The existence of humans as social beings in social life clearly cannot be separated from the possibility of social stratification. In fact, in religion, social stratification also occurs and even influences. The existence of belief in a place, for example, is difficult to deny that it often affects the social and cultural conditions that exist in the social environment, including also influencing the existing social stratification.
Robert M.Z Lawang explained that social stratification classifies people belonging to a specific social system into hierarchical layers based on power, privilege, or prestige qualifications. (Lawang 1985) Meanwhile, according to Pitirim A Sorokin, social stratification is the difference in population or society based on hierarchical (tiered) class layers. (Sorokin 1927)
Social stratification is a form of social practice, as a social practice during society. As understood, social stratification is generally measured from: first, wealth (Capital) such as one's ownership of property, high income, and the like; second, power; for example, someone who has great power and authority often occupies better social strata than those who do not; third, honor (nobility) such as nobility, habaib, and so on; fourth, science (sciences), an example of someone who has a particular position amid society because of his advantages in terms of science or education that he takes.
As a consequence of social practice, social stratification can be divided into: first, open social stratification, namely the attitude of citizens who have the opportunity to experience social mobility, move up to a higher social layer for those who have the ability and vice versa; and second, closed social stratification, namely the existence of limits on a person on the possibility of moving positions from one social layer to another and is permanent. A concrete example of the second is birth which determines one's caste, especially in feudal society.
In constructing everyday social practice, we can analyze social stratification based on Pierre Bourdieu's theory. In this connection, social stratification is a dialectical dynamic between 'exterior internalization' and 'interior externalization' (Jenkins 1992, 67). exists outside the social actor, while the interior is everything that is attached to the social actor. Thus, how social stratification is formed can be understood from both. In social practice, everything observed and experienced outside the social actor (interior) moves dynamically dialectically with the disclosure of everything internalized to become part of the self—social actors (interior).
Of course, social stratification exists in time and space. As a product of social practice, stratification cannot be understood outside the context of space and time, which Bourdieu calls 'tempo.' (Bourdieau 1997) The formation of this social stratification, due to the existence of this 'tempo,' obviously takes time and takes place in a particular space. Not immediately, or naturally. The reason is that adaptation will require time and place for specific areas to be practiced in a social system. The practice is often regulated and driven unconsciously or not fully conscious.
According to Bourdieu, the social actions that form social stratification in this realm are more likely to result from individual improvisation and the ability to play a role in social interaction. In social life, most agents (individuals or groups, Bourdieu often also calls them actors) tend to accept the social world as it is. Likewise, with the social stratification in their midst. Agents don't rethink why they have to do this and that, why this or that. The reason is that agents deal with their social world and become an integral part of their social world. In it, agents grow, learn and acquire a series of cultural practice competencies, including social roles and identities. These roles and social identities are formed and, at the same time, develop social stratification.
Thus, social stratification is related to what Bourdieu formulated with '(habitus x capital) + field = social practice. (Bourdieau, 1984)
Social stratification as habitus
Habitus in Bourdieu's theory is a system that is durable and transposable regarding what we accept, values, and how to act in the social world. Likewise, with social stratification. Habitus is a scheme obtained by the agent through dismantling the conditions faced by the agent and conditions faced by the agent through the internalization of external constraints and various possibilities. In this case, social stratification as habitus is a shared experience owned by the agent as a subject, even though it has its uniqueness.
Social stratification as habitus includes cognitive and affective dimensions, which are manifested in the disposition system. Thus, social stratification is also a set of dispositions. 'Disposition' in this case is: first, the result of a governing action; second, the way to be; and third, intention or inclination. (Bourdieau, 1997)
Decision-making by agents can be related to: first, the reflection of what the habitus does; second, the choice of situation, or third, is an illusion, namely the unconscious doing something because he is trained and practiced continuously about his habitus. In other words, a person's attitude, tendency to perceive, feel, act, and think about the social stratification around them is nothing but the result that is internalized thanks to the person's objective conditions.
In short, habitus functions as a framework that gives birth to and shapes a person's perceptions, representations, and actions (structuring structure) of the social stratification in their midst. Habitus in this context is a patterned rule, but humans do not have to be subject to specific regulations, and at the same time, have a focus on the goals and results of particular actions. However, goal-directedness does not necessarily have a conscious intention to achieve the goal without mastery of exceptional intelligence. In the context of the formation of social stratification during society, this is the case. (Bourdieau, 1984)
Social stratification occurs in a domain.
In Bourdieu's view, habitus underlies the field. So social stratification is also related to the domain. Moreover, it is difficult to deny how social stratification is closely related to systems and relationships (relationships) in a particular space and time. By digesting this realm, we can rationalize the social stratification that forms. Bourdieu said, 'to think in terms of field is to think relationally.' (Updated 2011)
Based on Bourdieu's logic, social stratification is in a field where it is impossible to separate this field from social space. Social space in this context is an integral arena, which contains a system of domains. The social space, according to Bourdieu, is also a place of power contestation. There is an effort to struggle for resources (Capital) and fight for access to power. The struggle is to obtain a position in the realm. What about the agent position? The place of an agent in the arena is highly dependent on the amount of ownership (volume) of capital it has, its composition, and changes in its size and design from time to time. (Bourdieau, 1984) In the field, reproduction or transformation occurs. (Webb, Schirato and Danaher 2002) In the context of the formation of social stratification, this is what happens.
Social Stratification Related to Capital
Bourdieu's capital is essentially social relations. Capital is a social energy that only exists and produces results in the realm of struggle where capital produces and reproduces. One of them is the social stratification that is formed.
Bourdieu mentions several types of capital at stake in the field: economic Capital, Social Capital, Cultural Capital, and symbolic Capital. (Ritzer 1996) Financial capital includes the means of production (machinery, land, labor), materials (income and goods), and money. The latter is the most visible, can be used for any purpose, and is usually passed down from one generation to the next. Social Capital is manifested through relationships and networks, which are helpful resources in determining and reproducing social positions. Then what is included in cultural capital is the overall intellectual qualifications produced formally and family heritage. This capital has, for example, diplomas, the knowledge obtained, cultural codes, ways of speaking, writing skills, manners of character, manners or manners, methods of getting along, and so on that play a role in determining reproducing social positions. At the same time, symbolic capital is understood not to be separated from symbolic power, namely power that makes it possible to get equivalent to what is obtained through physical and economic strength, thanks to the special effects of mobilization. This model can be a house in an inclusive settlement, an office located in a strategic trade center, a car with a driver, and so on. But it can also be in the form of clues that are not conspicuous.
Another example is the title listed on the business card, how to speak in front of subordinates, and so on that show the owner's status. These capitals, all of which are at stake and contested in the realm. These three capitals are very potential in forming social stratification.
As previously explained above, there are social stratifications that are open, and some are closed. Both are easy to understand because stratification is indeed formed due to contestation in the social sphere. "The field is also a field of struggles…" (the field is also an arena of struggle), Bordieau wrote. (Bourdieau and Wacquant, 1996). The structure of the realm guides and provides strategies for positional agents, individuals, or groups to maintain or increase positions in achieving social standing. In this regard, the formation of social stratification, the strategy of these agents depends on the position occupied and the capital they have in that realm. "The strength and form of the procedure depend on the place the agent occupies in the power relationship (rapport de force). (Bourdieau, 1993)
According to Bourdieu, two types of strategies are relevant to social stratification in society: first, the reproductive system. Agents design this strategy to maintain or increase capital towards the future. This strategy is a set of practices; the amount and composition of production capital become the primary benchmark. Even social stratification is designed for this reason; second, the return strategy (reconversion strategies). This strategy is concerned with the movements of agents in the social space, which then constructs social stratification. The social space in which agents move is structured in two dimensions: the total amount of structured capital and the formation of dominant and dominated types of money.
Apart from these two strategies, there are also other types of systems that can construct social stratification. In this context, according to Bourdieu, are possible, such as biological investment strategies, inheritance strategies, educational strategies, and symbolic investment strategies. Natural investment strategies are seen in efforts, for example, to control the number of offspring. It is done to ensure the inheritance of capital and facilitate the increase in social position. This strategy is also related to efforts to maintain health, such as food consumption choices, exercise, rest, recreation, and entertainment. The inheritance strategy serves to guarantee wealth, especially material. It is done because of the understanding that economic capital is relatively more decisive in power relations. Educational systems are directed towards the goal that social actors have the appropriate skills and are needed in the social structure to receive group inheritance or even improve their social position. At the same time, the economic and symbolic investment strategies are directed directly to struggles in the social sphere. Economic and symbolic investment strategies are required now about works in the social sphere. The financial investment strategy is directed at maintaining and increasing various types of capital. Investment in this domain is not only financial capital but also social capital. This strategy is carried out to perpetuate and build long-term and short-term social relationships. In maintaining eternity, social relationships are transformed into long-lasting obligations, such as the exchange of money, marriage, employment, provision of time, etc. Symbolic strategies are used to maintain or increase social recognition. This strategy aims to produce perceptions and judgments that support its uniqueness, for example, name inheritance. In addition to encouraging efforts to be respected, the inheritance of family names is also a significant element of symbolic capital.
Again, the use of strategy by agents is to maintain position (in social stratification), improve function, differentiate themselves, or acquire new posts in the realm. As explained, there will always be a social "battle" in the domain, where the constant who wins will be at the top of the pyramid of social stratification.***
REFERENCES
Bourdieau, Pierre. 1984. Distinction; A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul LTd.
—. 1997. Outline of Theory of Practice. USA: Cambridge University Press.
—. 1993. The Field of Cultural Production; Essay on Art and Literature. Cambridge; UK: Polity Press.
Bourdieau, Pierre, and Loic J. Wacquant. 1996. An Innovation to Reflexive Sociology. Cambridge; UK: Polity Press.
Jenkins, Richard. 1992. Pierre Bourdieau. Newyork; USA: Routledge.
Lawang, Robert MZ. 1985. Materi Pokok Pengantar Sosiologi. Jakarta: Karunika, Universitas Terbuka.
Mutahir, Arizal. 2011. Intelektual Kolektif Pierre Bourdieau; Sebuah Gerakan Untuk Melawan Dominasi. Yogyakarta: Kreasi Wacana.
Ritzer, George. 1996. Sociological Theory. Newyork; USA: McGraw Hill Companies inc.
Sorokin, Pitirim Aleksandrovich. 1927. Social Mobility. California: Harper & Brothers.
Webb, Jenn, Tony Schirato, and Geof Danaher. 2002. Understanding Bourdieau. London; UK: Sage Publication.
