Return to JT's homepage
chapter 2: FUNCTIONALISM:
functionalism was the dominant sociological approach for many years. In
fact some would say that was the primary sociological perspective from the
1930s into the 1960s. according to functionalists, sociology involved two
things. First it examined the role or function that an institution or
type of behavior plays in society and the way it is related to other
social features. Second explains the social features in essentially
social terms. This is what functionalism supposedly did. We call this
functionalism because first he clarifies the link to the functionalism of
its forerunners such as Durkheim, and second major theorists tend to use
that term. Sometimes you hear this called structural-functionalism but
this was discarded decades ago.
What is functionalism:
the analysis of social and cultural phenomena in terms of the
functions they perform in a sociocultural. In functionalism, society is
conceived out of as a system of interrelated parts in which no part can be
understood in isolation from the whole. A change in any part is seen as
leading to a certain degree of imbalance, which in turn results and
changes in other parts of the system and to some extent to a
We've learned that Comte influenced the development of
functionalism with his emphasis on "statics (SOCIAL ORDER) and
"dynamics" (SOCIAL PROGRESS). We want to look, he said, at action
and reaction in various parts of the social system. He argued
that a lack of harmony was "pathological" (sick), and harmony and
progress were the natural order. (NOTE: Book's typo on comte's
bdate: it's 1798, not 1789).
Functionalism was influenced by structural anthropologists and by
Emile Durkheim's (1858-1917) social theory. Durkheim was
interested in issues such as boundary maintenance, integration,
and social cohesion. He also was a methodologist.
Durkheim used the term FUNCTIONAL in two senses:
1) System of vital movements witout reference to their
consequences, and
2): A "Function" expresses the relation existing between these
movements and the coresponding needs of the organism. He used
function of digestion (ie, processing food), but digestion also
has a function in the larger process (e.g., to introduce
necessary gasses into tissue of an organism to sustain life, help
organism grow
DEVELOP: As a methodologist, he said: "Treat social facts as
things."
DEVELOP: His most famous concept is ANOMIE (from Suicide)
So, influenced by Durkheim, Parsons argued that we may study
societies AS IF they behaved similar to physiological systems.
For example, a biological organism is examined as an entire
"body," or as a "whle," which exists in a particular environment
(i.e., in the larger society of which it is a part). This body
possesses specific mechanisms" which enable the body to adapt to
a changing environment (NOTE: Compare this to "evolutionary"
views of previous theorists---Does this view make functionalists
"evolutionists?")
Thus, functionalists look primarily at the "function" these
mechanisms serve within the body, or structure, in which it
operates.
THE BIOTIC METAPHOR: More specifically we will summarize
functionalism as follows: Just as a biological organism has
built-in regulators which function to keep the organism healthy
and to restore unhealth imbalances should they occur, social
systems, too, possess functions which serve to maintain stability
(or balance, or health).
This process is called in biological organisms HOMEOSTASIS, which
means, simply, self-correcting.
Parsons contends that ALL social systems, including even the most
complex of societies, must perform all four of the following
functions (AGIL):
1) ADAPTATION: to the environment (ie, creating mechanisms or
strategies to enable societies or groups to react to changes
which may be disruptive, such as new technology, famine, etc).
2) GOAL ATTAINMENT: in that societies define goals and strategies
for attaining these goals, and also direct activity to obtain
resources (eg, labor, new forms of social organization) to meet
these goals.
3) INTEGRATION: is met by coordinating each of the internal parts
of a social system into a smoothly functioning single entity;
4) MAINTENANCE: this means that societies insure that, over time,
the system will be able to maintain and perpetuate itself.
Developed in the U.S. especially in the mid-20th century by
Talcott Parsons, to adapt to a changing environment (NOTE:
Compare this to "evolutionary" views of previous theorists---Does
this view make functionalists "evolutionists?") Thus,
functionalists look primarily at the "function" these mechanisms
serve within the body, or structure, in which it operates.
DYSFUNCTIONAL elements in a society are those elments that reduce
the system's ability to adapt or adjust. The question:
"Functional and dysfunctional for whom?" Who "wins" and who
"loses"?
MANIFEST FUNCTION: Open and intended outcomes
LATENT FUNCTION: Unintended or hidden outcomes
================
AN EXAMPLE:
A study of major-league baseball teams by Oscar Grusky (in
Americn Journal of Sociology, 1963) provides an illustration of a
functionalist approach. Grusky examines whether changing
managers in mid-season, as loosing teams often do, improves
"organizational effectiveness" (in plain talk, this means he
wants to know if a team will win more games). His findings
include the observation that the greater the managerial ROLE
STRAIN the higher the rates of manger turnover. The higher the
rates of turnover (or "managerial succession, as a theorist might
say), the stronger the expectations of replacement when a team's
performance declines.
Grusky concluded that frequent managerial change can produce
important DYSFUNCTIONAL consequences within the team by affecting
the style of suprvision and by disturbing the informal network of
interpersonal relationships. Grusky's functionalist study is
useful because it shows how seemingly abstract concepts can be
employed in something so basic as baseball to attempt to EXPLAIN
patterns of winning and loosing as a result of the team's SOCIAL
ORGANIZATION rather than simply a result of poor players.
Opponents of the functionalist approach have submitted a number
of criticisms against it. Some of these include:
1. Functionalism is teological. That is, it attepts to explain
phenomena not be reference to antecedent conditions (or
"causes"), but rather by reference fo some future end which pulls
phenomena along toward a final purpose which is not empirically
evident.
2. The functionalist perspective removes the element of
individual rationality as a problem for research. That is,
social systems are viewed as existing separately from persons,
and rational purposive action by persons (a critical element of
research for both MEAD and WEBER) to change even the most
oppressive of systems is conceived, from the view of that system,
as being dysfunctional (although for an exception to this, see
Merton's ANOMIE THEORY). For this reason, functionalism is often
called (although with some unfairness) conservative.
The conceptual apparatus of functionalism is seen by critics as
vague and difficult to "operationalize," although we have
suggested several empirical studies that seem to have overcome
this, at least partially. But critics ask with some
justification, "What constitutes systemic balance (or imbalance?"
How is it possible in concrete cases to specify with any
precision the range of alternative behavior patterns,
institutions, or customs which arise to correct systemic
imbalance?
4) Functionalism is often called a "tautology." That is, it
restates a description of phenomena different words without
significantly adding to the description because its general
hypothesis of systemic self-regulation and "tendency" towards
"stasis" (that is, toward stability) can construe ANY response of
a given system as an attempt at adjustment.
The influence of functionalist thought seems to be in decline,
and there is some question whether it was ever as dominant or
frequent in empirical research (although its intellectual
influence has been considerable) as many claim.
Parsons work originated during the great depression, amidst
unemployment, labor struggles, social reform, racial conflict,
are, and chaotic iternational shifting of geographic boundaries.
social reform, racial conflict, are, and chaotic iternational
shifting of geographic boundaries. This has prompted Gouldner to
label functionalism as an Americanized form of German
sociological Romanticism, and he views it as an attempt to
re-establish bourgeois culture and to confront and resolve
cultural conflict between utilitrian and natural rights theories
on the theoretical level byreinforcing and perpetuating, in
theory, existing social relations.
===========
PART TWO of Functionalism
Parsons four-function paradigm applied to the US
CHART
A = ADAPTATION G=Goal Attainment
_______________________________________________
ECONOMIC POLITICS
_______________________________________________
Educational, Relig, Legal
Family
_______________________________________________
Latent pattern/ Integration
tension management
the crucial point to remember about the force system needs is that Parsons
considers them the prerequisites for social equilibrium; their continuing
daily operation is in turn insured according to Parsons by two mechanisms
socialization and social control.
its socialization works all members of the society will be committed to
share values, make the appropriate choices among the pattern variables,
and generally do is expected of them in terms of adaptation integration
and so forth. For example people will marry and socialize their children
latent latent stuff, and within the family fathers will as they" showed
the the breadwinner's, (a),. Such social socialization produces what
Parsons refers to as complementarity of expectations. This means that all
parties involved in an interaction situation share and except the same
cultural values and normative expectations, so that each actor knows what
the other expects, and their resources complement each other.
A few examples of functionalist theory:
Merton: (SEE HANDOUT)
DYSFUNCTIONS
Mertons concept of dysfunctions involves two complementary but distinct
ideas. the first is that something may have consequences that are
generally dysfunctional, in his words they may have consequences that
lessen the adaptation or adjustment of the system.
The second is that these consequences may vary according to whom one is
talking about; the sociologist must ask the crucial question functional
and dysfunctional for whom.
--functions of poverty
--functions of the coronation
--functions of lynching
--functions of the coronation
MANIFEST AND LATENT FUNCTIONS
manifest functions are the consequences people observe works backed. Late
in functions are the consequences that are neither recognized your
intended.
NEOFUNCTIONALISM
neofunctionalism is a theoretical development that emerged in the mid
1980s and the United States and Germany. The neofunctionalism attempts to
integrate other theoretical approaches with Functionalism.
for example Jeffery Alexander argued three similarities between the
neofunctionalism and Neo-Marxism. Both include a critique of some of the
basic elements of the original theory, the incorporation of elements from
antagonistic theoretical traditions is a second feature, the incorporation
of elements from antagonistic theoretical traditions, and a variety of
competing developments rather than a single coherent form.
NIKLAS LUHMANN
Luhmann was a German theorists who focused on the concepts of self
reference and complexity. He tried to integrate a universal or brand.
Social systems that incorporates both concepts. According to lumen there
are three types of social systems. First interaction systems that is the
face-to-face interaction of human beings; organization systems, where
membership is linked to specific conditions,; and social systems were the
all embracing system the entire society.
Luhmannspace focused on communication and how it functions within the
system to sustain it.
In summary, functionalism tends to stress values over interests, and
although it shows the independent importance of ideas and the links
between power and social consent, it neglects the coercive aspects of
power and the significance of peoples conflicting objectives.
It's macro sociological emphasis means that one is taking an aerial view
of society when one views society from the functionless perspective. It
is not a better picture in fact taken from the ground where individuals
are interacting; it is simply a picture taken from a different angle.
Page maintained by: Jim Thomas - jthomas@sun.soci.niu.edu