社會階層化與社會流動 Social Stratification and Social Mobility 所有的社會皆有某種程度的「不平等」，即社會中的少數人擁有不成比率的財富、權力、及聲望。 All known societies have been characterized by inequalities of some kind, with the most privileged individuals or families enjoying a disproportionate share of the total wealth, power, or prestige.

社會階層化與社會流動 Social Stratification and Social Mobility 階層化研究的首要任務在於勾勒出不平等的分佈情況及發展過程，並解釋它之所以存在及維繫的理由。 The task of contemporary stratification research is to describe the contours and distribution of inequality and to explain its persistence despite modern egalitarian or anti-stratification values.

階層化系統Stratification System 「階層化系統」指的是創造「不平等」的複雜社會制度。 The term "stratification system" refers to the complex of social institutions that generate inequalities.

階層化系統的主要構成部分 Key component of Stratification Systems The key components of such systems are: (1) 界定某種事物為「有價值」及「人人都想要的」體制過程the institutional processes that define certain types of goods as valuable and desirable, (2) 將這些有價值的事物分配於分工體制中的不同職位與職業的規則the rules of allocation that distribute these goods across various positions or occupations in the division of labor (e.g., doctor, farmer, or "housewife")

階層化系統的主要構成部分 Key component of Stratification Systems (3)將所有人分派於擁有、控制不同資源職位或位置的流動機制 the mobility mechanisms that link individuals to occupations and thereby generate unequal control over valued resources.

階層化系統的主要構成部分 Key component of Stratification Systems 不平等是由兩種配對過程(matching processes)所造成的： (1) 各種社會角色被配予不同價值的「報酬」The social roles in society are first matched to “reward packages” of unequal value, and (2) 個人被分配到各種具有不同報酬的「位置」individual members of society are then allocated to the positions so defined and rewarded.

階層化的穩定性 Stability of stratification systems 在所有的社會中，人們經常不斷地在各種不同的「位置」上進進出出，但這些位置及依附在位置上的報酬並不會經常變動。In all societies, there is a constant flux of occupational incumbents as newcomers enter the labor force and replace dying, retiring, or out‑migrating workers, yet the positions themselves and the reward packages attached to them typically change only gradually.

階層化的穩定性 Stability of stratification systems 正如熊彼得指出，職位結構可以被比擬為「一家生意很好的旅館，每一間房間經常住滿了人，但總是住著不同的人」 As Schumpeter (1953) puts it, the occupational structure can be seen as "a hotel ... which is always occupied, but always by different persons" (p. 171).

階層化體系中的有價值的資財、資源及貨品Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems 一個階層化體系中的有價值的資財、資源及貨品可以分成下列幾類： Economic經濟性資源: 擁有土地、廠房、農莊、專業、公司、流動資產、人、人力Economic Ownership of land, farms, factories, professional practices, businesses, liquid assets, humans (i.e., slaves), labor power (e.g., serfs)

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems Political政治性資源: 家中的權威（戶長），工作場所的權威（經理）政黨及社會威權（立法委員），有魅力的領導人Household authority (e.g., head of household); workplace authority (e.g., manager); party and societal authority (e.g., legislator); charismatic leader

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems Cultural文化性資產: 上流社會的消費型態（Mets, Polo, wine tasting)、上流社會的禮儀(finishing school, British accent)、特殊的生活形態(soho, long island villa) high‑status consumption practices; 'Good manners', Privileged life-style

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems 社會資產Social: 特殊的社會網絡、俱樂部（Young executives club) Access to high‑status social networks, social ties, associations and clubs, union memberships

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems 榮譽性資源Honorific: 社會聲望、名譽、服從敬意、權威、宗教及種族的正統性Prestige; “good reputation; fame; deference and derogation; ethnic and religious purity

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems 公民資源Civil: 財產權、契約、特許投票權或經營權、委員會成員、集會結社自由Rights of property, contract, franchise, and membership in elective assemblies; freedom of association and speech.

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems 知識技能Human Skills: 專業、在職訓練、工作經驗、正式教育、知識Expertise; on‑the‑job training; experience; formal education; knowledge

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems 間接貨品“Second‑order goods” (i.e., 如投資investments) that are deemed valuable only insofar as they provide access to other intrinsically desirable goods. 間接貨品的價值來自於他們與有價值物品的相關性。 學歷、文化資源、社會網絡Schooling (Becker, 1975), cultural resources (Bourdieu 1977), social networks (Coleman, 1990)

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems 以上的資源很多是與生俱來的或是從小時候的社會化過程中自然取得的（上流社會的禮儀），不是經由受益人的成本效益計算考量而取得。many of these assets are secured at birth or through childhood socialization (e.g., the "good manners" of the aristocracy), and they are therefore acquired without the beneficiaries explicitly weighing the costs of acquisition against the benefits of future returns (see DiMaggio 1979).

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems 階層化學者理應考量上述所有資產，採取一個多面向的觀點，將各種資產的分配視為具有連續性，並描述及解釋這些資產（源）的多變量分配。 實際上，多數學者傾向將階層化體系視為由少數幾個階層或階級所組成（而非連續的概念），同一階級的成員擁有相同水準的資源stratification systems were usually characterized in terms of discrete classes or strata whose members are (allegedly) endowed with similar levels or types of assets.

Types of Assets, Resources, and Valued Goods Underlying Stratification Systems 這些階層經常被視為是具體的存在，以致於研究階層化的學者經常有「階級位置影響其成員能夠控制的資源」的說法，彷彿在資源尚未分配前，階級界線就已經存在。In the most extreme versions of this approach, the resulting classes are assumed to be real entities that exist prior to the distribution of assets, and many scholars therefore refer to the "effects" of class location on the assets that their incumbents control.

階層化研究的核心問題 Central questions of stratification research 階層化研究的目的因而被化約成描述社會階級，然後進一步的勾勒出產生及維繫社會階級結構的過程。The goal of stratification research has thus been reduced to describing the structure of these social classes and specifying the processes by which they are generated and maintained. 以下是這個領域的幾個核心問題： The following types of questions are central to the field:

階層化研究的核心問題 Central questions of stratification research (1) 階層化的形式及起源Forms and sources of stratifications: What are the major forms of inequality in human history? Can the ubiquity of inequality be attributed to individual differences in talent or ability? Is some form of inequality an inevitable feature of human life? 人類歷史當中的主要不平等的形式為何？無所不在的不平等可否完全歸因於個人在才能上的差異？階層化是否為歷史的必然？

階層化研究的核心問題 Central questions of stratification research (2) 當代社會階層化的結構The structure of contemporary stratification: What are the principal “fault lines” or social cleavages that define the contemporary class structure? Have these cleavages strengthened or weakened with the transition to modernity and postmodernity?社會中有哪些社會階級？階級之間的社會界線為何？這些階級界線在工業化的歷程中越來越明顯還是越來越模糊？

階層化研究的核心問題 Central questions of stratification research (3)階層化的產生Generating Stratification: 跨越「職位」或「階級」界線是否容易、是否頻繁？是否有永久的下層階級存在？智商、努力、學歷、自我期許、人際關係、與機運對於個人能夠找到什麼樣的 工作或隸屬於何種階級有沒有關連？個人取得社會地位的過程是否受到其他社會或體制力量的影響？ How frequently do individuals move into new classes, occupations, or income groups? Is there a permanent "underclass?" To what extent are occupational outcomes determined by such forces as intelligence, effort, schooling, aspirations, social contacts, and individual luck?

階層化研究的核心問題 Central questions of stratification research (4) 階層化造成的結果The consequences of stratification: 生活型態、態度、人格如何受到社會階層地位的影響？過去或現今的社會中是否有明顯的「階級文化」區隔？How are the life‑styles, attitudes, and personalities of individuals shaped by their class locations? Are there identifiable "class cultures" in past and present societies?

階層化研究的核心問題 Central questions of stratification research (5) Ascriptive processes: 哪些社會過程或政策可以改變或強化勞動市場中的種族、性別、族群歧視？這些歧視現象是否隨著著工業化的腳步逐漸消失中，還是有越演越烈的趨勢？ What types of social processes and state policies serve to maintain or alter racial, ethnic, and sex discrimination in labor markets? Have these forms of discrimination weakened or strengthened with the transition to modernity and postmodernity?

階層化研究的核心問題 Central questions of stratification research (6) The future of stratification: 社會階層化的體系在未來是否會有新的形式出現？社會階級的概念在未來還適用嗎？專業人士及知識階層是否形成了一個嶄新的階級？現代社會的各種不同階層體系是否逐漸擺脫其特殊性而越來越趨朝向某一個共同的方向發展？Will stratification systems take on completely new and distinctive forms in the future? Is the concept of social class still useful in describing postmodern forms of stratification? Is a "new class" of professionals and intellectuals emerging? Are the stratification systems of modern societies gradually shedding their distinctive features and converging toward some common (i.e., post industrial) regime?

階層研究的批判性 Critical Orientation of Stratification inquiries 在人類大部分歷史中，階層化被視為是人類社會無法避免的必然特質，且經常用宗教或類似宗教的教義來合理化、解釋階層的存在。For the greater part of human history, the existing stratification order was regarded as an immutable feature of society, and the implicit objective of commentators was to explain or justify this order in terms of religious or quasi‑religious doctrines.

階層研究的批判性 Critical Orientation of Stratification inquiries 直到啟蒙運動時，「平等」的概念才被用來反對貴族及其他既得利益階層在法律及公民權上所享有的特權。It was only with the Enlightenment that a critical "rhetoric of equality" emerged in opposition to the civil and legal advantages of the aristocracy and other privileged status groupings.

階層研究的批判性 Critical Orientation of Stratification inquiries 這種平權的觀念逐漸從要求公民權（如投票權）拓展到要求經濟資產的分配、如土地、財產、生產工具等。 The same egalitarian ideal was extended and recast to encompass not merely civil assets (e.g., voting rights) but also economic assets in the form of land, property, and the means of production.

階層研究的批判性 Critical Orientation of Stratification inquiries 因此階層化的研究與馬克思主義享有共同的前提：即相信所有的人應該「完全平等」。The field shares with Marxism a distinctively modern (i.e., Enlightenment) orientation based on the premise that individuals are “ultimately morally equal”. 這個前提隱含「不平等的問題」為評估階層化系統是否符合正義及效率原則的關鍵。This premise implies that issues of inequality are critical in evaluating the legitimacy of stratification systems.

基本觀念： 社會不平等 Basic Concepts：Social Inequality 社會不平等有三種不同的基本形式： Differentiation分化 Ordering排序 Ranking評比

Differentiations分化 沒有任何兩個人是完全相同的。可用來區分人群的屬性包羅萬象，包括：appearance, physical features, psychological make‑up, personality, age, sex, attitudes, skills, knowledge, experience, circumstances, income, property, possessions, etc. 這些屬性中，僅有少數的屬性區別會形成社會不平等的基礎。而且不同社會及時代，造成不平等的分化基準有很大的差異。

Differentiations分化 例如財富幾乎在所有的社會及世代中，皆是形成不平等的主要基礎。 但在Polynesian societies中，人們以頭髮顏色來區分社會地位。紅色頭髮被視為貴族的表徵，在社會中享有較高的地位。

Ordering排序 排序指的是我們可以將一群人置於一個具有差異的尺度上Ordering refers to the fact that individuals can be placed in relation to one another on a scale with respect to one or more differences. 例如我們可以將班上的同學按照身高來排序。 Before there can be inequality it must be possible to make judgments that individuals are greater or lesser with respect to something or have more or less of something, and so on.

Ranking or Evaluation評比 光有「分化」及「排序」不能形成社會不平等。 只有當某種差異或順序被評價為「好、壞」或「優、劣」時，才有所謂不平等可言。 所以社會不平等的概念隱含了對於某種可以用來將人排序的差異給予價值判斷The idea of inequality implies evaluation of some kind of difference by which people may be ordered.

Ranking or Evaluation評比 對於人與人之間差異的評價（價值判斷）不外乎以下兩類： First, individual differences may be evaluated in terms of how desirable they are, 有多麼被想要…（欲求程度） second in terms of how admirable they are. 有多令人景仰、稱羨…

Privilege特權 第一種Desirable欲求程度：如differences of material well‑being such as wealth or income. 我們將基於「享有高價值的物質、服務、機會及報酬」等，所形成的不平等稱之為特權。We may term this type of inequality privilege which may be defined as the enjoyment of valued goods, services, opportunities, rewards, life‑chances, etc.

Prestige聲望 第二種不平等乃奠基於對於某種令人景仰、讚佩、羨慕、或具有無形價值及榮譽的品質、特徵、或行動的評價。The second type of inequality, that based upon evaluations in terms of admirability, worthiness, honors, etc., involves qualities, characteristics, and actions, which although admired are not necessarily desired by others, although, of course, they may be. 例如某種特殊的才藝、慷慨無私的個性等。

Prestige聲望 我們將「對於某種特質或行動的內在價值做價值判斷」所形成的不平等稱之為聲望。Inequality of this second type may be termed prestige and defined as the evaluation of characteristics or actions in terms of their worth or admirability.

Privilege特權 and Prestige聲望 形成聲望的基礎為內在於人的屬性或特質，而形成特權的基礎為外在於個人的物質或條件。These characteristics are intrinsic to the individual who has them whereas the sorts of things that form the basis of privilege are extrinsic to the individual. Privilege is the enjoyment of things which are desirable享有欲求的事物 while prestige refers to characteristics intrinsic to individuals or their behavior個人或其行為的某種內在特質, whether or not others desire to have those characteristics or to emulate the behavior.

Power權力 Power: a social relationship in which one person gets others to do what they would not otherwise do.一個人可以促使另一個人去做他不會主動願意去做的事的一種社會關係。 It is essentially the determination of the behavior of others對於他人行為的一種決定力量.

Power權力 Power may itself be a form of inequality. It consists of actions and their effects which may be admired and may, therefore, be a form or basis of prestige. 權力本身可以是一種形成不平等的基礎，因為它包含令人景仰的行為或效果，是形成聲望的基礎之一。

Power權力 For the most part, however, power is not particularly admired for its own sake but for what it allows those that exercise it to do. 大多數的情況，我們並不景仰、稱羨權力本身，而是權力的運用所能令我們達成的目標。

Power權力 權力是否為特權的一種形式a form of privilege? 我們經常說某人「擁有」權力其實是一種誤導。因為權力是一種互動的形式，是某人改變另外一個人行為的一種互動，它是內在於使用權力者的行動當中，而不是外在於行動者，而可以被累積、儲存的物質。Power is a type of interaction between people such that one party produces changes in the behaviors of the other. it is clear that this is intrinsic to the actions of those who exercise power and that it is not an extrinsic aspect that can he accumulated, stored, etc., as can wealth.

Power權力 權力雖然不是特權的一種形式，但經常是特權的形成基礎Power, of course, can be and usually is an important basis or determinant of privilege. Privilege, prestige and power三者的關係密切

Inequality同時具有主觀與客觀面向 不平等的主觀面向：差異必需透過評價（evaluation)才能形成不平等，而評價必然包含主觀判斷。 所謂「主觀判斷」並不是個人的一己之見，這些評價必須具有社會基礎，為社會所共同決定的評價socially determined 。

Inequality同時具有主觀與客觀面向 社會共同發展出一套規範及標準來界定值得追求的事物（包含令人稱羨及人人想要的），每個社會的標準不一定完全相同，同一個社會中的個人彼此也有很大的差異Societies develop and promote certain norms and standards as to what is admirable, and even what is desirable, which can vary considerably from one society to another and which members of a society are socialized to accept and affirm.

Inequality的主觀面向 由於不平等具有主觀面向，各個次團體或文化有其評估的標準，因此社會分化程度越高，不平等的現象越複雜。應盡量避免假設同一社會中，只有一種聲望的標準。 The fact that evaluations are subjective suggests an important possibility; that they may vary from one sub‑group or culture to another within a society. We should not simply assume that there is just one, homogeneous, all‑pervasive pattern of prestige in a society.

Inequality的主觀面向 由於社會中各個次文化或次團體評估聲望的標準不同，因此對於報酬的分配及特殊權益的結構也會有不同的看法If there are significant discrepancies in criteria of evaluation of what is prestigious between various sub‑cultures or sub‑groups in the society, there will also, clearly, be disputes about the distribution of rewards and about the structure of privilege.

Inequality的主觀面向 討論不平等問題，要特別注意價值判斷主體的問題：究竟是對誰有價值？when dealing with evaluations we should always ask the question, whose values are we really concerned with? The dominant values are often the values of dominant groups in the society. 主流價值觀永遠都反映統治階層的價值 換言之，社會不平等有其意識型態的面向In other words there may be an ideological dimension to inequality which we should remain aware of. 例如語言表達能力（作為一種文化資產）所造成的不平等，經常僅是反映統治層級的價值）

基本觀念：不平等的程度 Basic Concepts : Degree of inequality 在某一個資產上的不平等程度決定於這個資產在人口中的分佈與集中情形。很多學者嘗試以一個簡單的指標來表達一個社會不平等的程度。但這樣的單一指標必然會過度簡化社會不平等的複雜現象。The degree of inequality in a given asset (e.g., income) depends, of course, on its dispersion or concentration across the individuals in the population. Although many scholars seek to characterize the overall level of societal inequality with a single parameter, such attempts will obviously be compromised insofar as some types of assets are distributed more equally than others.

基本觀念：不平等的程度 Basic Concepts : Degree of inequality 不平等程度之所以如此複雜，主要是因為各種不同的不平等面向之間未必有共變關係，也就是說，某一個面向的平等或不平等與其他面向不必然相關。例如公民權的普及化與經濟或政治資源的不平等程度無關。 This complexity clearly arises in the case of modern stratification systems; for instance, the recent emergence of "citizenship rights" suggests that civil goods are now widely dispersed across all citizens, whereas economic and political goods continue to be disproportionately controlled by a relatively small elite (see, e.g., Parsons 1970; Marshall 1981).

基本觀念：階層化系統的僵硬度 Basic Concepts : Rigidity of a stratification system 階層化系統的僵硬度（嚴峻度、封閉性）指的是社會成員的相對地位維持長久不變的狀態。The rigidity of a stratification system refers to the continuity (over time) in the social standing of its members.

基本觀念：階層化系統的僵硬度 Basic Concepts : Rigidity of a stratification system 假如我們可以從某人所佔居的社會地位或家世背景來正確地預測其在社會中所擁有的財富、權力、及社會聲望，我們說這個階層化體系十分僵硬或嚴峻。The stratification system is said to be highly rigid, for example, if the current wealth, power, or prestige of individuals can be accurately predicted on the basis of their prior statuses or those of their parents.

基本觀念：階層化系統的僵硬度 Basic Concepts : Rigidity of a stratification system 一個社會中的階層化僵硬度，會因不同的資源及資產而有程度上的差異。如某些社會中，文化資產的分佈與階級的相關度較高，而經濟性資產與社會地位較不相干。The amount of rigidity (or "social closure") in any given society will typically vary across the different types of resources and assets listed in Table 1.

基本概念：歸屬過程 Basic Concepts : Ascriptive process 如果與生俱來的特質（性別、種族、族群、家世、國籍）對個人往後的社會地位有重大的決定影響力，則我們稱此階層化系統奠基於「歸屬過程」The stratification system rests on ascriptive processes to the extent that traits present at birth (e.g., sex, race, ethnicity, parental wealth, nationality) influence the subsequent social standing of individuals.

基本概念：歸屬過程 Basic Concepts : Ascriptive process 如果「歸屬過程」在社會中的運作力很強，則這些與生俱來的特質會成為社會團體或集體行動的構成基礎（如女權運動、種族暴亂）If ascriptive processes of this sort are in operation, it is possible (but by no means guaranteed) that the underlying traits themselves will become bases for group formation and collective action (e.g., race riots and feminist movements).

基本概念：地位結晶化 Basic Concepts : status crystallization 地位結晶化的指標為上述提及的各種「資源」之間的相關度。相關度越高，代表同一個人在各種不同的資源面向上總是居於同等的地位。The degree of status crystallization is indexed by the correlations among the resources mentioned above. If these correlations are strong, then the same individuals (the "upper class") will consistently appear at the top of all status hierarchies, and other individuals (the "lower class") will consistently appear at the bottom of the stratification system.

基本概念：地位不協調 Basic Concepts : status inconsistency 「地位不協調」為「地位結晶」的相反概念，即各種地位的結構之間有矛盾的現象，如暴發戶（財富地位上高，但教育地位低）、窮酸教授、黑道立委。在這種系統中，我們很難用單一的階級指標來預測各種不同資源的分佈情形。By contrast, various types of status inconsistencies (e.g., a poorly educated millionaire) will emerge in stratification systems with weakly correlated hierarchies, and it is correspondingly difficult in such systems to define a unitary set of classes that have predictive power with respect to all resources

簡化策略Simplifying Strategies 很多階層化的學者認為我們應該以簡單的原則來理解階層化系統。Many scholars argue that stratification systems can in fact be adequately understood with a smaller and simpler set of principles.

化約主義Reductionism 最平常的化約論證為：「在所有重要資源的分佈當中，有一種最基本的資源分配可以讓我們理解整個社會階層化的結構、成因、及演變。」The prevailing approach is to claim that only one of the asset groups is truly fundamental in understanding the structure, sources, or evolution of societal stratification.

化約主義Reductionism 馬克思最被人詬病的就是太過於強調經濟因素在決定社會階級中所扮演的角色。Marx is most commonly criticized (with some justification) for placing "almost exclusive emphasis on economic factors as determinants of social class" .

Reductionism 德國衝突學派達倫多夫認為社會中衝突團體形成的最根本原因在於各個團體間的權威差異。Dahrendorf (1959) argues that "differential authority in associations is the ultimate 'cause' of the formation of conflict groups"

Reductionism 席爾認為如果缺乏「遵從」「順服」的主觀態度要素，則任何資源分配不均皆無法形成階層。「Shils (1968) suggests that "without the intervention of considerations of deference position the ... inequalities in the distribution of any particular facility or reward would not be grouped into a relatively small number of vaguely bounded strata" (p. 130).

「綜合指標」的研究取向 Synthesizing Approaches 除了單一指標的化約主義學者外，另外一支學派以綜合指標為基本分析單位，同時考慮各種不同的資源分佈狀況。There is an equally long tradition of research based on synthetic measures that simultaneously tap a wide range of assets and resources.

「綜合指標」的研究取向 Synthesizing Approaches 這派學者認為多數的資源皆是透過「工作」來分派給個人（即個人大多透過工作來取得社會報酬），因此我們可以透過「職位」的劃來衡量個人的社會地位。Many of the rewards are directly allocated through the jobs that individuals hold, and one can therefore measure the standing of individuals by classifying them in terms of their positions.

「綜合指標」的研究取向 Synthesizing Approaches Parkin將職業結構稱為「現代西方社會中，報酬分配系統的最重要支柱」Parkin (1971) refers to the occupational structure as the "backbone of the entire reward system of modern Western society".

「綜合指標」的研究取向 Synthesizing Approaches Hauser and Featherman 認為：「對於職業流動的研究，可以同時讓我們間接地瞭解地位權力、經濟權力、及政治權力的分佈及變化。」Hauser and Featherman (1977) argue that studies "framed in terms of occupational mobility ... yield information simultaneously (albeit, indirectly) on status power, economic power, and political power"

階級分類Classification Exercises 多數的階層化研究皆涉及「階級」的定義問題。Most scholars adopt the final simplifying step of defining a relatively small number of discrete "classes." 如Parkin認為社會中有六大職業階級，主要的區分在於「勞動」與「非勞動」之間的區別。Parkin (1971) argues for six occupational classes with the principal "cleavage falling between the manual and non‑manual categories"

階級分類Classification Exercises Dahrendorf採用二分法，認為最重要的區分在於「行使權威」階級，「接受權威」階級。Dahrendorf (1959) argues for a two‑class solution with a "clear line drawn between those who participate in the exercise [of authority] ... and those who are subject to the authoritative commands of others“.

階級分類Classification Exercises 不管如何分類，最重要的問題在於這些類別是否僅為一種「名稱、標籤」，還是對於被分類的人而言，也是一種有意義的實體存在？The question that necessarily arises is whether the categories so constructed are purely nominal entities or are truly meaningful to the individuals involved.

階級分類Classification Exercises 所謂這些類別是否有意義，指的是階級成員不但要意識到階級界線的存在及認識自己所屬的階級（階級意識），而更要進一步的認同自己的階級（階級認同），甚至偶而會採行「階級行動」。If the categories are intended to be meaningful, one would expect class members not only to be aware of their membership ("class awareness") but also to identify with their class ("class identification") and occasionally act in its behalf ("class action").