Definition of Social Mobility

The study of social mobility has been raised, mainly, from two theoretical currents: on the one hand, the so-called functional theories of society or consensus theories and, on the other, the so-called of conflict.

Social mobility from the functionalist point of view

The functional theories of society —whose representatives include Saint Simon (1760-1825), Auguste Comte (1798-1857), Émile Durkheim (1858-1917), Talcott Parsons (1902-1979), among others—assume as a general assumption that the social order is based on tacit agreements, so that social changes occur slowly and orderly, giving rise to the possibility of social mobility of people in an ascending direction, that is, towards better material conditions of life. From this frame,

stratification social is the result of the division of labor, depending on the qualifications and skills of individuals. Upward social mobility, in this sense, is the product of a meritocratic effort, to the extent that the distribution of scarce goods depends on a reward system.

Thus, social stratification, for functionalism, does not imply conflict, but is explained by the needs of the social system, thought of as an organic whole. In turn, mobility occurs given the ability of agents to successfully perform the functions assigned to them according to their position, taking as a starting point a equality of opportunities for individuals.

The Russian sociologist Pitirim Sorokin (1889-1968), along with the Austrian-American economist Joseph Schumpeter (1883-1950), are considered the founders of the sociology of social mobility, from a pre-functionalist matrix; which will be elaborated by Talcott Parsons years later. According to Sorokin, the mobility of individuals—namely, the transition from one social position to another, in an ascending or descending vertical (hierarchical) sense—is one of the defining characteristics of contemporary Western societies. Social strata are determined by three dimensions: economic, politics and the occupational; and their interaction does not imply, unlike the point of view of conflict theories, a struggle between classes.

Social mobility from the perspective of conflict theories

The debates around the notion of mobility have historically been settled between two poles: while functionalism has followed a liberal bent, conflict theories articulated on inheritance Marxist, based on the notion of the division of society into antagonistic classes.

Conflict theories, unlike those of a functionalist bent, have not thematized the problem of social mobility as such. This is due to the fact that the former do not accept the presupposition of equal opportunities between individuals, but rather take as their starting point the inequality of material conditions resulting from the social division into oppressor and oppressed classes. While, for functionalism, individual merit is sufficient to theoretically justify social advancement; For neo-Marxist theories of conflict, the conditions of exploitation make social mobility impossible in practice.

For a real transformation of the material conditions of existence of the subjects to occur, at within a class-divided society, there must be a radical restructuring of the relations social of production —not only an increase or a decrease in the salary remuneration received—, such that it is private ownership of the means of production has been eliminated and, with it, the abolition of lessons.