So what is structural-functionalist perspective that this blog talks about? It is generally understood as a way of viewing our social surroundings in terms of its norms and traditions. Some might better understand this through relating this system as in relation with body and other organs and glands that make up the part of the human body. The society is basically made up of all these norms and traditions that we are so used to and these are what make up the so called “society” or the structure of it as we know it today.
Herbert Spencer is one of the most famous British philosophers in this field. This is because he uses the natural selection theory to society and perhaps considered one of the earliest functionalists. Spencer recognized three functional needs and they included regulatory, operative, and distributive. He argued that all societies need to solve problems of control, production of goods, services, and to distribute resources. So perhaps this shows how he used the natural selection method for the functionalism. Through using natural selection it shows how the “survival of the fittest” would fit this system. Because there needs to be someone who is at the very top and people who are below to serve whoever is in higher position than that person.
Talcott Parsons believed in roles of individuals. He argued that individuals can take up more than one role and they each has expectations of the other’s action and reaction through interaction between the people. So in a sense, each person is taking their own social position and when they are trying to describe themselves, they tend to relate themselves to their social standing and the “role” or “position” they take in the society. And Parsons also talks about individual interaction that are ever changing between each other in a process called “role bargaining”. This is a process in which through the changing in norms, the roles also change in order to improve the norms between the individuals so that the changes occur in a positive way for better living standard for the people of the society. Parsons thought that the society is always in the state of equilibrium, if there is a change in one side then there must be another change on the other side. Another example of social system is symbol. These symbols can be interpreted in many different ways in regards to the each individuals but has some what definite meaning to the society and these symbols are very important in cultural system. Because different cultures have different symbols and what they mean and the affects the culture greatly depending on how the symbol is interprted within the culture.
Basic unit of the system for Parsons was status-role bundle or complex and these are structural elements that are not characterstics of the individuals but or of interaction. Also, in modern society, there composed of many roles and statues that make up who we are. These may be social positions or jobs that we take on and which basically characterizes who we are despite our personality or characteristics. These social standings greatly affect who we are even though it does not show who we are. And this system is very important in maintaining order of the society because if this order is broken then there is no such a thing as higher person and underdog in the society and if these does not exist then the people would not have a goal to strive for.
Since functionalism looks at the society as parts that are working together to make a whole, these parts must operate properly in order for a smooth process of the society. So if one part of the society changes, then another part that is connected with that part needs to be also change in order to not create problem and run smoothly.
Each societiy has needs that needs to be carried out for survival. Goods and services must be produced and distributed between the people in order for the survival of the people and there must be political system in order to create order between the people.
Even though it rejected social processes and cultures which led to recognition of ecological context, functionalism seems to be a view that we cannot view so lightly. Because our society is somewhat made of each norms that we take for granted and that we are so used to for each cultures but we do not notice it. Each cultures has its own symbols and system unique to it. Therefore, to understand another society, it is important to understand what their symbols mean and how the system of the society is made up of. In order to do this, if you use functionalism, which seeks the norms of the society and the system created by the social positions of the individiauls, you can easily distinguish and understand what a symbol means in that culture even though it may be different from the culture that you are used to.
Malinowski’s concept of culture is easy to understand through the following statement, “It obviously is the integral whole consisting of implements and consumers’ goods, of constitutional charters for the various social groupings, of human ideas and crafts, beliefs and customs. Whether we consider a very simple or primitive culture or an extremely complex and developed one, we are confronted by a vast apparatus, partly material, partly human and partly spiritual by which man is able to cope with the concrete specific problems that face him” (Malinowski 1944:36).”
The meaning of the culture very prodominent in this statement. Malinowski says that the culture is basically a social grouping of human ideas and crafts and beliefs and traditions. These are likely to be different from one culture to another.
Functionalism had many critisims and resulted in decline in 1970s. It failed to analyze the complex nature of actors and processes of interaction. It was also critized for being circular. Needs are postulated on the basis of existing institutions which are used to explain their very existence. In addition, functionalism’s antihistoric approach made it impossible to examine social processes, rejection of psychology made it impossible to understand attitudes and sentiments and rejection of culture led to problems. Since functionalism only focuses on so called “structure” of the society rather than the details and how each one is affecting each other such as sentiments, it caused many problems. But how can one understand fully how each individual is thinking and behaving if one does not go into that individual’s very brain? Everyone has different background and different events that they have gone through and different culture they have been grew up in. Everyone is different so how can one determine how one will react or behave just by analyzing with some data? It seems impossible to calculate one individual in that much detail so therefore through functionalism it may be easier to understand in broad term of how one may characterize or make up the society in parts by understanding a little about functionalism and how that creates each individuals in the large system of so called society.
Further criticisms have been levelled at functionalism by proponents of other social theories. Conflict theorists criticised functionalism’s concept of systems as giving far too much weight to integration and consensus, and neglecting independence and conflict. According to Lockwood, it was these tendencies that come to the surface as opposition and conflict among actors. However Parsons’ thought that the issues of conflict and cooperation were very much intertwined and sought to account for both in his model. In this however he was limited by his analysis of an ‘ideal type’ of society which was characterised by consensus. Merton, through his critique of functional unity, introduced into functionalism an explicit analysis of tension and conflict.
Also, another problem with the functionalism was that it neglected the existence of women. They did not talk much about the supression of the women in the society even though such problem existed. Even though Parsons did mention this, it was not very thorough saying that he simplified the problem in the functional anaylsis regarding women in situations such a work and family. In this period, women were still not treated equal to the men and were neglected and this is when the rise of feminism came about and which also gave some problems to the decline of the functionalism. This probably caused because of desire for social order for the women in regards to men. Like men, they probably wanted to have their own “parts” in this huge system called “society”. This was probably what made the rise of the feminism and the decline of the functionalism. Despite this, functionalism did its job in generalizing what a society is in terms of individuals and their behavior in order for their own survival for the fittest in the society. Also, by playing their parts in this system, they are creating “organs” in a “human body” that helps the society keep going.
Sociology Blog about Structionalism 