on the basis of these materials, due to the lack of data on the intragenerational dynamics of socio-professional statuses (career mobility), issues related to the reproduction of real social groups cannot be studied. In addition, in the ESS materials, negligible attention is paid to the disclosure of such important information from the point of view of studying social differentiation as information about property (not only in the traditional sense - movable and immovable property - but also the participation of respondents in the ownership of means of production, their management, ownership securities, etc.). Finally, the survey contains virtually no information about how the respondent’s social networks are formed.

Appendix No. 1

Description of variables for entropy analysis based on materials European Social Survey(3rd wave, 2006/2007).

Appendix No. 2

Algorithm for bringing the socio-professional affiliation of respondents and their parents to a single scale based on materials European Social Survey(3rd wave, 2006/2007).

The research was carried out within the framework of the Fundamental Research Program of the State University - Higher School of Economics, topic No. 71 “Comparative analysis of the development of post-socialist societies.”
Klyuchevsky V.O. History of estates in Russia. Full course of lectures. M.: Harvest, 2004.
Ilyin V.I. Models of class formation in the post-communist world // World of Russia. 2008. No. 2.
Shkaratan O.I., Yastrebov G.A. Identification of real (homogeneous) social groups in Russian society: methods and results // Applied econometrics. 2007. No. 3; Shkaratan O.I., Yastrebov G.A. Shkaratan O.I., Yastrebov G.A. Entropy analysis as a method of non-hypothetical search for real (homogeneous) social groups // Sociological Research. 2009. No. 2.
Marx K., Engels F. Essays. T. 20. M.: Gospolitizdat, 1961. T. 20, p. 186.
Ibid., T.4, p. 310
Weber M. Selected works. M.: Progress, 1990; Weber M. Class, status and party / Belanovsky S.A.(responsible editor) Social stratification. Vol. I. M.: Institute of National Economic Forecasting of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1992.
The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992; Erikson R., Goldthorpe. J.H. Intergenerational Inequality: A Sociological Perspective // ​​Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2002. 16 (3); Goldthorpe J.H., Hope K. Occupational Grading and Occupational Prestige / K.Hope(Ed.), The Analysis of Social Mobility. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972; Goldthorpe J.H. Social Mobility and Class Structure in Modem Britain. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987.
Wright E.O. The comparative project on class structure and class consciousness / The Comparative Project on Class Structure and Class Consciousness, Technical Paper Series, No. 1. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press, 1982; Wright E.O. Classes. L.: Verso Editions, 1985; Wright E.O. Class, Exploitation, and Economic Rents: Reflections on Sorensen’s ‘Sounder Basis’ // American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 105, No. 6. 2000.
These conclusions are based on an analysis of a number of national socio-professional classifications in Europe, to which a special issue of the authoritative French journal Societes contemporaines was dedicated (‘Enjeux el usages des categories socioprofessionneltes en Europe No. 45-46, 2002 (1-2).
Sorensen A.B. Toward a sounder basis for class analysis // American Journal of Sociology. 2000. 105 (6); Wright E.O. Class, Exploitation, and Economic Rents: Reflections on Sorensen’s ‘Sounder Basis’ // American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 105, No. 6. 2000; Goldthorpe J.H. Rent, class conflict, and class structure: A commentary on Sorensen // American Journal of Sociology. May 2000. 105 (6); Goldthorpe J. Occupational Sociology, Yes: Class Analysis, no.: Comment on Grusky and Weeden’s Research Agenda // Acta Sociologica. 2002. 45 (3); Rueschemeyer D., Mahoney J. A neo-utilitarian theory of class? // American Journal of Sociology. 2000. 105 (6); Grusky D., Weeden K. Decomposition Without Death: A Research Agenda for a New Class Analysis // Acta Sociologica. 2001. 44 (3); Grusky D., Weeden K. Class Analysis and the Heavy Weight of Convention 11 Acta Sociologica. 2002. 45 (3); Scott J. Social Class and Stratification in Late Modernity //Acta Socioloca. 2002. 45 (1).
The overall result of these studies is summarized in the monograph by Shkaratan O.I. and the team. Socio-economic inequality and its reproduction in modern Russia. M.: Olma Media Group, 2009.
For comprehensive information about the survey, see the Internet: http://ess.nsd.uib.no ; http://www.ess-ru.ru; http://www.cessi.ru/index.php?id=141.
The conceptualization of the concept of a real (homogeneous) social group, including some considerations for the operationalization of this concept in the practice of empirical research, is discussed in detail by us in: Shkaratan O.I., Yastrebov G.A. Identification of real (homogeneous) social groups in Russian society: methods and results // Applied econometrics. 2007. No. 3.
Taganov I.N., Shkaratan O.I. Study of social structures by the method of entropy analysis // Questions of Philosophy. 1969. No. 5; Shkaratan O.I., Sergeev N.V. Real groups: conceptualization and empirical calculation//Social Sciences and Modernity. 2000. No. 5; Sergeev N.V. Ranking of stratification criteria using the entropy analysis method // World of Russia. 2002. No. 3; Shkaratan O.I., Yastrebov G.A. Identification of real (homogeneous) social groups in Russian society: methods and results // Applied econometrics. 2007. No. 3; Russian neo-etacracy society and its stratification // Sociological studies. 2008. No. 11; Shkaratan O.I., Yastrebov G.A. Entropy analysis as a method of non-hypothetical search for real (homogeneous) social groups // Sociological Research. 2009. No. 2.
Bergman M., Joye D. Comparing Social Stratification Schemes: CAMSIS, CSP-CH, Goldthorpe, ISCO-88, Treiman, and Wright. Cambridge: Cambridge Studies in Social Research, 2001; Leiulfsrud H., Bison /., Jensberg H. Social Class in Europe. European Social Survey 2002/3. NTNU Social Research Ltd., 2005 and others.
Or, conversely, a non-class position: in the sense of the absence of “classes” as the main components of the social hierarchy in societies of a different non-Western European (more broadly, non-Atlantic) type.
Common tools for studying connections between phenomena in modern sociology are various modifications of pairwise contingency coefficients, of which a huge variety have been developed (Pearson, Spearman, Kendall, Cramer, Chuprov, etc.). Proposed in 1969 by I.N. Taganov’s coefficient of inhomogeneity of filling the space HN based on the measure of information entropy (for more details, see Section 2.3) has in this sense the advantage that it can be considered as a kind of n-dimensional connection coefficient.
To carry out the calculations, a program written in Visual Basic for Microsoft Excel was used by a group of programmers under the guidance of HSE Professor E.B. Ershova.
We are talking about cumbersome procedures that make it possible to “straighten” the relevant information taking into account indirect indicators and empirically calculated correction factors.
In the Russian part of the 3rd wave of the European Social Survey, which took place in 2006, the question was: “Which of the statements on this card most accurately describes the current level of income of your family?” Respondents were offered four answer options: “1. We live on this income without experiencing financial difficulties,” “2. This income is basically enough for us”, “3. It’s quite difficult to live on such an income”, “4. It is very difficult to live on such an income.” A similar question with similar answer options was asked to citizens of other countries participating in the survey.
The Spearman rank correlation coefficient for these two indicators for the sample of all countries included in the ESS in 2006 was 0.577. It is worth noting, however, that there is no single algorithm for bringing this scale to a comparable indicator for all countries participating in the survey. In particular, in Russia and Bulgaria the interval scale of income in the 3rd wave of the ESS is represented by only 5 possible intervals (while in other countries - 12). Upon closer examination of the survey documentation [http://ess.nsd.uib.no/ess/round3/fieldwork.html], the author had questions about how these groupings were obtained, not to mention the possibility of their use in a comparative study .
In itself, the proximity to Portugal does not look strange, given the still tangible consequences of the harsh political regime of dictator António de Salazar, which was called the “New State” and existed in this country until 1974. The similarity of the modern Russian regime with Salazar’s is not surprising, despite the fact that , which since the liquidation of the latter almost 40 years ago could not but affect the similarity of the social structure of these countries.
Chan T.W., Goldthorpe J.H. Class and Status: The Conceptual Distinction and its Empirical Relevance // American Sociological Review. 2007. 72 (4)
Ionov I.N. Postcolonial discourse in civilizational ideas of Latin America and Russia // Social sciences and modernity. 2008. No. 3; Shemyakin Ya.G. Europe and Latin America: Interaction of civilizations in the context of world history. M.: Nauka, 2001; Shemyakin Ya.G.“Borderline” civilizations on a planetary scale. Features and prospects of evolution // Latin America. 2007. No. 7.
In particular, see Shkaratan O.I., Yastrebov G.A. Russian neo-etacracy society and its stratification // Sociological studies. 2008. No. 11.
Teckenberg W. Die soziale Struktur der sowjetischen Arbeiterklasse im intemationalen Vergleich. Auf dem Wege zur industrialisierten Standegesellschaft? Munchen, Wien, 1977; Teckenberg W. The Social Structure of the Soviet Working Class. Toward an Estatist Society? // International Journal of Sociology. 1981-1982. 9 (4); Teckenberg W. The Stability of Occupational Structures, Social Mobility, and Interest Formation: The USSR as an Estatist Society in Comparison with Class Societies // International Journal of Sociology. N.Y. 1989. 19 (2).
It should be added that in traditionally used in American and in a significant part of European sociology, Weber’s concept of status groups, as shown by a thorough analysis of V. Teckenberg and E. Scheuch, is essentially Weber’s own concept of classes, built on the basis of the prestige of an inherited position, and also lifestyle and level of formal education. And this is not at all surprising if we take into account that in German the concepts of “estate” and “status” are expressed by the same word Stand. However, the author adheres to the point of view according to which “status group” is a generic concept in relation to “class”.
Grusky D.B. The Past, Present and Future of Social Inequality / Grusky D.B.(Ed.) Social Stratification. Class, Race and Gender in Sociological Perspective. 2nd Edition. Westview Press, 2001. p. 9
Brooking E.N. Intellectual capital. The key to success in the new millennium. St. Petersburg: “Peter”, 2001; Himanen P., Castells M. Information society and the welfare state: The Finnish model. Per. from English M.: “Logos”, 2002; Castells M. Information Age. Economy, society and culture. Per. from English scientifically edited by Professor O.I. Shkaratana. M.: State University-Higher School of Economics, 2000; Wallerstein I. The end of a familiar world. Sociology of the XXI century. Per. from English M.: “Logos”, 2003.
Retrieved from http://ess.nsd.uib.no/ess/round3/fieldwork/Russian%20Federation.
The degree of heterogeneity in filling the space “occupation - level of education - income” for individual countries is in full accordance with Figure 1 .
The use of this method assumed the use of “non-empty” observations, i.e. The lack of information on at least one of the measurements included in the analysis automatically served as a criterion for “rejecting” observations. In this study, for each of the national samples, the proportion of such “marriage” did not exceed 15%.
Those. citizens of Estonia who are not ethnic Estonians.
The consolidation of the professional statuses of parents and respondents to three significantly different socio-professional groups was carried out in accordance with the following logic: highly qualified groups (managers, professionals, semi-professionals), semi-skilled workers (office employees, trade and consumer services workers), workers low qualifications (employed in agriculture, industrial workers, representatives of elementary professions). For more details, see appendix 2.

Size: px

Start showing from the page:

Transcript

2 Introduction The content of the specialty “Social structure, social institutions and processes” is the analysis of society as a complex hierarchized system in the process of functioning, in the context of contradictory trends and factors associated with globalization and regionalization. In this regard, an analysis is being carried out of the ongoing processes of transformation of social and structural relations of society according to various criteria, new forms of social stratification, radical changes in trends and directions of social mobility, value orientations of individuals and groups, and patterns of their behavior. The study of these problems should be carried out on the basis of state and departmental statistics, analysis of sociological research materials, our own empirical data, as well as data from world sociological science. The objects of study are the specific state and level of integration and disintegration in the social space of modern Russian society, its individual elements, and their hierarchical subordination. Particular attention is paid to the objective dialectic of relations of equality and inequality between elements of the social stratification structure at various levels of social space. This allows us to offer well-founded recommendations in the field of social policy that have broad social significance, both at the federal, regional and sectoral levels. Passing the candidate's exam in the specified specialty is subject to the profile approved by the Higher Attestation Commission of the specialized council of the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Altai State University" for the defense of candidate and doctoral dissertations. An applicant for the academic degree of candidate of sociological sciences, 10 days before taking the exam, presents to the examination commission: a) a dissertation plan; b) a program of empirical sociological research on its topic; c) the most worked out fragments of the dissertation, usually the first chapter. The examinee answers two questions (one from each section of the following program) and characterizes the research he is conducting in the context of these questions. In order to comply with the last condition, the exam is conducted not on tickets, but on program questions selected by the examiners taking into account the topic of the dissertation research.

3 Section. I. MINIMUM PROGRAM for a candidate exam in the specialty “Social structure, social institutions and processes” in sociological sciences Social structure and social stratification. The concept of “social stratification structure of society.” Various criteria for social stratification Social structure is the most important problem of sociological science. Social stratification is the most important component of social structure. The concept of social structure. A systematic idea of ​​society as a set of interconnected and interacting elements. Social differences between people. Hierarchical ranking. The concept of social stratification: uneven distribution of rights, privileges, responsibilities and duties, the presence or absence of social values, power and influence among members of a particular community. Three main criteria of social stratification: economic, political and professional. The concept of “social stratification structure of society” as a multidimensional, hierarchically organized social space in which social groups and layers differ among themselves in the degree of possession of power, property and social status. Social inequality of people. Various ways of organizing inequality: in K. Marx, M. Weber, P. Sorokin, P. Bourdieu and others. Multidimensional social stratification. Basic methodological approaches to the study of social structure. Unidimensionality and multidimensionality of stratification Traditional for the Soviet period, the class approach to the study of the social structure of society. Main classes and social groups. Modern paradigm for studying social stratification. Main criteria for stratification. Multidimensional hierarchical approach. Formation of new socio-group self-identifications and resource groups. Elements of social stratification structure. The concepts of “social stratum” and “social group”; their objective and subjective definition. Group social distance Social communities, principles of their formation. Similar, identical functions and statuses determined by them, social roles, cultural needs, ethnic characteristics, etc. The role of solidarity in the formation, effectiveness, and functioning of a community as an association.

4 Basic types of communication: social contacts and social interactions. Types of social communities: social circle and social groups. Definition of social group. Small groups and large groups. Formal and informal groups. Social groups: target groups. The concept of social layer (stratum). Criteria (lines) of differentiation according to P.A. Sorokin: citizenship, nationality, occupation, economic status, religious affiliation, etc. Objective and subjective definition of social layer (stratum). Group social distancing. Theories of social differentiation/integration. Criteria for socio-economic differentiation Problems of social integration and disintegration, harmony and conflict are the key problems of classical sociological theory and the main field of sociological analysis. Definition of social integration and disintegration. Criteria for socio-economic differentiation: property, power, income and others dominant in the stratification of society. Social origin, social status, educational level, place of residence, nationality, etc. Transformational social-stratification processes of modern Russian society. The main ways of forming a new social structure The concept of “transformation”. New forms of social disintegration and differentiation at the macro level and at the level of social and production structures; a new system of relations of equality-inequality, integration-disintegration in social space. Changes in the relationships between forms of ownership, institutions of power, the disappearance of some groups and layers, the emergence of others, the fragmentation of others, changes in the social role and status of others, etc. A set of factors that determine the scale, trends, depth and features of the transformation of the social structure in transforming societies: structural changes in the economy; profound changes associated with changes in the employment system; decline in the standard of living of the vast majority of the population; social anomie. The main trends in the transformation of the social structure of modern Russian society: deepening social inequality and marginalization of a significant part of the population. Ways to form a new social structure and its composition: pluralization of forms of ownership; transformation of the state form

5 property; the emergence of new layers (strata) based on the interaction of different forms of ownership. The formation of civil society in Russia, its elements and structure The concept of civil society Analysis of the main elements of civil society. Features of the formation of civil society in Russia. Social inequality, main indicators and development trends. Processes of deepening social inequality and their dynamics The nature of social inequality The main trends in the transformation of the social structure. Trends in the transformation of the social structure of modern Russian society. Processes of impoverishment of the population and growing social stratification as factors in the emergence of hypertrophied forms of social inequality. Historical and theoretical analysis of the formation of new social group communities, their interaction and hierarchy. Transformation of the configuration of the social-class structure of society, the quantitative ratio of the number of workers, employees, intelligentsia, peasants, as well as their role. The problem of social-structural processes, their determination by qualitative changes in relations of property, power, and the level of income of various layers and groups of the population. New social strata and communities at the transitional stage of development of Russian society. The phenomenon of marginalization of entire social groups, and social disintegration. Subjective characteristics of social relations. The process of self-identification of individuals with social communities. Characteristic features of the processes of social stratification Characteristics of modern Russian society as a society with strong social polarization. The process of redistributing labor and capital to more efficient sectors of the economy. The social structure of modern Russian society and its extreme social instability. Pluralization of forms of ownership and the formation of new economic classes in Russia: the class of owners and the class of hired workers. Economic reforms and transformation of the basis of society, pluralization of forms of ownership, as the reason for changes in its social structure: the disappearance of some, the emergence of other social layers and strata.

6 The process of formation of the class of owners and the class of employees. Contradictions between the new classes in work, the related sphere of work motivation, financial situation and overall quality of life. Social dynamics and adaptation of individual groups and strata in a transforming society Social adaptation to dynamically changing conditions of the social environment. The state of adaptation is a characteristic of an individual’s relationship with the external environment. Its features in modern Russia (displacement of norms and values ​​that existed throughout the lives of several generations). Salaried workers, their social differentiation depending on the sector of employment, professional and industry affiliation, region of residence Salaried workers in Russia, as an element of the macrostructure of the entire society, are a socially differentiated part of the population. Levels of differentiation by position in the mesostructure and microstructure of society. Social content of the working class in modern Russia; a new interpretation of its essence, social composition, dynamics. Social characteristics of the working class in comparison with other strata or groups of the employed population. Changes in social status and deformation of the Russian intelligentsia, its professional differentiation. Directions of the process of erosion of the intelligentsia. Blurring the boundaries between highly skilled educated workers and specialists with higher education who are not associated with government. The situation of the rural producer. Erosion of dominant state property. Two types of owners: individual (farmer) and collective, developing on the basis of state and collective farms. Social uncertainty of producers in the world of a spontaneously emerging market. The problem of marginalization of the Russian population; the concept of “marginal layer”. Transformation of the elite; economic and political elite, their composition, functions, dynamics of development. Formation of the institution of power The concept of elite. The political elite, business elite, as an integral part of the ruling elite. Nomenclature outlines of power in Russia The process of concentration of power not only in politics, but also in the economy. The structure of the new Russian elite: politicians, entrepreneurs, security forces.

7 The phenomenon of unemployment in Russia; features of formation, development indicators Unemployment indicator as an important characteristic of social inequality. Replacing the “dismissal” of workers with flexible remuneration regimes (unpaid vacations, low wages, etc.). Property differentiation of layers of Russian society Increasing property differentiation, falling real monetary incomes of the population, changes in the structure of consumption. Rich and poor in Russia. Their quantitative and qualitative indicators. The concept of "living wage". Social stratification by material indicators (capital, income, property). The struggle for the redistribution of spheres of influence among diverse elites. Middle income group and middle class. Composition of “old” and “new” middle layers. Transformation of boundaries and criteria of class and social division. The role of social institutions in the transformation of the social structure of society Social institutions in the system of social connections. Formal and informal social connections. Formal social institutions, their common feature. Formal social institutions as a factor determining the strength of society. Development of society through the development of social institutions. Re-regulation of social institutions as a result of confrontation of social forces. Power relations and their place in the system of structure-forming characteristics The criterion of power as one of the main criteria of social stratification. A fundamental feature of power relations is their direct invisibility. The nature of power, its direction, structure and hierarchy, revealed by indirect signs: by the nature of coercion (moral, legal, economic, etc.), by the peculiarities of coordinating various actions in conditions of division of labor. Social mobility, its main directions and types. Social mobility as a factor in changing the contours of social stratification The concept of “social mobility”, its main directions and types. The direction of social mobility, its. scale and intensity. Two types of social mobility: group and individual.

8 Social mobility in modern Russia. Various strategies of adaptive behavior of people. Changes in the mechanisms of social mobility as a result of the transition to a market economy. Social functions of the education system Education as a factor of social stratification Functionality and dysfunctionality of vocational education. Labor market and vocational education. Labor autonomy in the social-structural space: levels, indicators, factors. Social-production structures and transformation of social-structural relations The problem of autonomy of the subject in the aspect of building a democratic society. Autonomy, its main elements and levels. Decision making, control action, control. Social autonomy, as the ability to make and implement responsible decisions. Labor autonomy is a component of social autonomy. The relationship between work autonomy and occupational structure. System of hierarchical relations: executive-manager. Social group, social stratum differentiation. A social-corporate type of relationship that arises on the basis of corporations of owners - labor collectives. Group integration. Labor motivation in the system of qualifications and content of an employee’s work and its changes in modern conditions. Problems of social conflicts, social tension Increased conflict in conditions of strict property division of society and a decline in production. A decrease in social justice in the public domain, leading to a persistently high percentage of negative assessments of the state’s activities. The opposition of interests of various social groups in Russia, as an incompletely formed civil society, is a manifestation of group, corporate egoism. The problem of unifying society on the terms of compromise between social actors. Youth in the labor market, prospects for their employment Age cohorts in the system of socio-structural relations New participants in the socio-cultural process and “massive new contact” with the old heritage are a new social phenomenon. Growing differentiation of life paths. Orientation of Russian youth towards a mobile type of career with frequent changes of place of work and changes in profession; work in non-productive sectors of the economy

9 (trade, consumer services, education, science, sports). Regional features of the youth labor market. Population health in a social context The modern paradigm for studying social structure assumes a multidimensional hierarchical approach that uses various criteria, which include the quality of public health. Factors influencing the formation of a healthy generation as a criterion of social differentiation. The institution of the family as a factor in the stratification of society Family and school are the fundamental institutions of socialization of the younger generation. The influence on these institutions of changes in social conditions and the transition from one socio-economic relations to qualitatively opposite ones. The socio-political nature of the realization of the family’s ability to reproduce new generations. Subjective aspect of social stratification The problem of an individual’s awareness of his social position, place in the social hierarchy. Changes in the attitude of social structure in mass consciousness. Social identification, its main types: social-group, social-stratum identification. Types of identification behavior. Basic procedures for studying the social stratification structure Analysis of state statistics materials. Use of historiographic methods. Analysis of documents and materials, periodicals and other publications. Secondary analysis of sociological research materials. Identification of what is common to the Russian Federation and what is regionally special in the processes under consideration. Development of a sample that takes into account the main indicators (demographic, statistical, social) of the general population. A questionnaire survey of the population in accordance with a matched sample. Expert survey. for preliminary testing of the list of social indicators and to determine the initial requirements for the sample. Multidimensional analysis of sociological information, identification of significant connections and correlations between initial values. Theoretical analysis of empirical information is the final stage of the work. Formulation of new theoretical generalizations and conclusions based on logical and methodological consideration of empirical data.

10 Section. II. ADDITIONAL PROGRAM TOPIC 1. Attributes of sociological science Object and subject of sociology. The genesis of ideas and modern discussions about the subject of sociology. General and specific in the definitions of the subject of sociology in modern domestic textbooks, its characteristics from the standpoint of monism and polyparadigmality of modern sociological knowledge. The relationship of sociology with other sciences about society and man. Specificity of sociological thinking and knowledge. Interdisciplinary social research. The method of sociology, the essence of disputes about it in the history of sociology and in modern Russian sociology. Specifics of sociological research methods. Sociological laws. Categories of sociology and their series. Initial (basic, primary) categories of sociology. System of initial categories of the applicant's dissertation research. Functions of sociology in society. Functional specificity of dissertation sociological research. Professional code of sociologist, professional ethics of a specialist in the field of sociology. TOPIC 2. Levels of sociological knowledge. Multilevel sociology: causes and consequences. Methodological level of sociological knowledge. Polyparadigmality and monism in sociology. Traditional and new sociological paradigms. Characteristics of the paradigm(s) of the applicant's dissertation research. General scientific and general humanitarian methods in sociology. Specifically sociological methods, characteristics of the applicant's dissertation research methods. Positivism, neopositivism, postpositivism and antipositivism as methodological orientations of sociologists. Theoretical sociology and its structure. Theoretical pluralism of sociology: causes and consequences. The relationship between polyparadigmality and monism in modern sociology. "Large" sociological theories, their purpose and varieties. Characteristics of general sociological theories that form the basis of the dissertation research. Argumentation for the choice of theoretical orientations of the applicant. The concept of vital forces of social subjects and its significance in the study of social structure, social institutions and processes. Sociological theories of the “middle” level: essence, purpose, varieties. Characteristics of the TSUs used by the dissertation candidate:

11 authorship, theoretical content, connections with general sociological concepts and paradigms, degree of validity and testing, heuristic capabilities. Particular, sectoral and special sociological theories, their relationships with TSU. The content of private and/or special theories used in the dissertation research. Argumentation of their heuristic value for dissertation research. Empirical sociology: academic and applied contexts. The purpose of empirical sociological research, its typology. Preparation for conducting empirical sociological research. The program of empirical sociological research, its mandatory components and the rules for their development. Characteristics of the theoretical and methodological part of the sociological research of the dissertation research: the real social and scientific problem, the extent of its knowledge, initial concepts, their operationalization, working hypotheses. The validity of empirical sociological research and ways to achieve it. TOPIC 3. Branches of sociology The multidisciplinary nature of sociology: causes and consequences. Typologies of branches of sociology. Branches of sociology, distinguished by: a) subjects of social activity; b) spheres of life of society; c) the close interconnectedness of sociology with other sciences about society and man. Qualification of dissertation research in an industry context. Characteristics of the branches of sociology within which the dissertation research is carried out. Industry specialization of sociologists: what should be and what is real. The minimum sociological knowledge required by sociologists of all specializations. TOPIC 4. Organization of empirical sociological research. Sample population: conditions of application and calculation rules. Rules for ensuring representativeness of empirical sociological research, problems of reliability of instruments. Organizational, technical and work plan for empirical sociological research. TOPIC 5. Methods of collecting sociological information, their tools and technologies. Document analysis: traditional and content analysis. Types of documents, their classification. Methodology and tools. Sociological observation: conditions of application, requirements for

12 tools. Participant and non-participant observation. Ethical issues arising from the use of surveillance. Survey methods. Varieties and specifics of using the survey method. Interview: types, design features and tools. Expert interviews as a special type of survey method. Telephone survey. Cognitive and research capabilities of survey methods and gaps in their application. Expert assessment method. Classification of expert methods. Stages of preparation, implementation and analysis of results. Sociometric techniques. Methods and procedures, development of tools, features of implementation. Processing and analysis of sociological data. Certification and mapping of social objects: conditions of application. Biographical method. Biographical method in qualitative research. Sources of information in biographical research. Life story. Family history. The problem of the truth of memories and possible ways to solve it. Using different types of interviews in biographical research. Analysis of visual information and personal documents. Sociological experiment. The specifics of using experiment in sociological research, its capabilities and limits of application. Logical structure of the experiment. Basic experimental designs, application conditions. Types of experiments. Case study method. The essence of the research strategy of the case study method. Stages of field work, techniques and tools in relation to the case study method. CASE STUDY as a strategy for qualitative sociological research. The essence of the case study research strategy. History of the development of the method. Case study identification criteria. Modern definitions and methodological principles. Concept by R. Yin. Cognitive capabilities of case study. Design case study. Stages of field work. Methods for integrating expert assessments. Determination of the expert assessment method. Methodological justification for the use of the expert assessment method in sociological research, its functions, main purpose. Areas of application of the method. The place of the expert assessment method in the system of sociological research methods. Classification of expert methods. Testing within the framework of the expert assessment method. Procedures and tools for conducting expert surveys. Preparatory stage: its main characteristics. The problem of measurement: requirements for the scale of expert judgments. Stage of selection of experts: search for potential experts, assessment of the competence of experts, determination of the size of expert groups. Stage of collecting expert information: its procedural features, advantages of procedures with feedback without direct interaction of experts (Delphi method, qualitative feedback method, individual feedback method). Stage

13 analysis of expert information: its procedures and purpose. Methods for processing expert judgments. Advantages, difficulties, typical disadvantages in the application of expert methods in sociology. "Brainstorm". BOW. Characteristics of the BOU method as a discussion of the problems of microsociety among the participants in the discussion. Possibilities of the BOU method and questionnaires. The principle of triangulation in the BOU methodology. Requirements for the formation of research groups and a group of representatives of the microsociety being studied. Analysis of secondary sources of information. Contents of procedures, tools and techniques of the BOU methodology. Use of observation, testing and interview methods before conducting the field phase of the BOU. Focus group. The concept of a focus group. The focus group method is a qualitative method for collecting sociological information. The place of the focus group method in the system of sociological research methods. Group dynamics and ethnographic approach as the main methodological principles of the focus group method. Methodological procedures for conducting a focus group. “Snowball”, video recording, “one-way mirror” and others methods. The decisive role of the moderator (discussion organizer) in a focus group. Methods for analyzing focus group data. Content analysis. Method of intergroup comparisons. Linguistic analysis. Discourse analysis. Video data analysis. Drawing up a report on the results of the focus group. Boundaries and scope of application of the focus group method. Problem wheel. TOPIC 6. Methods of processing and analysis of sociological information. Possibilities of using statistical processing of the results of sociological research. Forms of presentation of sociological data used by the dissertation candidate in statistical packages (Yes-system, SPSS, etc.). Statistical grouping of information as a way of processing the results of sociological research. Contingency tables as tools for analyzing the relationship of social characteristics. Different types of interest, their cognitive capabilities. Correlation analysis. Specifics of the relationship between qualitative and quantitative variables. Ability to work with multiple comparison methods. Regression analysis. The essence and logic of regression analysis of empirical data. Types of regressions, equations and regression coefficients. Cognitive capabilities and limitations of regression analysis of the results of sociological research. Factor analysis. The PA model as a latent variable model. Sociological significance of the method of reducing the dimensionality of the feature space. Conditions for applying the rotation of the factor loading matrix. Characteristics of the methods used by the dissertation candidate for processing and analyzing the information received.

14 Literature The person taking the candidate exam must know how the provisions of the above-mentioned program and the problems of the topic he is developing are revealed in the following publications, at a minimum: 1. Batygin G. S. History of sociology: textbook / G. S. Batygin, D. G. Podvoisky . - M.: Higher Education and Science, p.. - (Sociology) 2. Volkov Yu. G. Sociology: textbook / Yu. G. Volkov; edited by V. I. Dobrenkova. - 5th ed. - M.: Dashkov and K; [Rostov n/a]: Science Spectrum, p. 3. Goncharov V.D. Methodology and ideology of innovative, technical and socio-economic development: textbook. manual / V. D. Goncharov, V. A. Dorofeev; AltSTU. - Barnaul: Publishing house. house Barnaul, village 4. Devyatko I. F. Methods of sociological research: textbook. allowance / I. F. Devyatko. - M.: KDU, p. : ill. 5. Zheltov V.V. History of Western sociology: stages, ideas, schools: textbook. manual for universities / V. V. Zheltov, M. V. Zheltov. - M.: Academic. Project; M.: Gaudeamus, p.. - (gaudeamus) 6. Kravchenko A. I. History of sociology: textbook / A. I. Kravchenko; Moscow State University named after. M. V. Lomonosova (Moscow). - M.: Prospekt, p. 7. Kravchenko A.I. Sociology: textbook. for universities / A. I. Kravchenko, V. F. Anurin. - St. Petersburg. ; M.; N. Novgorod: Peter, p. : ill.. - (Textbook for universities) 8. General sociology: textbook. allowance / under general ed. A. G. Efendieva. - M.: INFRA-M, p.. - (Higher education: mid-founded in 1996) 9. Pavlenok P. D. Sociology: textbook. allowance / P. D. Pavlenok, L. I. Savinov. - M.: Dashkov i K, p. 10. Smekhnova G.P. Fundamentals of applied sociology: textbook. allowance / G. P. Smekhnova. - Ed. corr. and additional.. - M.: University textbook, p.. - (University textbook) 11. Sokolov S. V. Sociology: textbook. manual for universities / S. V. Sokolov. - M.: FORUM, p.. - ([Higher education]) 12. Sociology: textbook. for universities / ed. V. N. Lavrinenko. - 3rd ed., revised. and additional.. - M.: UNITY-[DANA], p.. - (Golden Fund of Russian Textbooks) 13. Sociology: textbook. for universities / Yu. G. Volkov, V. I. Dobrenkov, V. N. Nechipurenko [and others]. - Ed. 3rd. - M.: Gardariki, p.. - (disciplinae) 14. Sociology: textbook / St. Petersburg State University, Faculty. sociology; edited by N. G. Skvortsova. - Ed. 2nd, revised and additional.. - M.: Prospekt, p. 15. Sociology. General course: textbook / [V. I. Kondaurov and others]. - M.: INFRA-M, p. - (Higher education: mid-founded in 1996)

15 16. Sociology. Fundamentals of general theory: textbook / Academician. educational-scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow State University; resp. ed. G. V. Osipov, L. N. Moskvichev. - 2nd ed., rev. and additional.. - M.: NORM, p. 17. Tatarova G. Fundamentals of typological analysis in sociological research: textbook. allowance / Galina Tatarova. - M.: Higher Education and Science, p.. - (Sociology) 18. Theoretical sociology: Anthology: [Translated from English, French, German, Italian] / MHSSEN; RAS. Institute of Sociology. Foundation Center sociology; Edited by S.P. Bankovskaya. -M.: Book House University. Ch s. 19. Theoretical sociology: Anthology: [Translated from English, French, German, Italian] / MHSSEN; RAS. Institute of Sociology. Foundation Center sociology; Ed. S.P.Bankovskoy.-M.: University Book House. Ch s. 20. Toshchenko Zh. T. Sociology: textbook. for universities / Zh. T. Toshchenko. - 3rd ed., revised. and additional.. - M.: UNITY-[DANA], p.. - () 21. Shimko E. A. Fundamentals of scientific research activities: textbook. allowance / E. A. Shimko; Altai State University. - Barnaul: Altai State University Publishing House, p. 22. Shpak L. L. History of domestic sociology: textbook. allowance / L. L. Shpak; KemSU. - Kemerovo: [Kuzbassvuzizdat], p.. - (Educational literature of KemSU)

2 GENERAL PROVISIONS The main educational program of postgraduate professional education in specialty 22.00.04 “Social structure, social institutions and processes” was developed on the basis

MINIMUM PROGRAM for the candidate exam in the specialty 22.00.04. “Social structure, social institutions and processes” in sociological sciences Introduction The content of the specialty “22.00.04 - Social

1. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF POST-GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION BY INDUSTRY 1.1. An academic degree awarded subject to completion of the main educational program for postgraduate training and successful

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "Baikal State University" 1 PROGRAM FOR PREPARATION FOR THE ENTRANCE EXAM in the direction of training scientific and pedagogical personnel in graduate school

SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND PROCESSES Developer: Kozlov V.B., Doctor of Sociology. sciences, prof. Reviewer: Korobov V.B., Doctor of Sociology. sciences, prof. I. Organizational and methodological section 1. Purpose of the discipline Providing in-depth

2 1. Goals and objectives of the module The purpose of studying the module “Social structure, social institutions and processes” is to develop graduate students’ in-depth professional knowledge and skills in the field of sociology and analysis

FEDERAL STATE BUDGET EDUCATIONAL TOURISM AND SERVICE" Sheet 1 of 8 ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DISCIPLINE B1.B.16 METHODOLOGY AND METHODS OF SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH of basic educational

1. Social structure and social stratification. The concept of “social stratification structure of society.” Various criteria of social stratification. Social structure is the most important problem of sociological

P. 2 of 8 These questions of the candidate exam in the specialty are compiled in accordance with the program of the candidate exam in the specialty 22.00.04 “Social structure, social institutions,

SECTION 1. SOCIOLOGY AS A SCIENCE SUBJECT AND METHOD OF SOCIOLOGY Society as an object of sociology. Sociologists as an independent science. Subject area and method of sociology. The place of sociology in the system of social

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PUBLIC SERVICE UNDER THE PRESIDENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION" NIZHNY NOVGOROD

“APPROVED” First Vice-Rector for Academic Affairs of the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education “Altai State University” E.S. Anichkin March 2014 Entrance test program for applicants to study in the field of study

1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE DISCIPLINE, ITS PLACE IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS 1.1 The purpose of studying the discipline: sociology is to familiarize students with the diverse problems of social development. Sociology is one of the social sciences

3 1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE DISCIPLINE, ITS PLACE IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS 1.1 The purpose of studying the discipline: sociology is to familiarize students with the diverse problems of social development. Sociology is one of

State educational institution of higher professional education of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug of Ugra "SURGUT STATE PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY" FACULTY OF SOCIAL AND CULTURAL

P. 2 of 7 1 INTRODUCTION In accordance with clause 40 of the “Regulations on the training of scientific, pedagogical and scientific personnel in the system of postgraduate professional education in the Russian Federation”, approved

Contents PART I. PROGRAM OF CANDIDATE EXAMINATION IN SPECIALTY 22.00.04 SOCIAL STRUCTURE, SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND PROCESSES (Part I main)... 3 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS... 3 2. CONTENT OF THE PROGRAM...

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation" SOUTH-RUSSIAN

Federal Agency of Scientific Organizations Federal State Budgetary Institution of Science INSTITUTE FOR COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF REGIONAL PROBLEMS Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences PROGRAM

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "Altai State University" APPROVED by Dean (Director) Methodology and methods of sociological

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PUBLIC SERVICE under the PRESIDENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION "APPROVED" RANEPA

Sociology: abstract of the course program The discipline “Sociology” is part of Block 1. The basic part of the curriculum for preparing students in the direction 081100 State and municipal management"

1. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE DISCIPLINE, ITS PLACE IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS 1.1. The purpose of studying the discipline The purpose of studying sociology is to form in students a holistic understanding of society as a complex social system,

1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE DISCIPLINE, ITS PLACE IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS 1.1 The purpose of studying the discipline The purpose of teaching sociology is to familiarize students with the diverse problems of social development. Sociology

Budgetary institution of higher education of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug of Ugra "SURGUT STATE PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY" FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC EDUCATION

QUESTIONS for entrance exams in the field of study 04/39/01 Sociology (for graduates of third-party universities) Discipline “Sociology” 1. Sociology as a science about society: object, subject and tasks.

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OF TRADE UNIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION “ACADEMY OF LABOR AND SOCIAL RELATIONS” Department of Philosophy and Sociology Entrance test program for postgraduate study direction of training

1 1. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE DISCIPLINE, ITS PLACE IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS 1.1. The purpose of studying the discipline “Research of socio-economic and political processes” is to develop systematic knowledge about methods

The purpose of the entrance examinations in sociology is to determine the theoretical and practical preparedness of the applicant to perform professional tasks established by the Federal State

DIRECTION OF PREPARATION “SOCIOLOGY” MASTER PROGRAM “SOCIAL MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES” “PHILOSOPHY AND METHODOLOGY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES” Object of the discipline - problem field of philosophy and methodology

Doctoral studies Examination questions in the specialty Social structure, social institutions and processes 1. Subject of sociology of social structures 2. The concept of social structure 3. The essence of the concept

Information on the discipline Applied sociology 1. Contents of the discipline Topic 1. Applied sociology as a scientific discipline The origin of applied sociology. Its place in the system of social sciences. Relationship

7. Materials on the system of intermediate and final testing On the topic 1. Paradigms, theories and conceptual apparatus in sociological research 1. Understanding the research paradigm. 2. Theoretical and

EMERCOM OF RUSSIA FEDERAL STATE BUDGETARY MILITARY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION "ACADEMY OF CIVIL DEFENSE OF THE MINISTRY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION FOR CIVIL DEFENSE, EMERGENCY

2 3 1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE DISCIPLINE, ITS PLACE IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS 1.1 The purpose of studying the discipline The purpose of studying sociology is to form in students a holistic understanding of society as a complex social system,

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION State educational institution of higher professional education of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug of Ugra "Surgut State

1. Goals and objectives of the candidate exam _ Purpose:_ To determine the level of understanding by graduate students of the theoretical and methodological foundations of sociological science, scientific concepts regarding fundamental laws

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Kemerovo State University" Legal

MINISTRY OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION KRASNODAR UNIVERSITY STAVROPOL BRANCH FACULTY OF CORRESPONDENCE STUDIES AND ADDITIONAL PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION Department of Socio-Economic

ST. PETERSBURG STATE ECONOMIC UNIVERSITY Ê. M. ONLY MASTER AND MASTER OF THE SOCIAL BANK UNDER THE ACADEMIC BANK LAURIATA 3rd edition, corrected and expanded

O. Sorochan, N. Kosheleva, Y. Rosetskaya, N. Philip, O. Livitski Vilnius 2015 UDC 316.343(4-015) BBK 60.54(45) C69 Recommended by: EHU Scientific Council (protocol 53-35 of March 4, 2014 ) Team of authors:

BASIC LEVEL WILL LEARN Module 1. Man. Man in the system of social relations give examples of the manifestation of the social essence of man; distinguish between the concepts of “material culture” and “spiritual culture”,

Private Educational Institution of Higher Education "Vladikavkaz Institute of Management" Admissions Committee Approved by Rector I.D. Tsopanov September 28, 2017 Social Science Program Contents of the program Society Society as a complex dynamic

Federal Agency for Education State educational institution of higher professional education "Izhevsk State Technical University" GLAZOV ENGINEERING AND ECONOMIC

THE PROBLEM OF RESEARCHING SOCIAL INEQUALITY IN THE CONTEXT OF SOCIOLOGY Lykov A.V. Orenburg State University, Orenburg Social inequality and its research is a core topic of sociology.

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Tolyatti State University"

1. GOALS OF MASTERING THE DISCIPLINE The goal of the discipline “Sociology of Physical Culture and Sports” is to form in students a deep and complete understanding of the social essence of physical culture and sports, their origin

ENTRANCE EXAM PROGRAM SPECIAL DISCIPLINE IN DIRECTION 40.06.01 “JURIPRUDENCE” Directions (profiles): 1. Theory and history of law and state; history of doctrines about law and state

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION BELARUSIAN STATE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY AND POLITICAL SCIENCE Course program SOCIOLOGY for students of the Faculty of Pharmacy correspondence course Approved

ENTRANCE EXAM PROGRAM IN SOCIAL STUDIES Human. Man as a result of biological, social and cultural evolution. The relationship between the spiritual and physical, biological and social principles

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Pacific State University"

Feedback from the official opponent of Andrey Pavlovich Mikhailov, Doctor of Sociological Sciences, Professor on the dissertation of Andrey Anatolyevich Kurnosenko “The Internet in the process of forming the legal culture of youth

PROGRAM of the entrance test for applicants to the master's program of the Faculty of Sociology, direction 39.04.01 Sociology (master's programs "Sociology of Law", "Sociology of Management", "Sociology

Contents 2 Page 1. Name and scope of use. 3 2. Foundation. 3 3. Purpose and purpose. 3 4. Sources. 3 5. Requirements. 4 6. Contents 5 7. Control form 8 8. List of recommended documents.

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Adyghe State University" Department

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "NATIONAL RESEARCH MOSCOW STATE CONSTRUCTION

1. Goals of mastering the discipline The goal of teaching the discipline “Methodological foundations of scientific research, sociological and applied research in the field of theory and history of architecture, restoration

SOCIOLOGY OF MANAGEMENT 1. The purpose and objectives of the discipline The purpose of studying the discipline “Sociology of Management” is, by revealing the problems of the sociology of management as a branch of scientific knowledge, to present

FEDERAL STATE BUDGETARY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION "ALTAI STATE UNIVERSITY" PROGRAM of the entrance test in social studies for admission to study

Social differentiation is an intragroup process that determines the position and status of members of a given community. Social differentiation of society is an attribute inherent in all types of societies. Already in primitive cultures, where there were no differences between people in terms of level 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 collection. Individual differences continue to play an important role in modern societies.

According to functionalism theory, in any society some activities are considered more important than others. This leads to differentiation of both individuals and professional groups. Engagement in activities of different importance for society underlies existing inequalities and, therefore, determines unequal access to such social benefits as money, power, and 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 a known algorithm of its functioning. In a changing society, social differentiation is diffuse, difficult to predict, and the algorithms for its functioning are hidden or not defined.

Personal behavior is largely determined by the factor of social inequality, which in society is ranked and stratified according to different systems, bases or indicators:

Social origin;

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 social benefits such as money, power, prestige, education, etc. Social inequality finds its expression in inequality of living conditions, inequality of opportunities to achieve desired goals and inequality of results. In various societies, certain aspects of inequality were regarded as unfair, and therefore requiring elimination or mitigation.

The idea of ​​justice arises in the process of social interaction, mutual exchange of activities and their results. In its most general form, the concept of justice is associated with an understanding of the measure, scale, and 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 deserved, rights must correspond to duties.

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

In closed societies, where social control is aimed at preserving the existing social order, where a person is attached to his social stratum and does not have the opportunity to advance to other strata, social inequality is preserved and constantly reproduced. The ruling social groups of such societies regarded social inequality as the embodiment of a fair social order, and therefore any deviation from the established social order must be resolutely suppressed.

However, those who did not agree with this principle of 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 egalitarian equality, embodied in the principle “everyone is the same.” The stronger the social inequality, the more egalitarian sentiments appear among its opponents, especially in the sphere of distribution of goods. Attempts to realize full equality in practice have always led to the emergence of a new system of social inequality.

In open societies, social inequality persists, especially at the income level. 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. Nevertheless, the mechanism of social mobility existing in an open society helps to mitigate social inequality, although it does not eliminate it. Social justice is understood as the opportunity to take a prestigious place in the social hierarchy in accordance with personal merits, abilities, hard work, talents, knowledge, and education.

The principle of social justice is interpreted as the principle of “fair inequality”, which is expressed in the demands of “equal pay for equal work” or “freedom for the strong – protection for the weak.” It is from the point of view of social justice that the question is decided in what ways people are equal and in what ways they are not. Acting as a measure of the distribution of social benefits, justice serves as the basis for social protection of the interests of children, the elderly, the disabled and other social groups that experience difficulties in improving 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 life parameters, threatens the very existence of the individual, who can never be identical to all others. The motto of an open society is not “equal for everyone!”, but “everyone has the right to achieve a higher status, to have their merits and merits recognized by others!” In an open society, social equality means creating conditions in society that would facilitate the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities for every person and 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 understanding the reasons for the stratification of society. K. Marx believed that the reason for the division of society into classes is private property, which serves as a source of exploitation of the have-nots by the propertied classes. Therefore, it is fair that the destruction of private property will lead to the elimination of social inequality. If the Marxist program for the abolition of private property is implemented, along with social inequality, social stratification itself must disappear into oblivion. All people will occupy exactly the same position, and society itself will become one-dimensional, “flat”. Relations between social groups in such a society will have to be built on the principle not of subordination, but of coordination.

Proponents of the universality of stratification are convinced that the existing system of inequality stimulates people's efforts to achieve a higher status. In addition, by giving preference to certain groups, society gains confidence that the necessary work will be done well. At the same time, it is important to create mechanisms of social control (norms, laws, rules) that regulate social inequality and prevent the emergence of such social tension that will have destructive consequences for society. In this case, justice acts as a means of mitigating social inequality, harmonizing the interests of social groups, and regulating relations between groups and members within them. Thus, social justice, on the one hand, is a factor in stabilizing the social system, and on the other, a force that unites people in the fight against inequality.

Question 16. General characteristics of 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.

A social institution is an organized system of connections and social norms that brings together significant social values ​​and procedures that satisfy 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. kinship institutions related to family, marriage and raising children; 4. cultural institutions related to religion, education, science, etc.

Institutionalization is the process during which social practices become fairly regular and long-term.

The activities of the institute are determined by:

· a set of specific social norms and regulations governing 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 a social institution;

· availability of material resources and conditions to ensure the performance of functions.

Explicit functions of social institutions

The function of consolidating and reproducing social relations. Each institution has a system of rules and norms of behavior that reinforce and standardize the behavior of its members and make 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 role systems.

Translating function. Society could not develop if it were not for the possibility of transmitting social experience.

Communication function. Information produced within an institution must 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 and are not planned in advance. These results could have significant implications for society. Thus, the church strives 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, people appear who leave production activities for the sake of religion. Fanatics begin persecuting people of other faiths, and the possibility of major social conflicts on religious grounds may arise. The family strives to socialize the child to the accepted norms of family life, but it happens that family upbringing leads to conflict between the individual and the cultural group and serves to protect the interests of certain social strata.

You don’t have to read (The existence of latent functions at the Institute was most clearly 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 buy a luxurious Cadillac because they want to buy a 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. This understanding of the actions of an institution as the production of consumer goods in radically changes the opinion about its activities, tasks and operating conditions.

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 exist successfully, even if it not only does not fulfill its functions, but also interferes with their fulfillment. Such an institution obviously has hidden functions with 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 most developed.

Latent functions are, therefore, the subject which 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 characteristics of social objects, as well as the opportunity to control their development and to manage the social processes occurring in them.)

Economic institutions. The economy as a subsystem of society is itself a social institution, but in this important sphere of social life one can also name a whole series of social institutions through which the economic life of society is organized: market, property, money, entrepreneurship, labor, stock exchange, etc. A feature of society’s economic institutions is their enormous influence on all spheres of people’s lives. 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 the social stratification of society. In essence, the position of various social groups in society is determined by the system of 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 characterized by certain intra-group processes and phenomena.

Main functions of the family:

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

(Even E. Durkheim statistically showed that single, widowed or divorced people are more likely to commit suicide than married people, and married people who do not have children are more likely to commit suicide than those who have children. The more united the family, the lower the percentage of suicides. About 30% of intentional murders are the killings of other family members by one family member.)

SOCIAL SPHERE 10th GRADE

1 option

A1.The criteria for economic differentiation of modern society include

1) political beliefs 2) amount of income received

A2.By which of the indicated characteristics is the social community “doctors” formed?

1) territorial 2) ethnosocial 3) stratification 4) professional

A3.The director of the enterprise makes decisions on hiring and dismissing employees. This example illustrates the manifestation

1) social role 2) social stratification 3) social elevator 4) social control

A4. The concept "social role" is used to refer to

1) the position of the individual in society 2) changes in social status

3) social differences 4) individual behavior expected by society

A5.A low-income person cannot get advice from a specialist doctor. This example is an illustration

1) social norm 2) social stratification

3) social inequality 4) social mobility

A6.

A. Social roles are determined by social expectations.

B. Acceptance of a social role and its fulfillment always has a personal touch.

A7. In country Z, the richest 20% of families own 75% of the total shares of industrial enterprises. At the same time, more than 30% of families are below the poverty line. This example illustrates

1) social mobility 2) social stability

3) social control 4) social inequality

A8.

A. In modern society, social mobility is determined by changes in the structure of the economy.

B. In modern society, one of the determining factors of social mobility is the availability of education.

1) A is true 2) B is true 3) both judgments are correct 4) both judgments are incorrect

A9.

A. In the process of socialization, a person learns the ways and norms of life in society.

B. The result of socialization is the assimilation of behavioral patterns and methods of successfully fulfilling social roles.

1) A is true 2) B is true 3) both judgments are correct 4) both judgments are incorrect

IN 1.

A) Muscovites 1) territorial

B) Russians 2) ethnosocial

B) provincials

D) Belarusians

D) Voronezh residents

AT 2.Read the text below, each position indicated by a specific letter.

(A) Data from the 2010 All-Russian Population Census indicate that the number of women is 10 million higher than the number of men. (B) There are 1,147 women per 1,000 men. (B) The predominance of the number of women over the number of men is observed from the age of 33. (D) It is not difficult to assume that such a ratio has an adverse effect on the institution of marriage and family.

Determine which provisions of the text are

C1. Name and illustrate with examples three possible ways of moving people from one social group to another.

SOCIAL SPHERE 10th GRADE

Option 2

A1. The criteria for political differentiation of modern society include

1) access to power 2) the amount of income received 3) the prestige of the profession 4) personal authority

A2. What feature underlies the unification of people into such a social community as the Parisians?

Social class 2) ethnosocial 3) demographic 4) territorial

A3. The social role that a teenager is capable of playing along with an adult is

Bank borrower 2) buyer in a store 3) shareholder of a cooperative 4) taxi driver

A4. The expected behavior of an individual, related to his position in society and typical for a given social group, is

social prestige 2) social role 3) social adaptation 4) social status

A5. In country Z, the highest quality education is paid. It is not available to many citizens. This example is an illustration

1) Social norm 2) social stratification

3) social inequality 4) social mobility

A6. Are the following judgments about human social roles true?

A. At the same time, a person can perform several social roles.

B. Being in a family, a person has a whole set of social roles.

1) A is true 2) B is true 3) both judgments are correct 4) both judgments are incorrect

A7. What concept is used to characterize any changes in the social status of an individual or social group?

1) social stratification 2) social mobility 3) social elevator 4) social inequality

A8. Are the following judgments about the features of social mobility correct?

A. In modern society, the level of social mobility is high, status social groups are open to new members.

B. Today, education and professional activity act as social elevators providing vertical mobility.

A9. Are the following statements about human socialization correct?

A. Socialization is the process of an individual’s assimilation of the culture of society.

B. In the process of socialization, a person develops the qualities necessary for a successful life in society.

1) A is true 2) B is true 3) both judgments are correct 4) both judgments are incorrect

IN 1. Match the examples with the types of social groups.

EXAMPLES OF TYPES OF SOCIAL GROUPS

A) teenagers 1) demographic

B) agronomists 2) professional

B) teachers

D) women

D) pensioners

AT 2. Read the text below, each position indicated by a specific letter.

(A) Each person plays many social roles in his life. (B) The essence of a social role is the behavior expected by others under certain conditions.

(B) So, in a family, a man can simultaneously act as a husband, father, and son. (D) It can be assumed that often the social role displaces or at least obscures the own “I” for many people.

Determine which provisions of the text are

Actual nature 2) nature of value judgments

C1. Name three institutions that act as social elevators in modern society, and illustrate each of them with an example.

Write your answer on a separate sheet of paper.

SOCIAL SPHERE 10th GRADE

Option 3

A1. A person must be polite and respectful in dealing with other people. This is a requirement

ethical standards 2) aesthetic standards 3) legal standards 4) rituals

A2. Aesthetic norms, unlike other social norms,

are fixed by regulations

provided by the power of state coercion

involve belief in supernatural forces

reinforce ideas about beauty and ugliness

A3. Are the following statements about social norms correct?

A. Compliance with social norms is ensured by a person’s inner conviction and moral principles.

B. Compliance with social norms is ensured by the power of public opinion.

1) A is true 2) B is true 3) both judgments are correct 4) both judgments are incorrect

A4. The famous singer's appearance on stage was accompanied by thunderous applause. This is an example of sanctions

formal negative 2) informal negative

3) formal positive 4) informal positive

A5. Are the following statements about social control correct?

A. One of the ways to organize social control is suggestion.

B. Social control involves the mandatory use of coercion.

1) A is true 2) B is true 3) both judgments are correct 4) both judgments are incorrect

A6. A manifestation of deviant behavior is

participation in elections 2) playing sports 3) using drugs 4) studying at a university

A7. In every family there is a moral regulation of relations between spouses, parents and children, representatives of different generations. What function are we talking about?

emotional support 2) spiritual communication

3) socialization of the younger generation 4) primary social control

A8. The economic function of the family is manifested in

organizing recreation and leisure 2) establishing hostel rules

3) providing material needs 40 creating a comfortable psychological environment

A9. Are the following statements about social conflict true?

A. Conflict is a natural, logical phenomenon of social life.

B. One of the reasons for conflicts is the lack of agreement between people.

1) A is true 2) B is true 3) both judgments are correct 4) both judgments are incorrect

IN 1. What word is missing in the table?

AT 2. Establish a correspondence between the characteristics and types of social norms.

SIGNS OF TYPES OF SOCIAL NORMS

A) formal certainty 1) moral

B) provision with the power of state coercion 2) legal

Option #1

A2
By which of the indicated characteristics is the social community “workers” formed?

A3
The director of an enterprise makes decisions about hiring and firing employees - this is an example of how he

A4
Are the following judgments about a person's social status correct?
A. All social statuses are formally defined, enshrined and protected by law.

B. All social statuses are acquired from birth.

A5
A less wealthy person cannot get advice from a specialist doctor. This example is an illustration

Are the following judgments about human social roles true?

A. Society imposes certain social roles on people.

B. Acceptance of a social role and its fulfillment always has a personal touch.

A7
In the country of Latvia, the richest 20% of families own 75% of the total shares of industrial enterprises. At the same time, more than 30% of families are below the poverty line. This example is an illustration

A8
Citizen K.’s grandfather was a peasant, her mother was a veterinarian, K., having received secondary education, moved to the city and after graduating from college she works as a teacher in the city lyceum. This example is an illustration

A9
What social phenomenon is illustrated by the following historical fact: in the Middle Ages, the former slave Gebbon became the Archbishop of Reims?

A10

The common social role of a child and an adult is the role

PART B

IN 1
Below is a list of social groups. All of them, with the exception of one, are formed along religious lines. Find and indicate a social group that “falls out” from their series, formed on a different basis.

Orthodox, Muslims, Buddhists, Protestants, liberals, Catholics.
Answer: ______________________________________________.

AT 2
Read the text below, each position of which is numbered. 1. Data from the 2002 All-Russian Population Census indicate that the number of women is 10 million higher than the number of men. 2. There are 1147 women per 1000 men. 3. The predominance of the number of women over the number of men is observed from the age of 33. 4. It is not difficult to assume that such a ratio has an adverse effect on the institution of marriage and family.

Determine which provisions of the text are
A) factual nature,

B) the nature of value judgments.
Under the position number, write down the letter indicating its character. Write down the resulting sequence of letters in the table and transfer it to the answer form (without spaces or other symbols).

Write your answer on the back of the form or on a separate sheet of paper.

Test No. 8. Diversity of social groups. Social roles. Inequality and social stratification. Social mobility.