“Class” in Marxist terms, is defined as portraying a person objectively, based on one's relationship to the methods of goods production. One either has ownership of the means of production, in which case they are with the bourgeoisie, or the ones who have to sell their work, in which case they are with the proletariat. This concept functions admirably on macro-societal scale, where a great many people can be characterized either as proprietors or as specialists, which was the case in early 19th century at the time of socialist revolutions. But if dwelt in deeply, there exists a reasonable subjective distinction between the two classes. The current era individuals are surely aware about their characters, they think and act more promptly in their Socio Economic Structure rather than their social class. This is based on the grounds that they have a sensible mindful feeling of where they stand, with respect to other people, in terms of financial elements and educational achievement. Thus, a great part of the social mental writing on social class has concentrated on SES, determined by salary and educational accomplishments.
Everyday life is suffused with social class. A person’s social class has a significant effect on their physical health, their ability to receive adequate medical care, their political affiliations, their religious tendencies and their status. This is what “Weber” had propagated as the “social group”, a term for an amorphous group of people held together by virtue of a lifestyle that has come to be expected of ‘all those who wish to belong to the circle”. Consider this example; a person’s likelihood of smoking increased in line with the level of deprivation in their neighborhood (Office for National Statistics 2018). Meaning the lower class smoked more than the privileged class. The objective levels of income, employment, health and education are major contributors in the prevalent trend in any class. The lower class people do not have the assets as per Webber’s classifications, to actively avoid such trends and participate in more productive activities like sports and anti smoking education. Furthermore, the power resides with the elite, who are more concerned in perpetuating their status, rather than changing the condition of the lower classes. In a subjective perspective, the sense of belonging or prestige to sub - groups and culture can contribute to this kind of behavior. Resultantly, more cases of lung cancer are reported in the lower class, as they do not have the resources to go for regular health checkups at better health centers.
Moving on to the impact of class on the social mental point of view, it is obvious that growing up and living under certain social and financial settings would most certainly affect individuals' observations, emotions and practices and thus form an identity based around SES. Together, objective assets and subjective social-class rank offer adaptation of drastically unique examples of the thought process, feeling, and activity. That is logically centered examples of perception and other-oriented feeling and conduct among lower-class people, while dispositional centered perception and self-centered feeling and conduct among higher class people. Easterbrook, Kuppens, and Manstead (2018) analyzed data from two large, representative samples of British adults and showed that respondents placed high subjective importance on their identities that are indicative of Socio Economic Structure, as much as gender or ethnicity. They also showed that objective indicators of a person's SES were robust and powerful predictors of the importance they placed on different types of identities within their self‐concepts: Those with higher SES attached more importance to identities that are indicative of their SES position, but less importance on identities that are rooted in basic demographics or related to their sociocultural orientation (and vice versa).
If the emotional aspect of class impact is observed, the social flagging procedure very effectively isolates individuals into various levels and is the reason for the person's emotional comprehension of his or her social-class rank. Subjective social-class rank exerts sufficient influences on feelings of entertainment, emotion, and behavior, separately from the reality of objective social class. Consciousness of one's own lower-class rank may divert attention to the environment and cause an other-centered social introduction and avoidance of self-centered conversation. Inversely, privileged position tastes, trigger a focus far from the setting, towards oneself focusing on personal responsibility.Accordingly, lower class people might be more pro-social than their high society partners. For example, a substantial overview found that lower class people gave a higher extent of their pay to philanthropy than did upper salary people (Independent Sector 2002).
Class status is low-key evident in nonverbal conduct that stems from the larger amount of possessions high society people have, compared to lower-class folk. As upper class people lead lives of vast assets and less dependence on others, this instills in them nonverbal withdrawal like less responsive head gestures and less eye to eye connection. On the other hand, lower class people are many times reliant on other people’s assets, and hence show nonverbal social assurance with head gestures, eye to eye connection. (Kraus & Keltner 2009) found that upper class people seemed more withdrawn nonverbally, for example checking their mobile phone or doodling on a survey, while low class people showed all the more socially drawn in eye to eye connection, head gestures, and giggles during interaction with each other.
It is an interesting fact that people belonging to one class may value other people from the same or different class based on preferences. E.g. There may be a preference in favor of individuals of an unexpected class or race in comparison to one's very own, because of preferences. Or individuals find similarities in frames of mind about other social gatherings, like a protest against low wages can be appreciated due to its shared value in their own middle class. (Clery, Lee & Kunz 2013) observed that temperaments to poverty have changed in the course of the most recent three decades, in that there is a rising pattern for individuals to trust that the individuals who live in need, do so due to an absence of self-control, or lethargy. This kind of outlook blurs class division factors based and seems to be shared in all planes of the class, but it can be a destructive one as poverty will be related to one’s own fault rather than limitations of his environment.
People strive to climb the social ladder because life is much more satiating in the privileged class. When people improve or diminish their economic status in a way that affects social class, they experience social mobility and thus their whole life actions are based on this desire to resettle themselves in the social ladder. Regarding inter- generational mobility, Blau and Duncan (1967); Featherman (1979) proclaim that half of sons pass their fathers on the social class ladder, about one-third stay at the same level, and about one-sixth fall down the ladder. But the barriers in class remain huge, even in an open society such as of the UK, and the underprivileged have to work much harder to escape their inherited class and move up the ladder.
Pierre Bourdieu added the concept of cultural capital into stratification of classes, studying the tendencies of dominant classes remaining dominant, and the lesser privileged remaining in their boundaries during the late 20th
century. Based on this concept of cultural capital, seven classes have been found depending on this additional determinant. Even after a new distinction method, the top most and the bottom most strata remain the same. At the top, are the Elite: people who have a huge amount of economic, social and cultural capital, and at the bottom rung of the ladder are the Precariat: individual who have literally no amount of all three capitals. The cultural capital tends to remain in the same class, E.g. Hidden curriculum, which refers to the type of nonacademic knowledge that students learn through informal learning and cultural transmission serves to keep the people with higher cultural capital at their positions . It is no surprise that at age three, children from professional families learn 50 % more words than children from working class families and more than twice as many compared to children from welfare families. (Heckman and Mosso 2014).
The emerging classes with distinct social cultural capital, social status imprints on the mental maps, emotions and preferences clearly reinforce the idea that class does in fact impact human behavior to a large extent, as it is an important factor in determining life changes. All the subclasses can be grouped together into two major classes: the class of people who have property in the form of social, economic and cultural capital, and the class of people who do not have huge amounts of capital in excess. These factors form a driving force which pushes of social conflict to achieve upward social mobility or accidental downward mobility at the center of modern western capitalist society, and Karl Marx’s ideas were and still resounding in the hallways of modern capitalist configuration, until and unless the class structure is abolished and the differential factor in society is only merit.
References
E. Clery, L. Lee and S. Kunz, Public Attitudes to Poverty and Welfare. Analysis using British Social Attitudes data, London, NatCen, 2013
Easterbrook, M., Kuppens, T., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2018). Socioeconomic status and the structure of the self‐concept. Unpublished manuscript, University of Sussex.
Ferrante, J. 2013. Sociology: A Global Perspective, Ninth Edition. Stamford : Cengage learning
Henslin, James M. 2017. Essentials of Sociology A Down-to-Earth Approach, Twelfth Edition. USA. Pearson
Heckman, J. and Mosso, S. 2014. The Economics of Human Development and Social Mobility. Annual Reviews. 6:689–733
Kraus, M.W., Piff, P.K. and Keltner, D., 2009. Social class, sense of control, and social
explanation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 97(6), p.992.
Office for National Statistics, Likelihood of smoking four times higher in England’s most deprived areas than least deprived, a person’s likelihood of smoking increased in line with the level of deprivation in their neighbourhood, new analysis reveals. March, 2018, viewed 11 December 2018,
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/drugusealcoholandsmoking/articles/likelihoodofsmokingfourtimeshigherinenglandsmostdeprivedareasthanleastdeprived/2018-03-14
Manstead, S.R. Antony. 2018.
The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behavior, [Online] [December 10, 2018] Available at
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bjso.12251
Sector. I. 2002. Faith and philanthropy: The connection between charitable behavior and giving to religion. New York: Independent Sector.
Savage, Mike. Devine, Fiona.
The Great British Class Survey – Results. [Online]. [ December 11, 2018]. Available from: https://library.leeds.ac.uk/referencing-examples/9/leeds-harvard/556/website-or-webpage
