Functionalism

Society as a system

Parsons; uses the organic analogy - society is like a biological organism because it has a system, needs & functions.
Value consensus & social order - Parsons; the central question that sociology tries to answer is 'how is social order possible?', he argues that it exists through a shared central value system, allowing individuals to cooperate by laying down rules about how they should behave, what goals they should persue & what others may expect of them.
Social order is possible so long as members agree on these norms and values, the agreement is called value consensus - the glue holding society together.
Integration of individuals - Individuals are integrated as the value consensus directs them to meet the systems needs, e.g, the system has to ensure people's material needs are met, so the value consensus is going to work, rules of conduct also ensures it runs smoothly.
Socialisation & social control ensure that individuals are integrated into a shared value system, it ensures that their behaviours are predictable & stable, so that there is cooperation.
The parts of the social system - Individual actions, status-roles, e.g, teacher, institutions, e.g, family & sub-systems, e.g, shops, banks, make up economic sub-system.

1 of 4

The system's needs - Adaptation (meets material needs through economic sub-system), Goal Attainment (political sub-system allocates resources to achieve them), Integration (different parts of the system intergrate to persue shared goals, e.g, religion, education & the media), Latency (processes that maintain society overtime, the kinship sub-system allows for tension management & pattern maintenance).
Parsons; adaptation & goal attainment are instrumental needs, e.g, producing food to sustain the population. Whereas, integration & latency are expressive needs, they involve the channelling & expressing of emotions.
Social change - There are two types of society; traditional & modern, in modern societies we persue our individual self interest, achieve our status & are all judged by universalistic standards. Whereas, in traditional they are expected to put collective interests first, status is ascribed & they are judged by particularistic standards.
In traditional society a the kinship system may perform many functions, however, as society develops the kinship system loses to schools, political parties, churches etc...this is called structual differentiation - seperate, functionally specialised institutions develop, each meeting a different need.
The process leads to moving equilibrium, because the change only occurs in one part of the system, producing compensatory changes in other parts.

2 of 4

Indispensability - Parsons assumes that everything in society is functionally indispensable (absolutely necessary) in its existing form. It is an untested assumption & there are possibilities of 'functional alternatives', e.g, lone parent families & communes can perform primary socialisation as well as the nuclear family.
Functional unity - Parsons assumes that all parts of society are tightly integrated into a single whole or 'unity' & that each part is functional for all the rest. However, complex modern societies have many parts, they have 'functional autonomy', e.g, there may be little connection between the structure of banking & netball.
Universal functionalism - Parsons assumes that everything in society performs a positive function for society as a whole. Yet, some things may be functional for some groups & dysfunctional for others. There may be conflicts of interests & some groups have the power to keep arrangements in place that benefit them at the expense of others.
Manifest & latent functions - A manifest function is the intended function, e.g, Hopi Indians perform a rain dance to magically produce rain in times of drought, however, the latent (unintended) function is promoting a sense of solidarity in times of harship, so people don't just look after themselves.

3 of 4

Logical - Functionalism is teleological (things exist because of their effect or function), e.g, the family exists because children need to be socialised. Critics argue that the real explanation should be one that identifies its cause, which must come before its effect.
Functionalism is criticised for being too unscientific, they cannot be falsified, e.g, they argue that crime is both functional & dysfunctional, meaning it cannot be disproved.
Conflict perspective - They (Marxism etc...) criticse functionalism for its inability to explain conflict & change, due to the organic analogy which suggests that society is harmonious. They see functionalism as conservative ideology that legitimates the status quo & justifies the existing social order as inevitable & desirable.
Action perspective - Wrong; functionalism has an 'over-socalised' & deterministic view of the individual, people have no free will or choice, they are mere puppers being pulled by the social system. Action perspective believe that individuals create society through their actions.
Functionalism also reifies society - treating it as a distinct thing, that is over & above individuals, with its own needs & independent existence.
Postmodernism - Functionalism assumes that society is stable & orderly, it doesn't account for the diversity & instability in today's postmodern society. Functionalism is also a meta-narrative.

4 of 4