Structural Functionalism

• What is Structural Functionalism
• Theory of Structural Functionalism
• History of Structural functionalism
• Assumptions of Structural Functionalism
• Contributors of Structural Functionalism  
• Critical Evaluation

Introduction

Between the period spanning World War II and the Vietnam War, structural functionalism emerged as the predominant paradigm within sociology. Its prominence peaked in the 1960s, becoming widely utilized in research and earning recognition as a leading theoretical framework in both sociology and anthropology. Structural functionalism conceptualizes society as akin to an organism, comprising interconnected parts, each serving a function essential for the overall efficiency and functionality of the societal system.

At its core, structural functionalism is a consensus theory, positing that societal order is established through the harmonious interplay and balance among its constituent elements. It underscores the significance of shared norms and values as the foundational pillars of society, emphasizing the role of tacit agreements between various social groups and institutions in maintaining social order. Furthermore, it views social change as a gradual and orderly process, acknowledging the occasional necessity for change to rectify social dysfunctions while advocating for a measured pace to ensure smooth adaptation by individuals and institutions, thereby preventing rapid upheaval.

Broadly speaking, structural functionalism offers a comprehensive lens through which to interpret society, portraying it as a structured entity comprising interconnected elements such as norms, customs, traditions, and institutions. With its origins tracing back to the organicist theories of early 19th-century thinkers like Comte, and further influenced by subsequent figures such as Spencer, Durkheim, Malinowski, and Radcliffe Brown, structural functionalism represents the oldest and most pervasive conceptual framework within sociology. The enduring relevance of Durkheim’s analyses and Weber’s emphasis on social taxonomies, alongside other contributions, continue to shape and inform contemporary structural perspectives in sociology and anthropology.

Theory of Structural Functionalism

The structural-functional perspective within sociology views society as a complex entity where various components collaborate to foster cohesion and stability. It posits that social structures, which encompass stable patterns of social behaviour, shape our lives. These structures manifest in rituals like handshakes or elaborate religious ceremonies, providing order to daily existence.

From this standpoint, structural functionalism is often perceived as upholding the existing social order, emphasizing the preservation of equilibrium and resisting change. It asserts that all societal organizations and institutions are interconnected. Consequently, when one institution undergoes change, others adjust in response, although the pace of this adaptation varies across societies, with some changes occurring gradually while others are rapid.

History of Structural Functionalism

The evolution of functionalism was a gradual process, shaped by the contributions of various sociologists across the globe. While notable figures like Emile Durkheim and A.R. Radcliffe-Brown played significant roles in its initial development, the groundwork can be traced back to Herbert Spencer.

Hailing from England, Herbert Spencer is recognized as an early proponent of formalized Structural Functionalism. He is famously credited with coining the phrase “survival of the fittest” in his seminal work “Principles of Sociology” (1896), wherein he advocated for a societal application of natural selection principles. Central to Spencer’s ideas was the concept of societal equilibrium, positing that societies naturally gravitate towards a balanced state. Consequently, even amidst societal changes, the social structure adapts to restore equilibrium.

In the latter part of the 19th century, French sociologist Emile Durkheim laid crucial groundwork for Structural Functionalism. Durkheim’s theory emerged partly as a response to evolutionary theories proposed by thinkers like E.B. Tylor. Initially, Durkheim sought to elucidate social institutions as mechanisms through which individuals collectively fulfill their biological needs. His aim was to assess the significance of cultural and social traits by examining their contributions to the functioning of society as a whole.

Later, the trajectory of structural functionalism shifted towards examining how social institutions address the collective needs of individuals within a society. Durkheim, in his seminal works such as “The Division of Labour in Society” and “The Suicide,” elucidated concepts like “solidarity” and “suicide” and advocated for the framework of structural functionalism.

The pivotal contributions of Bronislaw Malinowski, a Polish anthropologist, and A.R. Radcliffe-Brown, an English anthropologist, significantly shaped the evolution of structural functionalism in the 20th century. Malinowski posited that cultural practices served physiological and psychological functions, such as fulfilling desires. Conversely, Radcliffe-Brown’s approach emphasized the importance of social structure, delineating the social realm as a distinct “level” of reality, separate from biological and inorganic forms. He asserted that understanding social phenomena necessitated analysis at this social level, viewing individuals as transient occupants of social roles, devoid of inherent significance beyond their positions within the societal structure.

In the American context, Talcott Parsons formalized functionalist thought in sociology. Parsons introduced the notion of stable structural categories constituting interdependent societal systems that function to sustain society. He advocated for individual integration into social structures, suggesting that individuals should autonomously discern their roles within society’s various facets rather than being assigned them.

Assumptions of Structural Functionalism

Groups that adhere to similar norms contribute to societal cohesion. The level of integration among these groups determines the overall cohesion of society, with a lack of cohesion potentially leading to increased violence or issues with law enforcement. Therefore, there is a focus on maintaining balance within society. Structural functionalism operates on various levels of analysis including society, community, individual, and social units such as families or organizations. Its main assumptions include:

1. Systems exhibit order and interdependence among their components.
2. Systems strive for self-sustaining order or equilibrium.
3. Systems may remain static or undergo orderly change.
4. The characteristics of one part of a system influence the form of other parts.
5. Systems uphold boundaries within their environments, requiring adaptation if conflicts arise.
6. Allocation and integration are crucial processes for achieving equilibrium within a system.
7. Systems naturally tend towards self-maintenance, involving control over boundaries, relationships among parts, environmental influences, and internal change tendencies.

The structural functionalist perspective views society as akin to a living organism, termed the organic analogy by Herbert Spencer. It posits that society emerges from the interactions of interdependent individuals who cooperate based on shared values to ensure the equilibrium, stability, survival, and proper functioning of the entire social organism.

Critical Evaluation

Based on the above description, it can be argued that the structural-functional perspective primarily focuses on society and the interconnectedness of its institutions rather than on individuals or specific groups like families. Social cohesion endures because societies establish structures to fulfill the necessary functions that either precede or result from organized social life.

This theory gained significant popularity during the 1960s and 1970s, making substantial sociological contributions in the USA, Europe, India, and other regions. It produced numerous classical scholars whose works continue to guide sociological inquiry. However, despite its contributions, structural functionalism faces several criticisms:

1. Lack of historical context: It neglects historical factors.
2. Inadequacy in addressing change and conflict: It struggles to effectively analyze processes of change and conflict.
3. Conservative stance: It tends to maintain the status quo.
4. Methodological ambiguity: Critics find it ambiguous and lacking in robust methodologies.
5. Limitation in comparative analysis: It inhibits certain forms of comparative analysis.
6. Questionable prioritization of positions: Functionalists assert that the most highly rewarded positions are the most crucial for society, but critics contest this view.
7. Logical problems: Teleology and tautology are identified as significant logical issues by scholars like Percy Cohen and Jonathan Turner.

Contributors of Structural Functionalism

Functionalism originated from the insights of English philosopher and biologist Hebert Spencer (1820–1903), who drew parallels between society and the human body. Spencer proposed that just as different organs collaborate to sustain the body’s function, various components of society cooperate to uphold its operation (Spencer 1898). These components, as described by Spencer, encompass social institutions, encompassing established patterns of beliefs and behaviours aimed at fulfilling societal needs such as governance, education, family structures, healthcare systems, religious organizations, and economic frameworks.

Emile Durkheim, a pivotal figure in sociology, further developed Spencer’s ideas to elucidate the mechanisms through which societies evolve and persist over time. Durkheim posited that society constitutes a multifaceted system wherein interconnected parts mutually support stability (Durkheim 1893). He emphasized the role of shared values, languages, and symbols in fostering social cohesion. Durkheim asserted that comprehending society requires an examination of social facts— encompassing laws, morals, values, religious convictions, customs, trends, and rituals—that collectively regulate social existence.

Alfred Reginald Radcliff-Brown (1881–1955) advanced the notion that the function of any recurring societal activity lies in its contribution to the broader social framework’s stability and continuity. In a thriving society, all elements collaborate to sustain stability, a concept later termed “dynamic equilibrium” by subsequent sociologists like Parsons (1961).

Durkheim posited that while individuals form the basis of society, sociological inquiry must transcend individual analysis to understand social facts. These social facts encompass a wide array of phenomena including laws, morals, values, religious beliefs, customs, fashions, and rituals, essentially constituting the cultural norms governing social existence. Each of these elements serves specific societal functions; for instance, laws may aim to prevent violence, punish criminal behaviour, or safeguard public health.

Robert Merton, another prominent structural functionalist, emphasized the multifaceted nature of social processes. He distinguished between manifest functions, which are the intended outcomes of a social process, and latent functions, which are unintended consequences. For instance, while the manifest functions of college education include acquiring knowledge and job preparation, its latent functions may involve social networking, extracurricular engagement, or even forming personal relationships.

A.R. Radcliffe-Brown, a notable British social anthropologist, emphasized the centrality of social structure in his framework and linked it closely to the notion of function. According to him, various components of social structure have interdependent functions, vital for both their own continuity and the overall cohesion of society. Through comparative analysis of preliterate societies, Radcliffe-Brown illustrated how institutions’ interdependence regulates social and individual life. He defined social structure empirically as patterned social relations that adhere to accepted norms, binding society members to socially beneficial activities.

Criticism

One critique directed at the structural-functional theory is its limitation in explaining social change. Additionally, there’s an issue with its circular reasoning: it assumes repetitive behaviours have a function, yet we only claim they have a function because they’re repeated. Moreover, dysfunctions may persist despite lacking a functional purpose, which contradicts the theory’s core premise. Many sociologists now view functionalism as ineffective for macro-level analysis but still find utility in some mid-level examinations.

In response to these criticisms, some sociologists proposed “conflict sociology,” suggesting that dominant institutions oppress weaker groups and that conflict permeates all aspects of society, including family, economy, politics, and education. This neo-Marxist perspective gained traction in the United States during the social upheavals of the civil rights and anti-war movements of the 1960s and ’70s, influencing a new generation of sociologists.

Additional critiques from various theoretical perspectives include structural functionalism’s reliance on flawed analogies between societies and biological organisms, its tautological and teleological reasoning, excessive abstraction, inadequate explanation of social change, and lack of empirical confirmation methodology.

References and Readings:

Sociological Theory, by  Ritzer G, https://amzn.to/3Da3pcm

Sociology by C.N. Shankar Rao, https://amzn.to/41A3Wh4