Functionalism traces its roots back to the work of Plato and Hegel. The elements of functionalist thought in sociology are found in the works of Auguste Comte and Emile Durkheim. However, functionalism, as a dominant sociological theory, came to prominence in the 1950s, especially through the works of Talcott Parsons, Robert K. Merton, and their followers.
Functionalism, as a single body of thought, does not exist. Different writers have made different contributions over time. Ronald Fletcher rightly argues that ‘there is no comprehensive account of functionalism to which all social theorists would own allegiance.’
Read: Three Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology: Explained
Organic analogy
Functionalism uses the premise that society is a system and all its parts are interconnected and interrelated. Each part has a unique function to play that maintains the well being of the entire society. In order to understand any of these parts, we must see them in relation to society as a whole.
The early functionalist thinkers described society by drawing comparisons from biology. Societies are analogous to organisms. As various organs work together in an organism, similarly various institutions work together to ensure overall equilibrium in the society. For instance, a functional explanation for the existence of religion, according to Durkheim, is that religion is a source of solidarity and identification. It introduces morals and norms and thus reinforces the collective will of the society. Malinowski (also a functionalist) argues that the main function of religion is to help people deal with situations they cannot control.
Read: Understanding our society through Durkheim’s Division of Labour
Society is more than the sum of its parts!
Functionalists propound that social structures shape the behaviour of individuals. Durkheim (1982) argues, ‘there are ways of acting, thinking and feeling which possess the remarkable property of existing outside the consciousness of the individual. Not only these are types of behaviour and thinking external to the individual, but they are endured with a compelling and coercive power by virtue of which, whether he wishes or not, they impose themselves upon him’. Therefore, individuals do not actively create their realities but are a product of the external reality.
Norms and rules regulate the actions of people and values provide a common outline of accepted behaviour. This perspective assumes that society is based on a value consensus- a set of shared norms and values that enable people to work together. Thus, ‘social change is assumed to be of only a gradual, evolutionary kind’ (Willis, 1996).
The concept of function
One of the main concerns of functionalism is to study social life and the functions of social structures- a recurring pattern of social behaviour. ‘The function of any recurrent activity, such as the punishment of a crime, or a funeral ceremony, is the part it plays in the social life as a whole and therefore the contribution it makes to the maintenance of the structural continuity’ (Radcliffe Brown, 1976). Functionalists examine the relationship between the different parts of the structure and their relationship to society altogether. For instance, death rituals are a way for individuals to show their commitment to each other and to the society. These rituals act as an emotional support for the family members and assist them to resume their social roles.
Functional prerequisites
Societies have certain requirements that must be fulfilled for their survival. For example, a society must have some means to produce and distribute food. It also needs to provide shelter and socialize new members. Parsons called these requirements as ‘Functional prerequisites’. He mentions four such requirements namely, adaptation, goal attainment, integration and latency. Functionalists study how different parts of social structure meet these functional prerequisites (Ritzer, 1992).
Value Consensus
Since all the different parts of the society are interconnected and inter-related, the functioning of one part affects the other parts and the entire system. So, a minimal degree of integration is essential for the smooth functioning of the society. Functionalists opine that this integration is based on what Parsons called as ‘Value consensus’. It refers to a set of agreed norms and values. This implies that if certain values of society are present in different parts of social structure, those parts will be integrated. For example, the value of materialism integrates the different parts of social structure in the western society. The economic system produces goods in large quantities and high productivity is regarded as important. The educational system also aims at teaching skills that increase productivity and efficiency. The family also acts as an important unit of consumption. Most of the people relate their happiness with materialistic possessions. The political system is concerned with improving material living standards. Thus, value consensus ensures stability and order in society.
Major Criticisms
The popularity of functionalism declined from the mid-1960s onwards. This was a phase when American society witnessed many conflicts, protests and disorder. The inability to explain these changes brought a lot of criticism. Some people declared functionalism dead, while others embraced alternative perspectives.
Functionalism is inherently ahistorical in nature. In fact, it was developed in reaction to the historical evolutionary approach of certain anthropologists. The early anthropologists gave a speculative account of the evolutions of the concerned societies. The later stages were the idealizations of the society where anthropologists lived. Early functionalists aimed to remove these speculative and ethnocentric biases (Ritzer,1992).
Functionalism focuses so intently on social equilibrium and social order that it fails to deal with the process of social change. Even when it does, it is explained as developmental rather than in revolutionary terms. Functionalism exaggerates harmonious relationships, societal consensus, and stability while it disregards conflict and disorder. For instance, family, which is seen as a necessary institution by the functionalists, acts as a site of oppression for many women (Ritzer,1992).
Neofunctionalism
By the mid-1980s, theorists such as Jeffery Alexander and Paul Colomy took a major effort to revive the theory. Neofunctionalism, as argues Farganis (1995), ‘acknowledges the imbalance in functionalism’s key orientation towards stability and equilibrium, its sparse attention to the dynamic of social change, and its exclusive concern with order in large scale social systems’.
References
- Durkheim, Emile. 1982, The Rules of Sociological Method, New York: Free Press.
- Farganis, J. 1993. Readings in social theory: The classic tradition to post-modernism. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Fletcher, R. 1956. Functionalism as a Social Theory. The Sociological Review, 4(1), 31-46.
- Haralambos, M., & Holborn, M. 2000. Sociology: Themes and perspectives. London: Collins.
- Radcliffe Brown, A.R., 1976, Structure and Function in Primitive Society, New York: Free Press.
- Ritzer, G. 1992. Sociological Theory, New York: McGraw- Hill
- Willis, Evan, 1996, The Sociological Quest: An Introduction to the Study of Social Life. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Nancy studies B.A. Sociology (Honors) at Miranda House. She enjoys pitting one theorist against another on her reading table. A lover of books- old and new, her pockets are always full of flowers for reasons she knows not.