Vertical social mobility is a change by the subject (individual, or group) of his social status, in which there is an increase in the level of income, education, prestige and power. We talked in more detail about social mobility in the course "Social science: USE for 100 points" .

Examples of vertical social mobility

There have always been people in society who made a career very quickly, or became multimillionaires. How did they do it? Is vertical social mobility only related to income?

Here is a kind of hit parade of such people.

Natalya Kasperskaya - born in 1966, co-founder of the Kaspersky Lab campaign.

Started my life path Natalya, like all Soviet guys: from entering the institute. She graduated from the Moscow Institute of Electronic Engineering with a degree in Applied Mathematics. Became a salesperson in 1993 software. Then - a manager in the same company. Then she put pressure on her husband - Evgeny Kaspersky - to open her own company - Kaspersky Lab.

She became a co-founder. However, its share was not specified in the company's charter documents. As a result, in 2011, she divorced her husband and resigned as chairman of the board of directors of Kaspersky Lab. Natalya devoted all her time to her company InfoWatch. The company today is a leader in corporate information security.

Well, for example, do you not like that your employees are working time use their mail, not corporate. Who knows, maybe they leak information to a competitor? This is where you need InfoWatch services to ensure information security Your company.

Thus, Natalia Kasperskayacmade dizzying vertical social mobility in all four dimensions: income (wealth $ 230 million), power (runs his company), prestige (recognized world-class expert in the field of information security), education (higher specialist in mathematics, bachelor in business ).

Pavel Durov - founder of the social network "Vkontakte"

Probably every young programmer wants to change the world beyond recognition - to hack normality. Pavel Durov did it! By the way, read on.

Pavel was born on October 10, 1984 in Leningrad in the family of Dr. philological sciences. I have been programming since the age of 11. That is, his father could afford to give his son a computer to use.

After school, Pavel began to study at the Faculty of Philology, while studying at the Military Faculty with a degree in Psychological Warfare. At the same time he studied at the military department. During his studies, Pavel several times became a scholarship holder of the Presidential and Potanin scholarships.

In the course of his studies, he created several projects to make life easier for students: a project on abstracts, etc. One day, an acquaintance of his came from an internship in the USA and told Pasha about facebook.

The idea was reworked for Russian realities, and in 2006 the Student.ru website was launched in test mode, which was then renamed Vkontakte. In 2007, 2 million people used the new social network. Offers to buy the Durov project immediately rained down. But all offers were rejected. Only in 2008 Pavel began to monetize the resource. Then there were already 20 million users.

Soon, the personal fortune of Pavel Durov was estimated by Forbes magazine at 7.9 billion rubles (approx. 263 million dollars). In 2012, pressure began from the authorities on the social network Vkontakte because of the Navalny case. As a result, his share of the shares (12%), the founder social network sold to his friend, and the multimillionaire Pavel Durov left for the USA. They say that he has now returned and lives in Russia.

Although hardly. Now Paul is developing his new project Telegram, where you can exchange messages absolutely free, and files [attention!], up to 1 gigabyte. Moreover, the messages are encrypted and, according to Durov, no one can decrypt them, even the developers themselves. By the way, in 2015 it became known that terrorists might use this service. To such attacks on his project, Pavel said that the terrorists would find where to communicate.

Thus, Pavel Durov made a stunning vertical social mobility in all parameters at once: income (increased billions of times), prestige (a cult person in Runet and not only), power (power on the accounts of 70 million users), education (St. Petersburg State University graduated with a red diploma, I still haven’t taken a diploma from the university).

Now there are a lot of opinions on the Web about whether Durov stole the idea of ​​​​Facebook or not. Personally, my position is that of course there are similar elements in the navigation. But personally, I mostly sit in VKontakte. Facebook is complicated, incomprehensible, the constant emails in my inbox are killing me (“Hi, you have a new message”, “Hi, we miss you”, “You have a new notification”). It infuriates me. And you?

Tatyana Bakalchuk is an example of vertical social mobility

Tatyana was an ordinary teacher of English language. In 2004, in connection with the birth of a child, she realized that there was simply not enough money for life. She came up with the idea of ​​reselling German clothes at a premium. At first, she and her husband simply ordered clothes from the German Otto and Quelle catalogs, and then resold them at a premium. At first they were acquaintances.

In Soviet terms, Tatyana became a speculator. But today, where not a plus - only speculators. Therefore, we will call Tatyana not a speculator, but a completely original bisneswoomen. Then, apparently, she persuaded her husband to invest in the creation of his own small online German clothing store.

Today, her Wildberries store has a revenue of 7 billion rubles. Forbes magazine estimates Tatyana's fortune at about $330 million.

Thus, Tatyana Bakalchuk, in terms of the nature and speed of social mobility, has become on a par with Pavel Durov: she has higher education(English teacher), has an extremely high capital by Russian standards, has power over his own brand and an online clothing store where millions of visitors buy things, by itself has a high prestige, as it is included in the magazine's listsForbes.

To be continued…... so as not to miss the continuation!

Horizontal mobility is the transition of an individual from one social group to another, located on the same level (example: moving from an Orthodox to a Catholic religious group, from one citizenship to another). Distinguish between individual mobility - the movement of one person independently of others, and group mobility - the movement occurs collectively. In addition, geographical mobility is distinguished - moving from one place to another while maintaining the same status (example: international and interregional tourism, moving from city to village and back). As a kind of geographical mobility, the concept is distinguished migration- moving from one place to another with a change in status (example: a person moved to the city for permanent residence and changed his profession).

1. Vertical mobility

Vertical mobility is the movement of a person up or down the career ladder.

Upward mobility - social uplift, upward movement (For example: promotion).

Downward mobility - social descent, downward movement (For example: demolition).

1. Generational mobility

Intergenerational mobility - a comparative change in social status among different generations (example: the son of a worker becomes president).

Intragenerational mobility (social career) - a change in status within one generation (example: a turner becomes an engineer, then a shop manager, then a factory director). Vertical and horizontal mobility are influenced by gender, age, birth rate, death rate, population density. In general, men and young people are more mobile than women and the elderly. Overpopulated countries are more likely to experience the consequences of emigration (relocation from one country to another for economic, political, personal reasons) than immigration (moving to a region for permanent or temporary residence of citizens from another region). Where the birth rate is high, the population is younger and therefore more mobile, and vice versa.

20. Stratification of modern Russian society

Modern studies of the factors, criteria and patterns of stratification of Russian society make it possible to single out layers and groups that differ both in social status and place in the process of reforming Russian society. According to hypothesis put forward by Academician T.I. Zaslavskaya, Russian society consists of four social strata: upper, middle, basic and lower, as well as a desocialized “social bottom”. Upper layer includes, first of all, the real ruling stratum, acting as the main subject of reforms. It includes elite and sub-elite groups that occupy the most important positions in the system of state administration, in economic and law enforcement agencies. They are united by the fact of being in power and the ability to directly influence the reform processes. The middle layer is the germ of the middle layer in the Western sense of the term. True, the majority of its representatives do not possess either the capital that ensures personal independence, or the level of professionalism that meets the requirements of a post-industrial society, or high social prestige. Moreover, this stratum is still too small and cannot serve as a guarantor of social stability. In the future, a full-fledged middle stratum in Russia will be formed on the basis of social groups that today form the corresponding proto-stratum. These are small entrepreneurs, managers of medium and small enterprises, the middle link of the bureaucracy, senior officers, the most qualified and capable specialists and workers. The basic social stratum covers more than 2/3 of Russian society. Its representatives have an average professional and qualification potential and a relatively limited labor potential. The basic stratum includes the main part of the intelligentsia (specialists), semi-intelligentsia (assistant specialists), technical personnel, workers in the mass professions of trade and service, and most of the peasantry. Although the social status, mentality, interests and behavior of these groups are different, their role in the transition process is quite similar - it is primarily an adaptation to changing conditions in order to survive and, if possible, maintain the achieved status. The bottom layer closes the main, socialized part of society, its structure and functions seem to be the least clear. Distinctive features of its representatives are low activity potential and inability to adapt to the harsh socio-economic conditions of the transition period. Basically, this layer consists of elderly, poorly educated, not too healthy and strong people, from those who do not have professions, and often a permanent occupation, place of residence, unemployed, refugees and forced migrants from areas of interethnic conflicts. Signs of representatives of this stratum are very low personal and family income, low level of education, unskilled work or lack of permanent work. The social bottom is characterized mainly by isolation from the social institutions of a large society, compensated by inclusion in specific criminal and semi-criminal institutions. This implies the isolation of social ties mainly within the stratum itself, desocialization, the loss of the skills of legitimate public life. Representatives of the social bottom are criminals and semi-criminal elements - thieves, bandits, drug dealers, owners of brothels, small and large crooks, hired killers, as well as degraded people - alcoholics, drug addicts, prostitutes, vagrants, homeless people, etc. Other researchers present a picture of social strata in modern Russia as follows: economic and political elite(no more than 0.5%); top layer (6.5%); middle layer (21%); other layers (72%). The top layer includes the top of the state bureaucracy, most of the generals, large landowners, heads of industrial corporations, financial institutions, large and successful entrepreneurs. A third of the representatives of this group are not older than 30 years old, the proportion of women is less than a quarter, the proportion of non-Russians is one and a half times higher than the national average. AT last years noticeable aging of this layer is noted, which indicates its closure within its boundaries. The level of education is very high, although not much higher than that of the middle class. Two thirds live in large cities, one third owns their own enterprises and firms, one fifth is engaged in highly paid mental work, 45% are employed, most of them in the public sector. The incomes of this stratum, in contrast to the incomes of the rest, grow faster than prices, i.e. there is further accumulation of wealth. The material position of this stratum is not only higher, it is qualitatively different from that of the others. Thus, the upper stratum has the most powerful economic and energy potential and can be regarded as the new master of Russia, on whom, it would seem, one should pin hopes. However, this stratum is highly criminalized, socially selfish and short-sighted, showing no concern for strengthening and maintaining the current situation. In addition, he is in a defiant confrontation with the rest of society, partnerships with other social groups are difficult. Using their rights and the opportunities that have opened up, the upper layer does not adequately realize the responsibilities and obligations that accompany these rights. For these reasons, there is no reason to associate hopes for Russia's development along the liberal path with this layer. The middle layer is the most promising in this sense. It is developing quite rapidly (in 1993 it was 14%, in 1996 it was already 21%). In social terms, its composition is extremely heterogeneous and includes: the lower business layer - small business(44%); qualified specialists - professionals (37%); the middle link of employees (middle bureaucracy, military, workers in the non-productive sphere (19%). The number of all these groups is growing, and the fastest of all are professionals, then businessmen, slower than others - employees. The selected groups occupy the position of higher or lower, therefore it is more correct to consider not their middle strata, but groups of one middle stratum, or, more precisely, groups of the protostratum, since many of its features are only being formed (the borders are still blurred, political integration is weak, self-identification is low). decreased from 23 to 7%.However, the social well-being of this group is subject to the most dramatic fluctuations, especially for employees.At the same time, it is this protolayer that should be considered as a potential source of the formation (probably in two or three decades) of a real middle stratum - a class that is able to gradually become a guarantor of the social stability of society, uniting that part of Russia th society, which has the greatest socially active innovation potential and is more interested in the liberalization of public relations.(Maksimov A. Middle class translated into Russian//Open policy. 1998. May. pp. 58-63.)

21. Personality- a concept developed to display the social nature of man, considering it as a subject of socio-cultural life, defining it as a carrier of an individual principle, self-revealing in the contexts of social relations, communication and objective activity . By “personality” is meant: 1) a human individual as a subject of relations and conscious activity (“person” - in broad sense words) or 2) a stable system of socially significant features that characterize an individual as a member of a particular society or community. Although these two concepts - the person as the integrity of a person (Latin persona) and the personality as his social and psychological appearance (Latin parsonalitas) - are terminologically quite distinguishable, they are sometimes used as synonyms.

22. Sociological theories of personality. Status-role concept of personality.

There are psychodynamic, analytical, humanistic, cognitive, behavioral, activity and dispositive theories of personality.

The founder of the psychodynamic theory of personality, also known as "classical psychoanalysis", is the Austrian scientist Z. Freud. Within the framework of the psychodynamic theory, personality is a system of sexual and aggressive motives, on the one hand, and defense mechanisms, on the other, and personality structure is an individually different ratio of individual properties, individual blocks (instances) and defense mechanisms.

The analytical theory of personality is close to the theory of classical psychoanalysis, as it has many common roots with it. The most prominent representative of this approach is the Swiss researcher K. Jung. According to the analytical theory, a personality is a set of innate and realized archetypes, and the personality structure is defined as an individual peculiarity of the correlation of individual properties of archetypes, individual blocks of the unconscious and conscious, as well as extraverted or introverted attitudes of the personality.

Supporters of the humanistic theory of personality in psychology (K. Rogers and A. Maslow) consider innate tendencies towards self-actualization to be the main source of personality development. In the framework of the humanistic theory, personality is the inner world of the human "I" as a result of self-actualization, and the structure of personality is the individual ratio of "real I" and "ideal I", as well as the individual level of development of needs for self-actualization.

The cognitive theory of personality is close to the humanistic one, but it has a number of significant differences. The founder of this approach is the American psychologist J. Kelly. In his opinion, the only thing a person wants to know in life is what happened to him and what will happen to him in the future. According to cognitive theory, personality is a system of organized personal constructs in which a person's personal experience is processed (perceived and interpreted). The structure of personality within the framework of this approach is considered as an individually peculiar hierarchy of constructs.

The behavioral theory of personality also has another name - “scientific”, since the main thesis of this theory is that our personality is a product of learning. In this approach, personality is a system of social skills and conditioned reflexes, on the one hand, and a system of internal factors: self-efficacy, subjective significance and accessibility, on the other. According to the behavioral theory of personality, personality structure is a complexly organized hierarchy of reflexes or social skills, in which the internal blocks of self-efficacy, subjective significance and accessibility play a leading role.

The activity theory of personality has received the greatest distribution in domestic psychology. Among the researchers who made the greatest contribution to its development, one should name, first of all, S. L. Rubinshtein, K. A. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya, A. V. Brushlinsky. In the framework of the activity theory, a person is a conscious subject occupying a certain position in society and performing a socially useful public role. The structure of a personality is a complexly organized hierarchy of individual properties, blocks (orientation, abilities, character, self-control) and systemic existential-existential properties of a personality.

Proponents of the dispositional theory of personality consider the factors of gene-environment interaction to be the main source of personality development, with some directions emphasizing mainly influences from genetics, others from the environment. In the framework of the dispositional theory, personality is a complex system of formal dynamic properties (temperament), traits and socially determined properties. The personality structure is an organized hierarchy of individual biologically determined properties that are included in certain ratios and form certain types of temperament and traits, as well as a set of meaningful properties.

Status-role concept of personality.

The role theory of personality describes its social behavior with 2 basic concepts: “social status” and “social role”.

Each person in the social system occupies several positions. Each of these positions, which implies certain rights and obligations, is called a status. A person can have multiple statuses. But more often than not, only one determines his position in society. This status is called the main or integral. It often happens that the main status is due to his position (for example, director, professor). Social status is reflected both in external behavior and appearance (clothes, jargon), and in internal position (in attitudes, values, orientations).

Distinguish between prescribed and acquired statuses. The prescribed status is determined by society, regardless of the efforts and merits of the individual. It is determined by origin, place of birth, family, etc. The acquired (achieved) status is determined by the efforts, abilities of the person himself (for example, a writer, a doctor, an expert, a management consultant, a doctor of science, etc.).

There are also natural and professional-official statuses. The natural status of a person presupposes essential and relatively stable characteristics of a person (man, woman, child, youth, old man, etc.). Professional and official status is the basic status of a person; for an adult, it is most often the basis of social status. It fixes the social, economic and organizational-production, managerial position (engineer, chief technologist, shop manager, personnel manager, etc.). Two forms of profession status are usually noted: economic and prestigious. The economic component of the social status of a profession (economic status) depends on the level of material remuneration assumed when choosing and implementing a professional path (choosing a profession, professional self-determination). The prestigious component of social status depends on the profession (prestigious status, prestige of the profession).

Social status denotes the specific place that an individual occupies in a given social system. The totality of the requirements imposed on the individual by society forms the content social role. A social role is a set of actions that a person holding a given status in the social system must perform. Each status usually includes a number of roles.

One of the first attempts to systematize roles was made by T. Parsons. He believed that each role is described by 5 main characteristics:

1. emotional - some roles require emotional restraint, others - looseness

2. method of obtaining - some are prescribed, others are won

3. scale - part of the roles is formulated and strictly limited, the other is blurred

4. normalization - action in strictly established rules, or arbitrarily

5. motivation - for personal gain, for the common good

The social role should be considered in 2 aspects:

Role expectation

Role play.

There is never a complete match between them. But each of them is of great importance in the behavior of the individual. Our roles are defined primarily by what others expect of us. These expectations are associated with the status that the person has.

In the normal structure of a social role, 4 elements are usually distinguished:

1. description of the type of behavior corresponding to this role

2. prescription (requirements) associated with this behavior

3. assessment of the performance of the prescribed role

4. Sanctions - the social consequences of a particular action within the framework of the requirements of the social system. Social sanctions by their nature can be moral, implemented directly by the social group through its behavior (contempt), or legal, political, environmental.

It should be noted that any role is not a pure model of behavior. The main link between role expectations and role behavior is the character of the individual, i.e. the behavior of a particular person does not fit into a pure scheme.

Social inequality and the resulting social stratification are not permanent. As mentioned above, they fluctuate, and the stratification profile is constantly changing. These processes are associated with the movements of individuals and groups in social space - social mobility, which is understood as the transition of individuals or groups from one social position to another.

One of the first researchers of social mobility, who introduced this term into sociology, was P. A. Sorokin. He devoted a special work to the processes of social mobility: " social stratification and mobility". He distinguishes two main types of social mobility - horizontal and vertical.

Under horizontal mobility implies the transition of an individual from one social group to another, located at the same social level (remarriage, change of job, etc.), while maintaining the same social status.

Vertical social mobility - it is the movement of an individual from one social level to another, with a change in social status. Vertical mobility can be either upward, associated with an increase in status, or downward, involving a decrease in status.

Vertical and horizontal mobility are interconnected: the more intense the movement "along the horizontal", albeit without a noticeable increase in social status, the more opportunities (connections, knowledge, experience, etc.) are accumulated for subsequent climbing the social ladder.

Mobility, both horizontal and vertical, can be individual, associated with a change in the social status and position in the social space of an individual, and group, involving the movement of entire groups. All types of mobility can occur voluntarily, when an individual or purposefully changes his position in the social space, and forcibly, when movements and status changes occur regardless of the will of people or even contrary to it. Usually, upward individual voluntary mobility is associated with strong-willed efforts and vigorous activity to improve social status. However, there is also downward voluntary mobility due to the personal decision of the individual to give up high status for the benefits that low status can provide. An example of such mobility in modern society is downshifting - a conscious and voluntary lowering of professional and economic status in order to increase the amount of free time that can be spent on hobbies, self-development, raising children, etc.

According to the degree of accessibility of social mobility and the intensity of movement of individuals, they differ open and closed society. In open societies, mobility is available to most individuals and groups. By intensity vertical mobility one can judge the democratic nature of society - the intensity of vertical mobility is less in closed, non-democratic countries and vice versa. AT real life there are neither absolutely open nor absolutely closed societies - always and everywhere there are both diverse channels and elevators mobility, and filters, restricting access to them. The channels of social mobility usually coincide with the grounds for stratification and are associated with changes in economic, political, professional status, and prestige. Social elevators make it possible to quickly change social status - its increase or decrease. The main social elevators include such activities and related social institutions as entrepreneurial and political activities, education, church, military service. On the level of social justice in modern societies judged by the availability of mobility channels and social lifts.

Social filters (P. A. Sorokin used the concept of "social sieve") are institutions that restrict access to upward vertical mobility in order to social hierarchy the most deserving members of society fell. An example of a filter is an examination system designed to select the most prepared and professionally fit individuals for training.

In addition, penetration into high-status social groups is usually limited by various filters, and the higher the status of the group, the more difficult and difficult it is to penetrate. It is not enough to correspond to the level of the upper class in terms of income and wealth, in order to be a full-fledged member, one must lead an appropriate lifestyle, have an adequate cultural level, etc.

Upward social mobility exists in any society. Even in societies dominated by prescribed social status, inherited and sanctioned by tradition, such as the Indian caste society or the European estate, there were channels of mobility, although access to them was very limited and difficult. In the Indian caste system, which is rightly considered an example of the most closed society, researchers trace the channels of individual and collective vertical mobility. Individual vertical mobility was associated with leaving the caste system in general, i.e. with the adoption of another religion, such as Sikhism or Islam. And group vertical mobility was also possible within the framework of the caste system, and is associated with a very complex process of raising the status of the entire caste through the theological justification of its higher religious charisma.

It should be remembered that in closed societies restrictions on vertical mobility are manifested not only in the difficulty of raising status, but also in the presence of institutions that reduce the risks of lowering it. These include communal and clan solidarity and mutual aid, as well as patron-client relationships that prescribe patronage to subordinates in exchange for their loyalty and support.

Social mobility tends to fluctuate. Its intensity varies from society to society, and within the same society relatively dynamic and stable periods are noted. Thus, in the history of Russia, the periods of clearly expressed movements were the periods of the reign of Ivan the Terrible, the reign of Peter I, the October Revolution. During these periods, throughout the country, the old government elite was practically destroyed, and people from the lower social strata occupied the highest managerial positions.

Significant characteristics of the closed (open) society are intragenerational mobility and intergenerational mobility. Intragenerational mobility shows the changes in social status (both rising and falling) that occur within one generation. Intergenerational mobility demonstrates changes in the status of the next generation relative to the previous one ("children" relative to "fathers"). It is widely believed that in closed societies with strong traditions and a predominance of prescribed statuses, “children” are more likely to reproduce social positions, professions, and the way of life of their “fathers”, while in open societies they choose their own life path, often associated with a change in social status. In some social systems following the path of parents, creating a professional dynasty is seen as a morally approved course of action. Thus, in Soviet society, in the presence of real opportunities social mobility, open access to such elevators as education, political (party) career for people from lower social groups, the creation of "working dynasties" was especially encouraged, reproducing from generation to generation professional affiliation and ensuring the transfer of special skills of professional excellence. However, it should be noted that in an open society, belonging to a high-status family already creates the prerequisites for the reproduction of this status in future generations, and the low status of parents imposes certain restrictions on the possibilities of vertical mobility of children.

Social mobility manifests itself in various forms and, as a rule, is associated with economic mobility, those. fluctuations in the economic position of an individual or group. Vertical socio-economic mobility is associated with an increase or decrease in well-being, and the main channel is economic and entrepreneurial, professional activity. In addition, other forms of mobility can also affect economic mobility, for example, the growth of power in the context of political mobility usually entails an improvement in the economic situation.

Historical periods, accompanied by the growth of socio-economic mobility in society, coincide with intense socio-economic changes, reforms, revolutions. Yes, in Russia early XVIII century, during the reforms of Peter I, social mobility increased in general, there was a rotation of the elites. For the Russian trade and economic class, the reforms were associated with fundamental changes in the composition and structure, which led to the loss of the economic status (downward mobility) of a significant part of the former large entrepreneurs, and the rapid enrichment (vertical mobility) of others, who often came to large business from small crafts ( for example, the Demidovs) or from other fields of activity. In the era of revolutionary changes at the beginning of the 20th century. there was a sharp downward mobility of almost the entire economic elite of Russian society, caused by the violent actions of the revolutionary authorities - expropriations, nationalization of industry and banks, mass confiscations of property, alienation of land, etc. At the same time, non-entrepreneurial, but belonging to professional elites and therefore possessing a relatively high material status, groups of the population - generals, professors, technical and creative intelligentsia, etc., also lost their economic positions.

From the above examples, it is clear that economic mobility can be carried out as follows:

• individually, when individual individuals change their economic position regardless of the position of the group or society as a whole. Here the most important social "elevators" are both the creation of economic organizations, i.e. entrepreneurial activity, promotion professional level, and social mobility associated with the transition to a group with a higher material status. For example, during the period of post-Soviet reforms in the economy in Russia in the 90s. 20th century the transition of officers or scientists into management meant an increase in well-being;
• in group form in connection with the growth of the material well-being of the group as a whole. In Russia in the 1990s many social groups Soviet period considered economically wealthy - officers, scientific and technical intelligentsia, etc. lost their former high salaries and made a sharp downward economic mobility without changes in social, professional, political status. A number of other groups, by contrast, have improved their material well-being without actually changing other aspects of their status. These are, first of all, civil servants, lawyers, some categories of creative intelligentsia, managers, accountants, etc.

Both forms of economic mobility intensify during periods of reform and transformation, but are also possible in calm periods.

As we have already noted, there are no absolutely closed societies, and there are opportunities for vertical economic mobility even in totalitarian societies, however, they may be associated with restrictions on economic stratification in general: it is possible to increase welfare in connection, for example, with obtaining a highly paid profession, but this growth will be small relative to other professional groups. The ban on entrepreneurial activity, of course, significantly limits both the absolute and relative opportunities for vertical economic mobility in Soviet-type societies. However, downward mobility in the form of loss of livelihoods, housing, etc. here is limited due to the presence of social guarantees and the general leveling policy. Democratic societies with developed economic freedoms present opportunities for enrichment through entrepreneurial activity, however, impose on the individual the burden of risk and responsibility for decisions taken. So there is a danger here. downward mobility associated with risks of economic fluctuations. It can be both individual losses and group downward mobility. For example, the 1998 default in Russia (as well as in the UK and a number of countries South-East Asia) led not only to the ruin of individual entrepreneurs, but also to a temporary decrease in the material level (downward mobility) of entire professional groups.

Social mobility can be vertical and horizontal. At With horizontal mobility, the social movement of individuals and social groups occurs to other, but equal in status, social communities. These can be considered as moving from state structures to private ones, moving from one enterprise to another, etc. Varieties of horizontal mobility are: territorial (migration, tourism, relocation from village to city), professional (change of profession), religious (change of religion) , political (transition from one political party to another).

With vertical mobility, there is an upward and downward movement of people. An example of such mobility is the demotion of workers from the "hegemon" in the USSR to the simple class in today's Russia and, conversely, the rise of speculators to the middle and upper class. Vertical social movements are associated, firstly, with profound changes in the socio-economic structure of society, the emergence of new classes, social groups striving to win a higher social status, and secondly, with a change in ideological guidelines, value systems and norms, political priorities. In this case, there is an upward movement of those political forces that were able to catch changes in the mindsets, orientations and ideals of the population.

To quantify social mobility, indicators of its speed are used. The rate of social mobility is understood as the vertical social distance and the number of strata (economic, professional, political, etc.) that individuals go through in their movement up or down in a certain period of time. For example, a young specialist after graduation can take the positions of a senior engineer or head of a department for several years, etc.

The intensity of social mobility is characterized by the number of individuals who change social positions in a vertical or horizontal position over a certain period of time. The number of such individuals gives the absolute intensity of social mobility. For example, during the years of reforms in post-Soviet Russia (1992-1998), up to one third of the "Soviet intelligentsia", who constituted the middle class Soviet Russia, became “shuttles.

The aggregate index of social mobility includes its speed and intensity. In this way one can compare one society with another in order to find out (1) in which of them or (2) in what period social mobility is higher or lower in all indicators. Such an index can be calculated separately for economic, professional, political and other social mobility. Social mobility is an important characteristic of the dynamic development of society. Those societies where the total index of social mobility is higher develop much more dynamically, especially if this index belongs to the ruling strata.

Social (group) mobility is associated with the emergence of new social groups and affects the ratio of the main social strata, whose status no longer corresponds to the existing hierarchy. By the middle of the 20th century, for example, managers (managers) became such a group. large enterprises. On the basis of this fact in Western sociology, the concept of the "revolution of managers" (J. Bernheim) has developed. According to it, the administrative stratum begins to play a decisive role not only in the economy, but also in social life, supplementing and displacing the class of owners of the means of production (capitalists).

Social movements along the vertical are intensively going on during the restructuring of the economy. The emergence of new prestigious, highly paid professional groups contributes to mass movement up the ladder of social status. The fall of the social status of the profession, the disappearance of some of them provoke not only a downward movement, but also the emergence of marginal strata, losing their usual position in society, losing the achieved level of consumption. There is an erosion of values ​​and norms that previously united them and determined their stable place in the social hierarchy.

Outcasts are social groups that have lost their former social status, are deprived of the opportunity to engage in their usual activities, and are unable to adapt to a new sociocultural (value and normative) environment. Their former values ​​and norms did not succumb to the displacement of new norms and values. The efforts of marginals to adapt to new conditions give rise to psychological stress. The behavior of such people is characterized by extremes: they are either passive or aggressive, and also easily violate moral standards, capable of unpredictable actions. A typical leader of the outcasts in post-Soviet Russia is V. Zhirinovsky.

During periods of acute social upheavals, fundamental changes social structure there may be an almost complete renewal of the upper echelons of society. Thus, the events of 1917 in our country led to the overthrow of the old ruling classes (nobility and bourgeoisie) and the rapid rise of a new ruling stratum (communist party bureaucracy) with nominally socialist values ​​and norms. Such a cardinal replacement of the upper stratum of society always takes place in an atmosphere of extreme confrontation and tough struggle.

Question number 10 “Concept social institution, its signs

A social institution in the sociological interpretation is considered as historically established, stable forms of organizing the joint activities of people; in a narrower sense, it is an organized system of social ties and norms designed to satisfy the basic needs of society, social groups and individuals.

Social institutions (insitutum - institution) - value-normative complexes (values, rules, norms, attitudes, patterns, standards of behavior in certain situations), as well as bodies and organizations that ensure their implementation and approval in society.

All elements of society are interconnected by social relations - connections that arise between social groups and within them in the process of material (economic) and spiritual (political, legal, cultural) activities.

In the process of the development of society, some connections may die out, others may appear. Relationships that have proven to be beneficial to society are streamlined, become universally valid patterns, and are then repeated from generation to generation. The more stable these ties that are useful for society, the more stable the society itself.

Social institutions (from lat. institutum - device) are called elements of society, representing stable forms of organization and regulation of social life. Such institutions of society as the state, education, family, etc., streamline social relations regulate the activities of people and their behavior in society.

The main goal of social institutions is to achieve stability in the course of the development of society. In accordance with this goal, the functions of institutions are distinguished:

meeting the needs of society;

regulation of social processes (in the course of which these needs are usually met).

The needs that are satisfied by social institutions are diverse. For example, the society's need for security can be supported by the institution of defense, spiritual needs - by the church, the need for knowledge of the surrounding world - by science. Each institution can satisfy several needs (the church is able to satisfy its own religious, moral, cultural needs), and the same need can be satisfied by different institutions (spiritual needs can be satisfied by art, science, religion, etc.).

The process of satisfaction of needs (say, the consumption of goods) can be institutionally regulated. For example, there are legal restrictions on the purchase of a number of goods (weapons, alcohol, tobacco). The process of meeting the needs of society in education is regulated by the institutions of primary, secondary, higher education.

The structure of a social institution is formed by:

social groups and social organizations designed to meet the needs of groups, individuals;

a set of norms, social values ​​and patterns of behavior that ensure the satisfaction of needs;

a system of symbols regulating relations in economic sphere activities ( trademark, flag, brand, etc.);

· ideological substantiation of the activities of the social institution;

· social resources used in the activities of the Institute.

The characteristics of a social institution include:

a set of institutions, social groups, the purpose of which is to satisfy certain needs of society;

a system of cultural patterns, norms, values, symbols;

a system of behavior in accordance with these norms and patterns;

· material and human resources necessary for solving problems;

· publicly recognized mission, goal, ideology.

Consider the characteristics of the institution on the example of secondary vocational education. It includes:

teachers, officials, administration educational institutions etc.;

· norms of student behavior, society's attitude to the system of vocational education;

the established practice of relations between teachers and students;

buildings, auditoriums, study guides;

· mission -- meeting the needs of society in good specialists with secondary vocational education.

In accordance with the spheres of public life, four main groups of institutions can be distinguished:

· economic institutions- division of labor, property, market, trade, wage, banking system, stock exchange, management, marketing, etc.;

political institutions - the state, the army, the police, the police, parliamentarism, the presidency, the monarchy, the court, parties, civil society;

• institutions of stratification and kinship - class, estate, caste, gender discrimination, racial segregation, nobility, social security, family, marriage, fatherhood, motherhood, adoption, twinning;

Institutes of culture - school, higher school, secondary professional education, theaters, museums, clubs, libraries, church, monasticism, confession.

The number of social institutions is not limited to the above list. The institutions are numerous and varied in their forms and manifestations. Large institutions may include institutions of a lower level. For example, the institution of education includes the institutions of primary, vocational and high school; court - the institutions of the bar, prosecutor's office, judging; family - institutions of motherhood, adoption, etc.

Since society is a dynamic system, some institutions may disappear (for example, the institution of slavery), while others may appear (the institution of advertising or the institution of civil society). The formation of a social institution is called the process of institutionalization.

Institutionalization is the process of streamlining social relations, the formation of stable patterns of social interaction based on clear rules, laws, patterns and rituals. For example, the process of institutionalization of science is the transformation of science from the activity of individuals into an ordered system of relations, including a system of titles, degrees, research institutes, academies, etc.

Vertical mobility

From a quantitative point of view, P. Sorokin believes, one should distinguish between the intensity and generality of vertical mobility. Under the intensity understand the vertical social distance or the number of layers - economic, professional or political, which the individual passes in his upward or downward movement for a certain period of time. Under the universality of vertical mobility, P. Sorokin means individuals who have changed their social position in the vertical direction over a certain period of time. The absolute number of such individuals gives, according to P. Sorokin, the absolute universality of vertical mobility in the structure of the population of the country, and the proportion of such individuals to the entire population - the relative universality of vertical mobility. By combining the intensity and relative universality of vertical mobility in a certain social sphere (for example, in the economy), one can obtain, according to P. Sorokin, an aggregate indicator of the vertical economic mobility of a particular society. The same can be said about the totality of indicators of political and professional vertical mobility.

General principles of vertical mobility

General principles vertical mobility P. Sorokin reduces to the following.

• 1. There has never been a society whose social strata would be absolutely closed or in which there would be no vertical mobility in its three main aspects - economic, political and professional.
• 2. There has never been a society in which vertical social mobility would be absolutely free, and the transition from one social stratum to another would be carried out without any resistance. This means that within an organized and stratified society, a kind of "sieve" functions, "sifting" individuals and allowing some to rise to the top, leaving others on the lower layers, and vice versa.
• 3. The intensity and generality of vertical social mobility change from society to society and from one period of time to another, i.e., they have an oscillatory character. In the history of social organisms, rhythms of comparatively mobile and immobile periods are seen.
• 4. The intensity and generality of vertical mobility - economic, political and professional - fluctuate within the same society in different periods his history.
• 5. In the three main forms of vertical mobility, there is no constant direction either towards strengthening or towards weakening its intensity and universality. This proposition is true for the history of any country, for the history of large social organisms and for the entire history of mankind. In this case, we can only talk about "non-directional" oscillations.
• 6. According to the degree of movement, it is fair to distinguish between mobile and immobile types of societies. While democratic societies are often more fluid than autocratic ones, there are exceptions to this rule.

Mobility mechanisms

Since vertical mobility is observed in any society, and between the layers there must be some paths along which individuals move up or down from one layer to another, it is necessary, according to P. Sorokin, to consider these existing channels of social circulation. P. Sorokin considers the following to be the most important of them: the army, the church, the school, political, economic and professional organizations.

The army as a channel of social circulation plays a particularly important role in wartime, thanks to which many individuals climbed high up the social ladder, starting service in the army from the lower social strata (Napoleon, Cromwell, Washington, etc.). In peacetime, the army continues to play the role of a channel for vertical circulation, but during these periods, P. Sorokin postulates, its role is much weaker than in wartime.

The Church, as a channel of vertical social circulation, successfully performs this function only when, according to P. Sorokin, its social significance increases. For example, the Christian church moved a large number of people from the bottom to the top of society (for example, out of 144 popes, 28 were of simple origin, 27 came from the middle classes). As a conduit for an upward movement, the church (like the army) was at the same time a vehicle for a downward movement (for example, heretics).

The institutions of education and upbringing, no matter what specific form they take, in all ages and in all societies were, according to P. Sorokin, the means of vertical social circulation. Many social spheres and a number of professions are practically closed to a person without an appropriate diploma, so the social advancement of many eminent people of our time was carried out thanks to the "school mechanism".

Political organizations from government to political parties also play the role of a social "elevator" in the vertical circulation. Historically, a large number of people born into the ranks of servants, peasantry or artisans have risen to prominent public positions through official and government service or political activity. If not for this channel, then many prominent politicians and statesmen, P. Sorokin believes, would hardly have been able to achieve a high social position.

Professional organizations (scientific, literary, etc.), according to P. Sorokin, also play a significant role in the vertical movement of individuals, since entry into these organizations is relatively free for everyone who has discovered the appropriate abilities, regardless of their social origin. Many scientists, lawyers, writers, doctors, sculptors of simple origin have risen socially thanks to this channel.

The accumulation of wealth is one of the simplest and most effective ways social promotion, says P. Sorokin. A successful entrepreneur is the largest aristocrat of a modern democratic society. If a person is rich, then he is at the top of the social pyramid, regardless of his origin, and often the source of income.

Family and marriage (especially with a representative of a different social status), according to P. Sorokin, can also lead one of the partners to either social advancement or social degradation.