Social Stratification Theory Essay

Happiness is the single thread that can connect a nation. The desire for and to understand this concept has continued to captivate mankind 's attention, throughout centuries. The question, however, continuously debated is whether this state of 'serenity ' is through the result of predetermined psychological traits, sociological factors, or human agency. It appears the predominant factor would rest heavily upon psychological-based influence. This topic draws on an understanding and research from the academic disciples of both sociology and psychology. The resulting essay shall present the significant contrasts between the three approaches to try to assess which theory would be the more definer to what truly determines a persons happiness. Furthermore,

The perception acknowledges the extent structure has on a person 's happiness practically declaring the theory that we are merely possible of achieving happiness through structural elements, like stratification. Stratification refers to the hierarchical arrangement of people among certain societies. Economic stratification, for a brief example, highlights how individuals are differentiated due to their wealthy statuses and therefore induces an inequality that evidently affects happiness in individuals (Carter, K, 2012). In addition was an article presented by Ehrenreich (2010) declaring that the happiness prominence is being overly-emphasised. The ideology of positive thinking is forming a delusion for individuals to believe everything happens under the determinacy of a thought. Mere thought would not reverse an already on-going war. As priorly mentioned earlier a persons life is heavily worked through that of social structure and the individual actions conform can be easily described as an outcome of structure in itself. There is an significant association with the link of happiness and structural factors however it seems to be a minor category when compared to that of pre-determined psychological traits among human

Various meanings lapse over the word, conflicting and distorting the already, generalisation. For a large majority of individuals the definition of this sense of feeling is defined as a satisfying almost serenity-filled feeling. Though there is no determinant of social phenomenon that could claim the state of a person 's happiness, the possibilities mentioned correlate to one another. The mutual relationship between the three social phenomenon contributes to the influence of another’s happiness. There were significant characteristics to each of the conceptions in relation with happiness, however among the connection between these theories it is evident that psychological predetermined traits hold a greater percentage to the decisive emotional happiness state an individual would be “set-back” to. These ideas about the source of happiness coincide one another. Each determinant and theory plays a roll within the contribution to an individuals happiness. Consequently it is to be also acknowledged the extent to which social structure influences another persons actions and through that the extent at which the persons action would impact the social structure made up within that community. Contrasts between all three notions are striking. But while these contrasts are explainable to be the bonds within a development it seems discernible the differences being the significant binder. One theory predetermining psychological traits that