As a modern central european I have huge problems to think about or discuss classes. I´m grown up with modern ideas of human rights and equality of chances and primary value. I don´t like such classifications in castes, classes or any other scheme. Of course I see and watch the different evolution end educations and chances for the individuals. But classes or casts? No!

I believe that humans have a desire for justice and equality!  I am thankful that some countries uphold equality.  But I am aware that certain places like India has its caste system.  I am thankful that it's not every human society that does this.  Do you agree (or disagree) that all humans have value based on their education, contribution to society, their ethics and/or character, rather than by birthright?

"The caste system in India is a system of social stratification[1] which has pre-modern origins, was transformed by the British Raj,[2][3][4][5] and is today the basis of reservation in India."  In any society, there will always be division of labor, but it's far better for each of us to decide the duties we can do, than to have those thrust upon us.  I have learned, "it's better to serve than to be served."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India

http://www.forumforhinduawakening.org/understanding/class-individual-determined?gclid=CjwKEAjw3PGtBRCWgajpu_uY9hYSJAAICRalwX6JSczbcq_59tPi6NcKPYHSg3bpR9H_8aKTDYhGSxoCqyjw_wcB

Every complex society faces the difficult task of placing its members into roles that are necessary for the society to survive. These roles must be filled with as little conflict and confusion as possible. There must be people willing to perform jobs (roles) with little status and those that carry a great deal of prestige.

Social stratification/division is based upon a variety of principles. The major types of stratification are:

(i) Caste

(ii) Class

(iii) Estate

(iv) Slavery

(i) Caste is a hereditary endogamous social group in which a person’s rank and its accompanying rights and obligations are ascribed on the basis of his birth into a particular group. For example-Brahmins, Kshyatryas, Vaishyas and Sudra Caste.

(ii) Class-Stratification on the basis of class is dominant in modern society. In this, a person’s position depends to a very great extent upon achievement and his ability to use to advantage the inborn characteristics and wealth that he may possess.

(iii) Estate system of medieval Europe provides another system of stratification which gave much emphasis to birth as well as to wealth and possessions. Each estate had a state.

(iv) Slavery had economic basis. In slavery, every slave had his master to whom he was subjected. The master’s power over the slave was unlimited.

http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/social-stratification-meaning-types-and-characteristics-sociology-2446-words/6199/

http://asiasociety.org/social-stratification-india

Interesting question with two beautiful answers.

As a modern central european I have huge problems to think about or discuss classes. I´m grown up with modern ideas of human rights and equality of chances and primary value. I don´t like such classifications in castes, classes or any other scheme. Of course I see and watch the different evolution end educations and chances for the individuals. But classes or casts? No!

We can not all be priests or traders or laborers or soldiers. Only the genius of the man who by his vision helped to properly gauge the transmission of this civilizational wheel

In which class  we the people who are in RG belong in this classification dear Abhijit?

I do not believe that there is a birth right recognized by society that is specific to a particular group and should not exist in our time. That was only true in the primitive times of social formations and in medieval times of kings and queens.

It is true that the human society is partitioned in wealth, fortunes and positions individuals occupy in society but that will not make them people of distinctive privileges and rights. Any right which is approved by society has to be admissible by any member of society. Any social post has to be attainable by any person from any group who works hard to reach and meet the requirements of the post. The classes mentioned are not closed with natural boundaries but open with porous social boundaries in which a member of one class can transform self and become a member of another. 

As we progress towards new centuries, modern thinking should permeate our way of life in which no special more right for a group and no less rights  for another as work and character are the parameters up on which a person is measured to occupy a place in society. 

It is true that societies who suffered colonialism live with the side effects of the means used but should come out of that and liberate themselves. 

There must be people to do every kind of jobs. But dividing people and reserving specific labours for them is not an acceptable idea. Such a system is not a good system. Every individual must be able to find a suitable job for him according to the qualification, interests and intellectual calibre. Only this system will be good for a progressive and balanced society.

I do not think that division of labour/class is good for human society as it "pigeon-hole's" some into a specific class for almost their entire lives. I started out waiting tables when I graduated from high school, but was able to progress thru my studies to a lecturer position at university. I think all citizens should be given the opportunity to do the same.

Best regards,

Debra

Dear madam

Ancient history is the witness  of cruel effects of  division of labor/class . It took the shape of social ,economic ,religious,political and cultural hierarchy.One who was born in a particular class had to do same job and received the social status. His/Her intelligence and hard work were given back seat. Now, we are a civilized society.We should learn from past history . Our governing principles should equality and equity.

R S SINDHU

Classification of society on work/job basis was/is injustice to humanity. Absence of discrimination, based on race, color, age, gender, national origin, religion, or mental or physical disability. should prevail in a human society.

When humans abandoned hunter gather units for sedentary/agricultural societies this was inevitable.  The world first cities are all characterised by buildings which can be clearly differentiated between the modest houses of the many labouring classes and the houses and community buildings controlled by the 'managerial' classes.

As the ancient civilisation got larger and more complex the society sub-divided again into labourers, clerks and managers.  It is a product of 'civilisation'.

No one holds the monopoly of knowledge and skills. So, division of labour provides the opportunity for people with different skills to contribute towards societal development in the different fields and at different levels.

Civilization(s) thrived because of combined human efforts . Effort is the the ability of an individual to do a task/job. Over time, it is an established norm that classification or grouping based on their ability is fair for a society to advance.

21st century pedagogy, not everyone can be Robots , being humane is the toughest challenge.  People study even to this day about empathy , compassion and kindness. 

I think the system of division of labor / classes is only good for human society when the system's selection criteria is based on competency instead of based on certain groups of people's rights carry down from generation to generation.  Reason being if a specialization / profession is carry down from generation to generation, this might stifle innovation for better competency in long run.  Moreover, this specialization also might restrict one person's from picking up other skill sets for better survivability (i.e. only have 1 primary skill & no other secondary / backup skills that s/he might be talented in).  Last but not least, this kind of division / classes will generate unwanted gaps / crashes between groups of labor (due to different social economic status after a while) which might be challenging for unification.  Hence, allocation of job function based on competency / meritocracy-based (inclusive its emphasis, stating down as laws and enforcement of it) can beneficial to a human society.

Classification upon profession or job

From earliest times to the Industrial Revolution the craft or skilled trade was the basic unit, the elementary cell of the labor process. In each craft, the worker was presumed to be the master of a body of traditional knowledge, and methods and procedures were left to his or her discretion. In each such worker reposed the accumulated knowledge of materials and processes by which production was accomplished in the craft. The potter, tanner, smith, weaver, carpenter, baker, miller, glassmaker, cobbler, etc., each representing a branch of the social division of labor, was a repository of human technique for the labor processes of that branch. The worker combined, in mind and body, the concepts and physical dexterities of the specialty: technique, understood in this way, is, as has often been observed, the predecessor and progenitor of science. The most important and widespread of all crafts was, and throughout the world remains to this day, that of farmer. The farming family combines its craft with the rude practice of a number of others, including those of the smith, mason, carpenter, butcher, miller, and baker, etc. 

http://digamo.free.fr/braverman.pdf

I see the danger here is in pre-determination of an individuals position by birth. That is harmful for development of Society. As we see social mobility happening and the functional classifications getting blurred, the treatment of people by their class or caste is reducing. 

The answer to this question would better be seen through the history of human civilization. Is there any existing civilization without division of labour? Is there any existing civilization with division of labour. I think the answer is very clear- all existing modern day civilizations have division of labour.

With the development of modern society there is a tendency of making finer distinctions of professions, jobs, expertises. The division of labor itself is neither right nor wrong, it is simply the matter, normal course of action. What is wrong is to predetermine a person's profession, division of labor soly upon his/her social upbring, caste, class, that is exactly what we try to avoid in modern societies. 

It is interesting that while societies divided by class are extremely difficult to reform that movement across class boundaries has always been possible.  

If we examine the priest and soldier class history is full of generals who rose from the lowest ranks, even in a hide bound class defined society like Britain.  Similarly many very senior members of the clergy were from 'humble birth'.

It is similarly interesting to note that with the traditional society divisions of labourer, soldier, priest and aristocracy that there are sub divisions within each.  Labourers have charge hands and foremen, soldiers have rankers, officers and generals, the priesthood in virtually all organised religions has a hierarchy and it is only the aristocracy where social movement within it is virtually impossible.

In all cases the hierarchical structures are necessary in a complex, society.   It would not have been possible for societies to have evolved without a hierarchy.  Without a hierarchy there would be no civilisation in the true sense of the word.  Without civilisation we would not have evolved our world of philosophy, law, technology and science and we would be in a far worse place than we are today.

It was never the case that we were all born equal.  It is not the case that we come into this world with nothing and may take nothing out when we leave it.  Some will achieve greatness and leave a legacy that can outlive them by millennia.  

While we should be grateful for the labour of the countless millions over the tens of centuries of civilisation our world was shaped by those who were exceptional rather than equal.  Many of those exceptional people, too many to list here were not born to rank and privilege but made their own destiny.  Many of them did vast harm but most did vast good and we are the beneficiaries of progress.

Humanity is work in progress and we have a long way to go.

hi Abhijit Mitra,

Great question

I Have 3 points:

1.The demoralization of the labourers classes that accompanied the new industrial system.

2.The breakdown of primordial equality into hierarchical systems of inequality,the disintegration of early kinship groups into social Classes, the Dissolution of Tribal Communities into the City, and finally the Usurpation of Social Administration by the STATE-all profoundly altered not only social life but also the attitude of people toward each other, humanity's vision of itself, and ultimately its attitude toward the natural world.

3.Class society and the State have always been validated by the role they play in rationalizing labor to a point where material production. The toil of class society in extricating humanity from the domination of nature and myth is inextricably entangled with the toil of humanity in extricating itself from the domination of class society and instrumental reason. Indeed, the instrumentalization of nature as raw materials is thoroughly wedded to the instrumentalization of human beings as means of production.

Source: https://libcom.org/files/Murray_Bookchin_The_Ecology_of_Freedom_1982.pdf

It is essential that the person works according to his abilities and potential, I do not think, there is a need to divide the community into classes. . Because the division of society means putting social and class differences between the members of the community

Dear Abhijit,

The classification of society members you presented is unknown for me. The draft you showed seems to be an Indian version of society structure. In Europe, this is practically unfamiliar. It is no wonder that Hanno could interpret it but with difficulty. Could you show some parallel examples of this structure to be found at other parts of the world?

In this era globalization, we should think of classless society rather than maintaining rigid classes.

In fact by the nature it is found , but in theory I do not think so for several reasons, some of them including the lack of acceptance of this classification society itself formally to this business for conflicting with religions and beliefs and values of some societies.