Q8(a) · UPSC Civil Services Mains 2024 · Anthropology GS 1 · 20 marks · 2 min read

← Q3(b) Q7(a) →

Examine critically the concept of social stratification as a basis for sustaining social inequality.

Topic: The Nature of Society. Syllabus: 2.2 The Nature of Society: Concept of Society; Society and Culture; Social Institution; Social groups; and Social stratification. Same official PYQ from year-wise 2024 and The Nature of Society.

Revision summary

Stratification is institutional ranking that produces unequal resources, honour and power. Marx stresses property; Weber separates class, status and party. Bourdieu explains reproduction through several forms of capital and habitus. Dumont highlighted purity hierarchy; Ambedkar highlighted endogamy, graded inequality and coercion. Srinivas showed Sanskritisation and dominant caste, mobility that need not end hierarchy. Intersectionality, law and movements show both compounded inequality and resistance.

Model answer

Introduction

Social stratification is the durable, institutional ranking of categories of people into unequal life chances, honour, resources and power. Difference becomes inequality when it is inherited, justified and reproduced through institutions.

Body

How hierarchy reproduces itself

Karl Marx located class inequality in ownership of productive property: dominant classes control labour and ideology. Max Weber separated class, status and party, explaining why ritual honour or political power need not follow income exactly. Davis and Moore claimed unequal rewards motivate socially necessary roles; Melvin Tumin replied that inherited privilege restricts talent and lets elites define which work is valuable.

Pierre Bourdieu shows reproduction through economic, cultural, social and symbolic capital. Schools can convert a dominant group's language and habitus into apparently neutral merit. Louis Dumont's Homo Hierarchicus interpreted caste through purity and pollution, while B. R. Ambedkar centred graded inequality, endogamy and coercion. M. N. Srinivas's Sanskritisation demonstrates mobility, but often mobility within rather than abolition of hierarchy. Dominant caste links number, land and political office.

Endogamy transmits status and property; occupational closure restricts opportunity; ideology naturalises privilege; law and everyday discrimination enforce boundaries. Gendered unpaid care and control of marriage reproduce caste and class together. Dalit women's location shows Kimberlé Crenshaw's intersectional insight: axes of inequality combine rather than simply add.

Stratification is not perfectly closed. Reservation, urbanisation, social movements, education and democratic politics create mobility and counter-power. Yet wealth, networks, English-medium credentials, residential segregation and digital access can remake old advantage in new forms. Functional integration cannot excuse unequal dignity, and a purely ritual account misses land and violence.

Flow diagram

flowchart TD
  R[Unequal resources] --> I[Institutions]
  I --> E[Endogamy education occupation]
  E --> L[Legitimating ideology]
  L --> C[Unequal life chances]
  C --> R
  M[Movements law and mobility] -. challenge .-> I

Conclusion

Stratification sustains inequality by turning resources into inherited status and then naming the result merit, purity or tradition. Marx, Weber, Bourdieu and Ambedkar together reveal material, cultural and political reproduction; agency and constitutional justice reveal that it is never uncontested.

Quick related

Students also ask

  • Critically evaluate different types of social stratifications with suitable examples

    Next question on this syllabus topic (2021 · Q7(a)). View answer →

  • Does social differentiation always mean stratification?

    No. Differentiation becomes stratification when categories are durably ranked with unequal rewards and power.

  • Does Sanskritisation eliminate caste?

    It may alter a group's claimed rank or practices, but usually leaves the hierarchical field and endogamous boundaries intact.

PYQ trend

When UPSC asked this

Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.

  1. 2025 · Q3(b) · Anthropology GS 1 · 15 marks

    Critically examine the drawbacks in assuming culture as an 'integrated-closed system in understanding of contemporary society

    View answer →

  2. 2021 · Q7(a) · Anthropology GS 1 · 20 marks

    Critically evaluate different types of social stratifications with suitable examples

    View answer →

  3. 2016 · Q1(a) · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks

    Differences between Social Anthropology and Sociology.

    View answer →

  4. 2015 · Q1(b) · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks

    Society and Culture.

    View answer →

More from this topic

Q3(b) · UPSC Mains 2025 · Anthropology GS 1 · 15 marks

Critically examine the drawbacks in assuming culture as an 'integrated-closed system in understanding of contemporary society

The Nature of Society

Closed integrated culture is the picture in Benedict, functionalist equilibrium and the bounded field. Its virtue was holism against trait lists. Its drawbacks are conflict, history as in Wolf, power, internal plurality as in Barth, multi-sited scale and rapid change. Holism remains useful as connection-thinking without a sealed, harmonious whole. Contemporary society is an open system with unequal articulation.

Q7(a) · UPSC Mains 2021 · Anthropology GS 1 · 20 marks

Critically evaluate different types of social stratifications with suitable examples

The Nature of Society

Stratification is durable structured inequality. Egalitarian bands limit surplus; ranked chiefdoms give hereditary honour. Class is relation to production (Marx) plus status and party (Weber). Caste ranks endogamous groups by purity and occupation; estates are legal orders. Slavery, social race, and gender are further axes; types mix in living societies.

Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2016 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks

Differences between Social Anthropology and Sociology.

The Nature of Society

Social anthropology grew from intensive fieldwork in small-scale societies. Sociology grew from industrial class, state, and survey. Malinowski versus Durkheim is the textbook origin split. Srinivas and Béteille show the Indian overlap. The wall is departmental, not a law of nature.

Toppers' copies

Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.