Analyse the differences between the attributional and interactional approach in studying the caste system. (UPSC CSE Mains 2023 - Sociology, Paper 2)
Caste identity is closed linked with the social fabric of a village, town or city. There are two basic approaches to explain the various divisions in caste, viz. Attributional approach to caste and Interactional approach to caste.
Attributional approach
- Attributional approach discusses primarily the significant features of the caste system qua system and what distinguishes it from other forms of the social stratification. Interaction approach takes into account how castes are actually ranked with respect to one another in a local empirical context.
- The attributional approach, characterized by scholars like S. Ghurye and M.N. Srinivas, concentrates on inherent caste attributes such as hierarchy, endogamy, and traditional occupations, seeking to define caste based on these characteristics, while the interactional approach, exemplified by F.G. Bailey and L. Dumont, explores actual caste relationships within specific contexts like commensality and food types, emphasizing the role of rituals and religious values in determining caste hierarchy.
- For example, Bailey feels that caste dynamics and identity are united by the two principles of segregation and hierarchy. He feels that ‘“Castes Stand in ritual and secular hierarchy expressed in the rules of interaction”. The ritual system overlaps the political and economic system.
Interactional approach
- According to interactional approach the relationship between castes does not comprise rituals alone –there is a power dimension because there exists a dominant caste to which other castes are subordinate. Rank and caste identity are expressed by a lower caste attempting to emulate a caste which is higher in rank. Thus the interaction pattern becomes indicative of ritual status the rank order hierarchy.
- Scholars using the attributional approach stress the attributes of a caste. However each of them lays emphasis on one or other of these attributes and how they affect interaction. In the case of Srinivas he chooses to study the structure of relations arising between castes on the basis of these attributes. Thus he introduces a dynamic aspect of caste identity very forcefully. This aspect becomes clearer in Srinivas’s work on positional mobility known as ‘Sanskritization’.
The attributional approach centers on inherent caste attributes and the preservation of caste identity, whereas the interactional approach examines caste interactions in specific contexts, highlighting the significance of rituals, religious values, and consensus in shaping caste hierarchy. Both approaches aim to elucidate the intricate nature of the caste system in Indian society, recognizing its diversity, and collectively contribute to broadening our understanding of this age-old social reality.
Next
previous
Latest News
General Studies